Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
Reads to me as a way to prevent the area from becoming a gypsy ghetto. If you can't a afford a pipe, don't bother, they don't want you. Seems reasonable to me.
|
|
Happiegrrrl2
Trad climber
|
|
Reads to me as a way to prevent the area from becoming a gypsy ghetto. If you can't a afford a pipe, don't bother, they don't want you. Seems reasonable to me.
The cost of a building permit alone eliminates "gypsy ghetto," as you referred to. Anyone who is going to put up a structure without obtaining a permit ain't going to be stopped by a water haul ban.
From Lockers post, it seems this is statewide, not just a county thing. And who is "they?" Because there are plenty of people who OWN lands affected by the water haul ban. I've heard of self hatred but that's a stretch in this situation.
Edit: I am inclined to agree it is about making money. Land boom in more isolated areas>Eliminate water haul>land prices plummet>speculators sweep in and buy up after having cut a deal on water piping>bring in the water with development of tract subdivisions>start selling and ride a new boom.
Maybe that is not the intention, but if I were a Donald Trump type slimeball creepster with an eye for residential development, that would be absolutely what I would be thinking. And if that isn't stealing land, it's only so in the eyes of creepster slimeballs.
|
|
climb_eng
Trad climber
Calgary, AB
|
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but over the long term in California, real estate has been a fantastic investment, even if you bought in July of 2008.
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
We've done well with our real estate purchases, but they were incidental to buying first to have a place to live. The investment part was really a secondary goal. Having said that, buying in the westside of LA was not a bad use of funds. Our mortgage has probably been less to what rent for a comparable house would have been, though the costs of maintenance, property tax (ugh) and improvements get expensive. We also bought a little place in the mountains, just for family enjoyment, which is good because that has not been a good investment. Great fun and memories, yes. Good return on the money, no.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
So you want a nice inexpensive little place - next to a national park - in California - and you don't want to have get a job in the community [or anywhere else] to help pay for it...? Well, isn't that special.
So you're running into some barriers, that generally increase cost if not flat out block the way? No way, those greedy controlling bastards...
Gentrification has been going on everywhere for a long time.
|
|
Jon Beck
Trad climber
Oceanside
|
|
JLP nails it, if it was easy we would all be doing it.
|
|
Happiegrrrl2
Trad climber
|
|
So you want a nice inexpensive little place - next to a national park - in California - and you don't want to have get a job in the community [or anywhere else] to help pay for it...? Well, isn't that special.
I work JLP. I don't know why you, and some others, seem to refuse to acknowledge that fact. I work at least some portion of every single day, and when I am in NY I work probably 75 hours a week.
I ALSO have ZERO shelter costs at my NY home. That allows a good portion of the income I make to go to other uses.
I don't WANT a home in Joshua Tree; I don't need a HOME. It makes little sense to me to have one at this phase in my life.
Why does it rankle some of you people sooooo much that I don't play by the rules YOU think I should?
Sheeesh!
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
Real estate is a great investment,
See, Happi? That’s what I was talking about - Kool-Aid drinkers. I’m quite sure nobody except cbburton read my link. Everybody who has seen their house double or triple in value thinks they made a killing. While that is better than a sharp stick in the eye it ain’t jack compared to proper investing. My house has tripled in value but I don’t even consider it an investment - more like a ball and chain.
|
|
Happiegrrrl2
Trad climber
|
|
I read it, but there wasn't anything in the article I hadn't read or heard before.
But, not everyone is interested in "proper investing." Seeing the weasely games that get played with stocks, and how companies are beaten with a stick to perform at all costs - or else? That, to me, is nothing to be proud of as a money-generating machine. I think the stock game is like a cancer.
And not everyone needs their to grow money like they're going all in for this years Grand Prize for the Biggest Zucchini at the County Fair.
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
Sorry Reilly but I think that the piece you linked is your typical economist whose perspective is limited by his head up his ass, oops, I mean whose data is limited and fails to acknolwedge or factor other issues at play. First, it addresses the issue of solely real estate as an investment. However, it starts with a false premise that everyone buys real estate primarily as an investment. It ignores the reality that most buy because they need a place to live and the benefits of buying outweigh the benefits of renting. Second, it suggests that people of color are limited in their wealth accumulation because their home is their primary investment. However, this ignores the reality (which the article showed in a chart but did not address in the body of the article) that people of color often earn far less (the effects of less education, societal factors, etc.) and so do not have the means to aggressively invest in other sectors. Third, as with every article I've seen on this subject, it fails to acknowledge that people still need to pay for housing costs and that the wealth gained from home ownership is far greater than having no equity captured from renting over the same period.
Honestly, the article struck me as a disingenuous effort to argue in favor support the Republican tax bill, which caps deductions on property tax. The argument behind this flawed provision is that it will force people to diversify their wealth by making home ownership less attractive. However, that presumes people have surplus wealth to invest in something other than housing.
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
People thought real estate was a good investment in 2005
It was a great investment in 2011. I bought because I needed a place to live. I don't like the mortgage, but the payment doesn't go up. Rent goes up year after year. Screw that.
|
|
10b4me
Mountain climber
Retired
|
|
My house has tripled in value but I don’t even consider it an investment - more like a ball and chain.
that's for sure.
some people go to the wilderness to get away from the city. I go to get away from the city, and the house.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
Fat Dad, “disingenuous”? The author intended to mislead and distort by showing how people could better themselves? And this was written long before the new tax bill was even a twinkle in Paul Ryan’s eye. Do you regularly review economics papers for The Daily Worker?
|
|
fear
Ice climber
hartford, ct
|
|
....I think the stock game is like a cancer.....
But with an alluring aroma of opium for the masses not in the club...
|
|
Happiegrrrl2
Trad climber
|
|
Maybe the "club" is the ones who have a fix on the shell game. But if the club is just all those who invest in it, then I'm glad to be clean and sober, and one of the lucky ones who doesn't get triggered when they smell their drug of choice.
I have had 401k's and that kind of stuff at various work places. In fact, I funded my move from Wisconsin to NYC by cashing out the plan I had with JCPenny when I worked there, even as everyone said it was a bad idea.
I read about, especially the portfolio products that the average person has in a work 401k and how sometimes they include companies that you might find deplorable(and usually those are the ones that are *winning*).
I get the idea of growth through passive investment. It can be lucrative, and it's nearly impossible to amass a comfortable retirement if you are not gaining by SOME kind of passive income, even if it is by having employees who do the labor, although I know - that's not really passive income(ethically, I do consider it so, even though it's not technically so).
But those shenanigans are really a thing that causes a lot of the hate that is within a society. I know.....an employer/employee relationship is a foundation of our economics, but there's always "the line." The line between where the employer is being fair, and when they are taking more than their share, with the law is firmly on their side to do so.
Rules are made for people who need rules. And sometimes those people who need rules need those rules in order for them to take more than what is, in a spiritual sense of universal law, rightfully theirs.
Edit: And before Reilly can giggle over my quaint idea of considering a 401k as an "real" investment tooo, yeah, I get it that the "big boys" chose on their own what they will buy/sell, or pay a broker a portion of the takes, and to not soak them in the long run.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
Renting can be cheaper than owning, even long term, especially if you are comparing something smaller than what you would likely buy. If you buy leveraged, the bank is probably your landlord. You won't see that money back either. The interest tax deduction is insignificant.
Appreciation is a check you'll never cash unless you downsize, even then the gains will get taxed to nothing. Your house tripled - so did everyone else's.
Home ownership, if you're honest and do the math, is really about lifestyle.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
Appreciation is a check you'll never cash unless you downsize, even then the gains will get taxed to nothing.
Hmmm, with home sale tax exlcusion (250,000 / 500,000), and maximum tax of 20% on any remainder, pretty hard to see how that's going to get you to nothing--the tax you pay seems somewhat closer (percentage wise) to that "insignificant" mortgage interest deduction.
|
|
Bad Climber
Trad climber
The Lawless Border Regions
|
|
Yeah, a lot of moving parts. We did pretty well, and a good chunk of our retirement came from the sale. When you sell at retirement and downsize--as we did--you take no capital gains taxes--schweet. I thought folks who were buying at the top of the 2008 bubble were crazy. The math made NO sense, but they got caught up in the frenzy. The rest is history. It is a bummer, though, knowing that all that rent is never coming back. A house in the right market can at least help recoup some of that--if not make you some money. I sometimes think of people who go out and buy a new car because they want lower gas mileage without looking at the hard numbers. How long will you have to drive the new rig to make up for the differential? Sometimes keeping the old rig really pays.
BAd
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Renting can be cheaper than owning,
The payment on my condo is about $300 a month cheaper than the rent on a comparable unit.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
Hmmm, with home sale tax exlcusion.. That's a little newer, forgot about it. Thing is, it's small compared to the transaction costs of selling, buying and possibly refinancing into something smaller. Most don't do it to pocket cash, they do it to get rid of a lawn and maintenance on an aging house. Do you win, sure a lot of people win, maybe even most, but it's not a given.
The payment on my condo Tell us all about your condo after you sell it and move, then compare. Of course, many here also win - but definitely not all with a condo - a lot of people write checks to get out of those deals. Condo prices are generally much less stable than single family homes, and they appreciate much less as well as they generally have no land underneath, plus often the association fees.
Point for OP - given all information given - a plot in JT sounds to me like a really bad idea. Buy a rehab/meth lab instead.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!