Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 92632	2008-08-17 05:02:00	Affordable housing	Nomad (952)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
697940	2008-08-18 04:05:00	I didn't account for rental rises. For buying, I calculated that a modest house in the main centres might be $400k, that would require $4k per month for 40yrs. At the end of it, one would have paid $1.2M ~. The other scenario I found was, instead of $4k per month, put $2k into rent that is about the market rate isn't it. $500 a week. Put $2k into savings each month of the 40yrs and let it compound. I'm still thinking that renting is an attractive option. I pretty much found out that a modest $400k house if one does not commit ~ $4k per month, you just won't pay it off by the time retirement. How many wealthy retirees do you see that have also rented all their lives?	johcar (6283)
697941	2008-08-18 05:46:00	I should point out that the plural of you is you,not youse. It may help if you sally further than the end of your street. People in San Francisco "sally forth" but we eschew that here in SoCal.	SurferJoe46 (51)
697942	2008-08-18 05:55:00	The only way that Kiwis get a tax write-off for mortgage interest is if they are self-employed and their home is also their office . Even then the amount you can claim is relevant to the size (reasonable) of the office in relation to the overall size of the house . I get about a 15% rebate . . . Consecutive NZ governments, from both sides of the political spectrum, have closed all the lovely loopholes so that now, a tax refund is as easy to get as a Lotto win . NZ governments just love to hang onto the money they steal! Gads . . . that's mean! We even get a tax write-off if we have offices in the home, as long as they are dedicated single-purposed rooms and not doubling as a bedroom or garage . I guess if you were a sex worker and needed the bedroom as a work space . . . that might be arguable . One of the neat things about the county in Arizona that I am going to is that the property taxes are based solely on the property itself, not the builkdings unless they are commercial and for profit . BUT, the best part is that the property taxes are on a diminishing - sliding scale that says that the amount owed on the mortgage is the taxable amount and when the property is all paid off, the taxes are zero-ed out to nothing . That way a retired person can live in no fear of losing their land and home if they lose most of their income . Since most home parcels are over 40 acres, they can subsistence farm for food and raise their own comestible livestock for eternity if they live that long with no further taxes .	SurferJoe46 (51)
697943	2008-08-18 06:15:00	Gads . . . that's mean! We even get a tax write-off if we have offices in the home, as long as they are dedicated single-purposed rooms and not doubling as a bedroom or garage . I guess if you were a sex worker and needed the bedroom as a work space . . . that might be arguable . One of the neat things about the county in Arizona that I am going to is that the property taxes are based solely on the property itself, not the builkdings unless they are commercial and for profit . BUT, the best part is that the property taxes are on a diminishing - sliding scale that says that the amount owed on the mortgage is the taxable amount and when the property is all paid off, the taxes are zero-ed out to nothing . That way a retired person can live in no fear of losing their land and home if they lose most of their income . Since most home parcels are over 40 acres, they can subsistence farm for food and raise their own comestible livestock for eternity if they live that long with no further taxes . Sounds pretty grim to me . It also means that a rich man who owns the land etc is subsidised by a poor person paying tax .	Cicero (40)
697944	2008-08-18 06:56:00	How many wealthy retirees do you see that have also rented all their lives? Oh :D What I found out was for the average person rent is better, because if you are 25yrs old and want a mortgage for 40yrs to 65yrs retirement you need to spend a bit more than $3k per month to pay it off just in time. If you are filthy rich, a) pay 100% cash and no rent to pay nor a mortgage to fuel or knock it out in a couple of years. I've sort of found that if you knock it out in 15yrs, paying around $6k a month that still might be a bit more than mortgaging but at least the house is your's and its not bad .. cos you pay a bit for that privilege or maybe it breaks even if you account for rent rises and stuff .. but I guess in a rough way rent rises may balance out with extra costs of house ownership like maintenance and rates etc. At a guess if you knock the mortgage out in 10yrs it might be cheaper than to rent for 40yrs to retirement. Althou renting and saving on the side require good dedication, if you have money available and you spend it cos you can .. then hey .....	Nomad (952)
697945	2008-08-18 10:43:00	Well done Nomad, very interesting. One thing I would like to know is "Who the hell thought up that mortgage formula that the banks use ?" Ie after say 5 years you have paid mostly interest only and peanuts off the principal. So that if you sell the house to move to another town or a better house you have not gained anything ! (unless the house has gone up in value) Is that forumla set in stone by maths or is it just one that the banks use for their own nefarious purposes ? What I can say in the numbers is that, upgrading houses better size or location, or whatever, basically it means you are back to the drawing board to get more loan and more pain :D I don't really buy the idea of buying a smaller house if you cannot get a bigger one and in the future get a bigger one. If you are thinking long term get the bigger house and if wage do increase its your benefit. Than to complete one phase of a mortgage hurdle and then get another hurdle later on at later market rates. Bought a big house and then sell it and get a smaller one, yeah .. but 2 bedroom vs a 3 or 4 isn't that much diff really and esp when you look at the fees / interests you have paid to the bank in those many 10's of years compounded. One may be facing a ratio 3:1, while the bank takes 3 and you take the 1. I think given, the climate now, if you go to Westpac and look at the home loan calculator or how much they are willing to loan you after you put your salary in, I think that is more accurate now because in the past, if they did just gave you the loan even knowing you cannot pay it off they knew the property market was booming so if you cannot make do, they take it and do a mortgage sale and they would still profit. But not now ... Ie., it says, a person's salary of say $50k may get a mortgage of $200k, not sure where you can such a property of that price .. but given the salary and the amount of loan I think that is more accurate in terms of what an individual typically can afford. $50k after tax becomes $30k and then you need to pay your own expenses and then the mortgage payments. Well, ok, a single person won't geta mortgage usually, so if 2x of them .. $100k a year, after tax that becomes $70k for that $400k house. Not a lot of room ... I'm not sure if most of those who had mortgages last yr or two had those household salaries.	Nomad (952)
697946	2008-08-18 11:28:00	What I found out was for the average person rent is better, Then all those landlords must be losing money.	decibel (11645)
697947	2008-08-18 14:54:00	Sounds pretty grim to me . It also means that a rich man who owns the land etc is subsidised by a poor person paying tax . Grim because you don't understand what's happening there . Not that there aren't persons needing social programs in Arizona, but they are indeed few and far between . The single largest drag on the society's purse are the illegals who demand their "Constitutional Rights", which by definition they don't have in the first place . Arizona's program all but eliminates that problem completely . . . . by . . . . . (yada, yada, yada . . . . . . . ) . Cic, . . . . (I call you "Cic" because I think we are good friends by now) . . . . . I had prepared a long and involved answer to your nasty dig and comment, but you would complain that the words are too many, :annoyed: the letters confuse you :blush: and you'd have a snide and nasty retort anyway - having the "slightest" undercurrent by/of an old codger :crying . . . so if you want to read it, I'll save it for you and PM it to you . I actually have better things to do, but if you think you'd like to read it . . . . . . . . . Suffice it to say you are totally wrong and you should never visit any place that might upset you, like Arizona; it would really put rocks in your gizzard to think people actually pay less, don't suck on the social teat and/or can own property that lets them retire with no tax worries . Stay exactly where you are happiest . . . . . . in your mind anyway . :punk	SurferJoe46 (51)
697948	2008-08-18 20:43:00	Nomad, you seem to be talking about one person buying a house. I would have thought that a decent amount of people buying a house (not an apartment) would be couples.	the_bogan (9949)
697949	2008-08-18 21:27:00	Grim because you don't understand what's happening there . Not that there aren't persons needing social programs in Arizona, but they are indeed few and far between . The single largest drag on the society's purse are the illegals who demand their "Constitutional Rights", which by definition they don't have in the first place . Arizona's program all but eliminates that problem completely . . . . by . . . . . (yada, yada, yada . . . . . . . ) . Cic, . . . . (I call you "Cic" because I think we are good friends by now) . . . . . I had prepared a long and involved answer to your nasty dig and comment, but you would complain that the words are too many, :annoyed: the letters confuse you :blush: and you'd have a snide and nasty retort anyway - having the "slightest" undercurrent by/of an old codger :crying . . . so if you want to read it, I'll save it for you and PM it to you . I actually have better things to do, but if you think you'd like to read it . . . . . . . . . Suffice it to say you are totally wrong and you should never visit any place that might upset you, like Arizona; it would really put rocks in your gizzard to think people actually pay less, don't suck on the social teat and/or can own property that lets them retire with no tax worries . Stay exactly where you are happiest . . . . . . in your mind anyway . :punk To say that I am wrong is a terrible thing to say,I sir am never wrong . The fact is Joseph these matters can't be sorted on this medium,so many variable . I know you are well meaning,but alas you are an American and therefore unable to grasp the subtle . (Unless of course you think of Bush as being subtle) We don't hold that against you! .	Cicero (40)
1 2 3