1) It's interesting that using several aggregator services plus personal contacts can be "not shopping around enough". 2) Why is 100% financing idiotic? It may be idiotic for the bank, but not if I plan to invest what would have gone into a down payment, elsewhere. Yes, that would have been something I'd like -- not a deal breaker, though. Is it that hard to imagine someone capable of affording a large down payment but instead prefering to invest it in a non-status symbol? 3) I don't have "less-than-usual documentation". That was the whole point. 4) An ARM is not "perfectly acceptable": the whole point of the mortgage is to fix my living costs (to some extent) and profit from interest rate movement and inflation! I don't know why you didn't count that as one of the "idiotic options".
How fast does that money that one spends on a lease appreciate?
The relevant comparison would be to the appreciation of the investments bought with the savings from renting. I know, you were mirroring my sarcasm, but you should have also mirrored the fact that it was otherwise a valid point. It's important to remember that when buying a home, you *also* throw away money -- but instead of on rent, it's on appraisals, lawyers, BS closing costs, real estate agents, property taxes, interest, HOA fees, and additional insurance.
Hallo, ich heisse UbuntuDupe, ich moechte gern ein Hotelzimmer mieten... Wie bitte? Ich muss eine Kreditkarte haben? Wieso?... Weil ich das Zimmer verderben koennte? Unerhoert!... Nehmen Sie vielleicht eine Kuh an?... Ja, aber diese Kuh haben Sie noch nicht gesehen!... Was ist's Ihnen, wenn ich das Zimmer verderbe, besitzen Sie eine tolle Kuh!... Verstanden. Auf Widersehn.... Mutti, ich bin's! Ja, darf ich mein altes Zimmer naechste Wochenende benutzen?... Wem hast du es vermietet???
Expanding on the previous poster, does that mean a merchant must accept all previous versions of the $1, etc. bills that have been printed? Then how does the Treasury the currency in light of advances in counterfeiting? I could print some easy-to-counterfeit 1920 bill and merchants have to accept it since their authentication methods can't distinguish real from fake.
However, I still stand behind my assertation that if owning a home is doable then it is smarter, because a home is an investment. That is why it's a great goal to have...
Did you know that it's possible to invest in other things?
Heh, let me ease of the sarcasm for a minute:
Even though a home is an investment, it's not necessarily the best use of the money. Homes typically appreciate much slower than e.g. stock indices and are far more illiquid, and have much higher transaction and carrying costs. It's true that there is a strong correlation between "renters" and "people who wouldn't invest the difference if they could", but if you're not one of those people, it can turn out better.
I didn't want to turn this into a "rent or buy" massive subthread, but I wanted to point out the comparison you need to make when thinking of a home as an investment.
Heh, I figured the reason was bogus; when I read it, I assumed that was more of a rationalization the judge figured he could get away with because the guy wouldn't appeal.
Your credit rating largely comes from a proven history of paying bills....
The sad reality is, without some observable history of you actually repaying creditors or other accounts, you're a non-entity and don't have a proven track record.
No. I was a non-entity last November when applying for a loan, despite a "proven history" of paying bills for over two years.
Now, if by "bills" you mean "credit card bills", then yes, you're right. I just needed to remind others that all the other bills don't really count. Not paying them would hurt you, but paying them doesn't any more prove you exist to the credit industry.
"Branch managers aren't allowed to make judgment calls anymore." i.e., They're not going to call in the cavalry for one small mortgage.
I did do what Ramsey described (though it wasn't called that). My "financial situation" is pretty simple: stable employment, no other debt, lots in mutual funds, no other obligations, no judgments, no liens, no bankruptcy, loan for about 2x yearly gross. I explained this to their "special situations expert". The result:
The very best they would consider giving me is 80% financing on a 3/1 ARM at 10% interest. I was classified as subprime.
My situation isn't "special". I don't have unstable, commission-based income. I don't have past debt. I don't have complicated, illiquid holdings. I don't have bizarre partnerships.
Oh, I understand. Even America isn't backward enough not to have direct deposit for wages and gov. benefits, and electronic payment for taxes.
My point was that it annoys me how some people still describe these transactions like they involve checks. I know, it's probably just me, but it just feels so quaint to hear someone use "check" as a sort of metonym for "payment". I'm still trying to figure out what about it bothers me so much. I think it has to do with the level of presumption/specificity.
Yes, I had the same experience when applying for a mortgage. Apparently, when they tell you that you need a solid history of honoring your obligations, they don't mean crap like rent, insurance, utilities, cable bill, etc. You have to have a credit card.
Does it matter that I saved 1/3 of my gross for two years? Does it matter that I paid every bill on time for about three? Does it matter that the mortgage would be less than 1/6 of my gross even at a high interest rate? No, no, and no. I've even been turned down for department store credit cards. Reason: "didn't get a credit card at a young enough age."
(I've since gotten my credit unions to issue me cards.)
What's odd is, my credit history would be substantially longer, and my credit MUCH better if I had done *exactly* the same things as I did before, but moved some purchases I'd make anyway, onto a credit card. Or if my parents had added me as an authorized user at 16 and refused to actually let me use the card. (They're closing the latter loophole... finally.)
Remember: "no credit" is much, much worse than "bad credit".
Afterall if the pural of "tooth" is "teeth" then why isn't the plural of "booth" "beeth"? Then again Chinese is pretty difficult as well, as is Japanese.
Yeah, what a bitch that English still keeps a few irregular plurals. Never mind that French also has irregular plurals. Never mind that French has irregular *adjectives*. Never mind that French verbs have more distinct forms, so there's more to remember about a verb irregularity. Never mind that French orthography itself is pretty messed up (last four consonants are optional!).
Among European languages, English is about alone in:
-only having declension for pronouns -no noun gender -how few forms there are for each verb
I agree. Or as some wag put it: "The internet has done wonders to eliminate the barriers to human interaction posed by age, gender, and distance. First question people ask online: a/s/l?"
It sounds to me like you should just rent and leave property ownership to the adults.
Heh, I'm not sure most adults seem to understand mortgages either. I've seen mainstream, middle-class-targeted publications, very frequently, fielding questions from, and giving advice to, people who can't even understand that an adjustabe-rate mortgage... er, *adjusts*. See here and here.
Oh, come on, if you couldn't get a patent on the successful drugs, wouldn't you STILL invest at least as much in research, and still produce wonderdrugs at the same rate??? [/typical slashdotter posting about pharma patents]
Well, "honorable" lawmakers, how many of your teacher's pensions are in IBM stock?
Heh, knowing how some government pension funds are being run (San Diego), I wouldn't be surprised if the State of California has a big stake in some hedge fund that's short-selling IBM.
Maybe so, but if *one* person burns wood, that negatively and noticeably impacts my air quality more than ALL of the gasoline-burning that goes on in cars in my area. (Which is a small town, but not a farming community.)
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, nothing like pandering to the biases of the typical /.er to nab some karma, eh?
The source is open. Therefore, it's open source.
The fact that you attach additional connotations to the combination "open source" is your problem, not the vendor's.
1) It's interesting that using several aggregator services plus personal contacts can be "not shopping around enough".
2) Why is 100% financing idiotic? It may be idiotic for the bank, but not if I plan to invest what would have gone into a down payment, elsewhere. Yes, that would have been something I'd like -- not a deal breaker, though. Is it that hard to imagine someone capable of affording a large down payment but instead prefering to invest it in a non-status symbol?
3) I don't have "less-than-usual documentation". That was the whole point.
4) An ARM is not "perfectly acceptable": the whole point of the mortgage is to fix my living costs (to some extent) and profit from interest rate movement and inflation! I don't know why you didn't count that as one of the "idiotic options".
How fast does that money that one spends on a lease appreciate?
The relevant comparison would be to the appreciation of the investments bought with the savings from renting. I know, you were mirroring my sarcasm, but you should have also mirrored the fact that it was otherwise a valid point. It's important to remember that when buying a home, you *also* throw away money -- but instead of on rent, it's on appraisals, lawyers, BS closing costs, real estate agents, property taxes, interest, HOA fees, and additional insurance.
Hallo, ich heisse UbuntuDupe, ich moechte gern ein Hotelzimmer mieten... Wie bitte? Ich muss eine Kreditkarte haben? Wieso? ... Weil ich das Zimmer verderben koennte? Unerhoert! ... Nehmen Sie vielleicht eine Kuh an? ... Ja, aber diese Kuh haben Sie noch nicht gesehen! ... Was ist's Ihnen, wenn ich das Zimmer verderbe, besitzen Sie eine tolle Kuh! ... Verstanden. Auf Widersehn. ... Mutti, ich bin's! Ja, darf ich mein altes Zimmer naechste Wochenende benutzen? ... Wem hast du es vermietet???
Expanding on the previous poster, does that mean a merchant must accept all previous versions of the $1, etc. bills that have been printed? Then how does the Treasury the currency in light of advances in counterfeiting? I could print some easy-to-counterfeit 1920 bill and merchants have to accept it since their authentication methods can't distinguish real from fake.
However, I still stand behind my assertation that if owning a home is doable then it is smarter, because a home is an investment. That is why it's a great goal to have...
Did you know that it's possible to invest in other things?
Heh, let me ease of the sarcasm for a minute:
Even though a home is an investment, it's not necessarily the best use of the money. Homes typically appreciate much slower than e.g. stock indices and are far more illiquid, and have much higher transaction and carrying costs. It's true that there is a strong correlation between "renters" and "people who wouldn't invest the difference if they could", but if you're not one of those people, it can turn out better.
I didn't want to turn this into a "rent or buy" massive subthread, but I wanted to point out the comparison you need to make when thinking of a home as an investment.
Heh, I figured the reason was bogus; when I read it, I assumed that was more of a rationalization the judge figured he could get away with because the guy wouldn't appeal.
Your credit rating largely comes from a proven history of paying bills. ...
The sad reality is, without some observable history of you actually repaying creditors or other accounts, you're a non-entity and don't have a proven track record.
No. I was a non-entity last November when applying for a loan, despite a "proven history" of paying bills for over two years.
Now, if by "bills" you mean "credit card bills", then yes, you're right. I just needed to remind others that all the other bills don't really count. Not paying them would hurt you, but paying them doesn't any more prove you exist to the credit industry.
No, there isn't. Read the reply:
"Branch managers aren't allowed to make judgment calls anymore." i.e., They're not going to call in the cavalry for one small mortgage.
I did do what Ramsey described (though it wasn't called that). My "financial situation" is pretty simple: stable employment, no other debt, lots in mutual funds, no other obligations, no judgments, no liens, no bankruptcy, loan for about 2x yearly gross. I explained this to their "special situations expert". The result:
The very best they would consider giving me is 80% financing on a 3/1 ARM at 10% interest. I was classified as subprime.
My situation isn't "special". I don't have unstable, commission-based income. I don't have past debt. I don't have complicated, illiquid holdings. I don't have bizarre partnerships.
Do you see something wrong with that picture?
Oh, I understand. Even America isn't backward enough not to have direct deposit for wages and gov. benefits, and electronic payment for taxes.
My point was that it annoys me how some people still describe these transactions like they involve checks. I know, it's probably just me, but it just feels so quaint to hear someone use "check" as a sort of metonym for "payment". I'm still trying to figure out what about it bothers me so much. I think it has to do with the level of presumption/specificity.
We don't really use checks anymore either.
Really? That's cool. Do people still refer to their income as a "paycheck"? Or government entitlementment payments as "checks"?
If not, I'm packing my bags tonight. Because that means our neighbors to the north have moved past the 50's.
Yes, I had the same experience when applying for a mortgage. Apparently, when they tell you that you need a solid history of honoring your obligations, they don't mean crap like rent, insurance, utilities, cable bill, etc. You have to have a credit card.
... finally.)
Does it matter that I saved 1/3 of my gross for two years? Does it matter that I paid every bill on time for about three? Does it matter that the mortgage would be less than 1/6 of my gross even at a high interest rate? No, no, and no. I've even been turned down for department store credit cards. Reason: "didn't get a credit card at a young enough age."
(I've since gotten my credit unions to issue me cards.)
What's odd is, my credit history would be substantially longer, and my credit MUCH better if I had done *exactly* the same things as I did before, but moved some purchases I'd make anyway, onto a credit card. Or if my parents had added me as an authorized user at 16 and refused to actually let me use the card. (They're closing the latter loophole
Remember: "no credit" is much, much worse than "bad credit".
Afterall if the pural of "tooth" is "teeth" then why isn't the plural of "booth" "beeth"? Then again Chinese is pretty difficult as well, as is Japanese.
Yeah, what a bitch that English still keeps a few irregular plurals. Never mind that French also has irregular plurals. Never mind that French has irregular *adjectives*. Never mind that French verbs have more distinct forms, so there's more to remember about a verb irregularity. Never mind that French orthography itself is pretty messed up (last four consonants are optional!).
Among European languages, English is about alone in:
-only having declension for pronouns
-no noun gender
-how few forms there are for each verb
Sorry, [/rant]
My wife vetoed that. Sign....
I've called my wife a lot of nasty things in the past, but never a *sign*. That's just wrong. Take that back.
Yeah, they're called "tall buildings" and "train systems". (UK: TEE-YOOB)
See: any city that experienced significant growth before the advent of the automobile.
Yes, it's still an urban legend that you can violate the laws of thermodynamics.
I agree. Or as some wag put it: "The internet has done wonders to eliminate the barriers to human interaction posed by age, gender, and distance. First question people ask online: a/s/l?"
It sounds to me like you should just rent and leave property ownership to the adults.
... er, *adjusts*. See here and here.
Heh, I'm not sure most adults seem to understand mortgages either. I've seen mainstream, middle-class-targeted publications, very frequently, fielding questions from, and giving advice to, people who can't even understand that an adjustabe-rate mortgage
I'm not comparing Manhunt to The David
Well, then I will:
Manhunt 2
The David
About the same length, more detail on the latter.
Yes, so we have:
;-)
"public" means "non-public"
"secret" is "transparent", and, don't forget:
Weitzner was the person who personally barred my colleague from entering the conference."
"Personally barred" means "impersonally barred"
Do you mean Contra Costa?
... disappeared."
Nah, I think they mean the Cosa Nostra.
"Yeah, we'd appreciate it very much if you'd forget about that little debt we owe you for those computers that
Oh, come on, if you couldn't get a patent on the successful drugs, wouldn't you STILL invest at least as much in research, and still produce wonderdrugs at the same rate??? [/typical slashdotter posting about pharma patents]
Well, "honorable" lawmakers, how many of your teacher's pensions are in IBM stock?
Heh, knowing how some government pension funds are being run (San Diego), I wouldn't be surprised if the State of California has a big stake in some hedge fund that's short-selling IBM.
Maybe so, but if *one* person burns wood, that negatively and noticeably impacts my air quality more than ALL of the gasoline-burning that goes on in cars in my area. (Which is a small town, but not a farming community.)