Disgusted/Deflated. We make combines $350 & can't afford jack

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We refuse to be house poor. We want to keep monthly payment affordable. With property taxes, increased interest rates, upkeep, it is just a lot of $$. And we don't want to sink $$ into a home to lose it if there is an adjustment in the market.

"We refuse to be house poor, and we refuse to look elsewhere than NW DC, Bethesda and Chevy Chase! Waaah!"

Stomps foot and storms off to soothe feelings with yet another highly caloric Bubble Tea, because OP is trying to lose weight with liquid diet.

I hate DCUM for real

Shrug. Truth hurts.

OP here. I NEVER said NW, or CC, Potomac, Great Falls. We want a particular public school, decent house with space between neighbors. Could be anywhere in the DMV, as we both teleworking.

It's funny how ppl draw their own conclusions about data that was never discussed.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding but how can you look anywhere in the dmv if you want a particular public school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We refuse to be house poor. We want to keep monthly payment affordable. With property taxes, increased interest rates, upkeep, it is just a lot of $$. And we don't want to sink $$ into a home to lose it if there is an adjustment in the market.

"We refuse to be house poor, and we refuse to look elsewhere than NW DC, Bethesda and Chevy Chase! Waaah!"

Stomps foot and storms off to soothe feelings with yet another highly caloric Bubble Tea, because OP is trying to lose weight with liquid diet.

I hate DCUM for real

Shrug. Truth hurts.

OP here. I NEVER said NW, or CC, Potomac, Great Falls. We want a particular public school, decent house with space between neighbors. Could be anywhere in the DMV, as we both teleworking.

It's funny how ppl draw their own conclusions about data that was never discussed.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding but how can you look anywhere in the dmv if you want a particular public school.

Fair point. I guess we were looking everywhere and recently decided on a specific school.

It actually is a relief bc we just wait for one to come on the market and jump on it. But 75% are too much$ and my point is we can't afford a moderately priced home with space between neighbors. The homes are 1millio +

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We refuse to be house poor. We want to keep monthly payment affordable. With property taxes, increased interest rates, upkeep, it is just a lot of $$. And we don't want to sink $$ into a home to lose it if there is an adjustment in the market.

"We refuse to be house poor, and we refuse to look elsewhere than NW DC, Bethesda and Chevy Chase! Waaah!"

Stomps foot and storms off to soothe feelings with yet another highly caloric Bubble Tea, because OP is trying to lose weight with liquid diet.

I hate DCUM for real

Shrug. Truth hurts.

OP here. I NEVER said NW, or CC, Potomac, Great Falls. We want a particular public school, decent house with space between neighbors. Could be anywhere in the DMV, as we both teleworking.

It's funny how ppl draw their own conclusions about data that was never discussed.

So your search is even more privileged than was implied. You want a specific school. And you're acting like you can't afford jack? Unbelievable rich people are. Being self aware is a positive thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP sounds like my good friend who is house hunting now. They are first time buyers, HHI of over 300k, no idea how much they have saved but they are mid-30s professionals so I would have to assume a decent chunk of change at this point.

She complains constantly about how much everything costs and will often say "you guys are SO LUCKY you bought when you did." Though she will also say they won't buy a condo when we live in a condo. She also tells me we are lucky that we don't "need" a bigger home because we only have one kid and they have two. Cool, cool, I guess my secondary infertility was a blessing. She has no idea.

I think a lot of first time home buyers don't understand that it's always a compromise. I don't know but I bet even really rich people compromise when they buy homes most of the time because you can't control what inventory is available. I think the only way to not have to compromise is if what you want is well below your budget, because then you can come in hard with your offer and probably afford to change anything you need. But first time buyers are rarely in that situation.

It's so common for buyers to feel like everything they want is juuuuuuust out of reach. But if people feel this way whether their budget is 500k or a million or 1.3m, then maybe it's mostly in your head. It's a big purchase, you are stressed about it, you channel that stress into feeling like if you just had a little more money, you could have what you wanted. You need to get used the idea that home buying doesn't work that way, figure out what your priorities are (keeping mortgage low, square footage, location, how updated it is) and then make some hard choices based on those priorities. It's what everyone else does. This is why people rarely buy their "dream house" first time out. You get the dream house once you've actually lived in a home you own for a bit and know how to dream a dream that is possible.

Thanks for your thoughtful response. Is it your best guess that we are we in the 2006 height of the market? We bought at the highestpoint and lost a lot when closing. Had to pay hundred thousand just to get out from under that mortgage. What are yourthoughts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We refuse to be house poor. We want to keep monthly payment affordable. With property taxes, increased interest rates, upkeep, it is just a lot of $$. And we don't want to sink $$ into a home to lose it if there is an adjustment in the market.

"We refuse to be house poor, and we refuse to look elsewhere than NW DC, Bethesda and Chevy Chase! Waaah!"

Stomps foot and storms off to soothe feelings with yet another highly caloric Bubble Tea, because OP is trying to lose weight with liquid diet.

I hate DCUM for real

PP you replied to. Hey, OP asked for it

1. Smaller but newer houses do not exist. It's either small/old houses or large/new houses. There is no middle ground and it's very annoying, but unless OP wants to build, she'd better get used to it. And the builder will push her to build large.

2. There are PLENTY of houses that will not make OP house poor, but she doesn't like those, of course.

OP, I'm not buying. I have plenty of millions, but can find no house I love. So I'm sticking to my tiny sh1tshack close to downtown Bethesda.

Op could get a lovely apartment in DC for the amount she has. But when she says she would consider that “Jack.” I really get annoyed with posters who say there’s “nothing out there” but what they really mean is that there is nothing that fits their very specific parameters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We refuse to be house poor. We want to keep monthly payment affordable. With property taxes, increased interest rates, upkeep, it is just a lot of $$. And we don't want to sink $$ into a home to lose it if there is an adjustment in the market.

"We refuse to be house poor, and we refuse to look elsewhere than NW DC, Bethesda and Chevy Chase! Waaah!"

Stomps foot and storms off to soothe feelings with yet another highly caloric Bubble Tea, because OP is trying to lose weight with liquid diet.

I hate DCUM for real

Shrug. Truth hurts.

OP here. I NEVER said NW, or CC, Potomac, Great Falls. We want a particular public school, decent house with space between neighbors. Could be anywhere in the DMV, as we both teleworking.

It's funny how ppl draw their own conclusions about data that was never discussed.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding but how can you look anywhere in the dmv if you want a particular public school.

Fair point. I guess we were looking everywhere and recently decided on a specific school.

It actually is a relief bc we just wait for one to come on the market and jump on it. But 75% are too much$ and my point is we can't afford a moderately priced home with space between neighbors. The homes are 1millio +

Do I dare ask the specific school on which you have decided...is it in the Langley High pyramid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We refuse to be house poor. We want to keep monthly payment affordable. With property taxes, increased interest rates, upkeep, it is just a lot of $$. And we don't want to sink $$ into a home to lose it if there is an adjustment in the market.

"We refuse to be house poor, and we refuse to look elsewhere than NW DC, Bethesda and Chevy Chase! Waaah!"

Stomps foot and storms off to soothe feelings with yet another highly caloric Bubble Tea, because OP is trying to lose weight with liquid diet.

I hate DCUM for real

Shrug. Truth hurts.

OP here. I NEVER said NW, or CC, Potomac, Great Falls. We want a particular public school, decent house with space between neighbors. Could be anywhere in the DMV, as we both teleworking.

It's funny how ppl draw their own conclusions about data that was never discussed.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding but how can you look anywhere in the dmv if you want a particular public school.

Fair point. I guess we were looking everywhere and recently decided on a specific school.

It actually is a relief bc we just wait for one to come on the market and jump on it. But 75% are too much$ and my point is we can't afford a moderately priced home with space between neighbors. The homes are 1millio +

You CAN afford it. You just can’t afford it and tend to your anxiety about being house poor. That’s okay, but that’s your choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always stunned by how many people defend these insane prices. Is this the forum for foreign investors?

Can I afford a shit shack on my $400 income? Yes, I can. But WHY would I spend $1.2 on a hideous 60s ranch house that needs to be gutted or a cheaply made, horribly designed townhome? But that’s about all I can get. Not wasting my money.

Your problem is that standards changed so much that every MC/UMC Joe and Jane now demands to have 5000 sq.ft minimum with his and her walk in closets, showers, baths, a bunch of useless sitting/library/gym rooms, a room for each kid, with dedicated office and dedicated guest room, nice finishes that are trendy (god forbid it's the dated granite of wrong color cabinets, the horror!), no smells of any kind, high fancy ceilings and spacious halls, perfect floors and everything from the latest HGTV videos or designer home catalogs. And if the house falls short they don't want it and don't want to deal with fixing and remodeling anything. Oh, they also want perfect immaculate outdoor spaces and not any annoying natural environment features like trees too close by or sloping or irregular shaped lots or busy streets or certain shape of cul-de-sac or whatever little nuisance irritates them.

I've been on this forum long enough to see all of these complaints over and over again from people you would think were born with a "golden spoon" or are making 7 figure incomes but then they are crying how they cannot afford anything and how older generations or those who bought decade ago had it so easy and got all these "golden nuggets". The "golden nuggets" are the old ranchers and split levels, cramped Cape Cods, and tiny colonials.

Curious- how old are you? Because we make a lot more than my corporate exec uncle did in the 80s but he could afford a really nice home and put three kids through fancy colleges. We’re renting in our 50s and if not for the GI bill, would be taking out college loans for the kids.

All these 70s ranch houses in the suburbs were built for single earner households and that person was likely a government accountant or retired Lt Col . To own that same house now, you need a combined income of $400,000 a year.

I just don’t agree that I’m entitled for thinking $1 million should buy me more than a run down 80s colonial with a squatter in the basement. I really dislike most new construction but I’m also not willing to be house poor over something untouched since it was built in 1982.

I’m old enough to remember when $150,000 bought you a nice house and $300,000 was fancy. Now I need $1.4 in cash and waive inspections. Crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always stunned by how many people defend these insane prices. Is this the forum for foreign investors?

Can I afford a shit shack on my $400 income? Yes, I can. But WHY would I spend $1.2 on a hideous 60s ranch house that needs to be gutted or a cheaply made, horribly designed townhome? But that’s about all I can get. Not wasting my money.

Your problem is that standards changed so much that every MC/UMC Joe and Jane now demands to have 5000 sq.ft minimum with his and her walk in closets, showers, baths, a bunch of useless sitting/library/gym rooms, a room for each kid, with dedicated office and dedicated guest room, nice finishes that are trendy (god forbid it's the dated granite of wrong color cabinets, the horror!), no smells of any kind, high fancy ceilings and spacious halls, perfect floors and everything from the latest HGTV videos or designer home catalogs. And if the house falls short they don't want it and don't want to deal with fixing and remodeling anything. Oh, they also want perfect immaculate outdoor spaces and not any annoying natural environment features like trees too close by or sloping or irregular shaped lots or busy streets or certain shape of cul-de-sac or whatever little nuisance irritates them.

I've been on this forum long enough to see all of these complaints over and over again from people you would think were born with a "golden spoon" or are making 7 figure incomes but then they are crying how they cannot afford anything and how older generations or those who bought decade ago had it so easy and got all these "golden nuggets". The "golden nuggets" are the old ranchers and split levels, cramped Cape Cods, and tiny colonials.

Curious- how old are you? Because we make a lot more than my corporate exec uncle did in the 80s but he could afford a really nice home and put three kids through fancy colleges. We’re renting in our 50s and if not for the GI bill, would be taking out college loans for the kids.

All these 70s ranch houses in the suburbs were built for single earner households and that person was likely a government accountant or retired Lt Col . To own that same house now, you need a combined income of $400,000 a year.

I just don’t agree that I’m entitled for thinking $1 million should buy me more than a run down 80s colonial with a squatter in the basement. I really dislike most new construction but I’m also not willing to be house poor over something untouched since it was built in 1982.

I’m old enough to remember when $150,000 bought you a nice house and $300,000 was fancy. Now I need $1.4 in cash and waive inspections. Crazy.

But I still don’t get how you can have that income and equity and feel like you can’t spend $1.4M on a house?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We refuse to be house poor. We want to keep monthly payment affordable. With property taxes, increased interest rates, upkeep, it is just a lot of $$. And we don't want to sink $$ into a home to lose it if there is an adjustment in the market.

"We refuse to be house poor, and we refuse to look elsewhere than NW DC, Bethesda and Chevy Chase! Waaah!"

Stomps foot and storms off to soothe feelings with yet another highly caloric Bubble Tea, because OP is trying to lose weight with liquid diet.

I hate DCUM for real

Shrug. Truth hurts.

OP here. I NEVER said NW, or CC, Potomac, Great Falls. We want a particular public school, decent house with space between neighbors. Could be anywhere in the DMV, as we both teleworking.

It's funny how ppl draw their own conclusions about data that was never discussed.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding but how can you look anywhere in the dmv if you want a particular public school.

Fair point. I guess we were looking everywhere and recently decided on a specific school.

It actually is a relief bc we just wait for one to come on the market and jump on it. But 75% are too much$ and my point is we can't afford a moderately priced home with space between neighbors. The homes are 1millio +

So you can’t have the exact school you want with the exact amount of space between houses you want. Yet, somehow you’ll survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. We refuse to be house poor. We want to keep monthly payment affordable. With property taxes, increased interest rates, upkeep, it is just a lot of $$. And we don't want to sink $$ into a home to lose it if there is an adjustment in the market.

"We refuse to be house poor, and we refuse to look elsewhere than NW DC, Bethesda and Chevy Chase! Waaah!"

Stomps foot and storms off to soothe feelings with yet another highly caloric Bubble Tea, because OP is trying to lose weight with liquid diet.

I hate DCUM for real

Shrug. Truth hurts.

OP here. I NEVER said NW, or CC, Potomac, Great Falls. We want a particular public school, decent house with space between neighbors. Could be anywhere in the DMV, as we both teleworking.

It's funny how ppl draw their own conclusions about data that was never discussed.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding but how can you look anywhere in the dmv if you want a particular public school.

Fair point. I guess we were looking everywhere and recently decided on a specific school.

It actually is a relief bc we just wait for one to come on the market and jump on it. But 75% are too much$ and my point is we can't afford a moderately priced home with space between neighbors. The homes are 1millio +

So you can’t have the exact school you want with the exact amount of space between houses you want. Yet, somehow you’ll survive.

+1. So much whining from the picky OP who could afford 95 pct of houses in the USA but is sad she can’t afford the specific ones she wants in rich areas with limited diversity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always stunned by how many people defend these insane prices. Is this the forum for foreign investors?

Can I afford a shit shack on my $400 income? Yes, I can. But WHY would I spend $1.2 on a hideous 60s ranch house that needs to be gutted or a cheaply made, horribly designed townhome? But that’s about all I can get. Not wasting my money.

Your problem is that standards changed so much that every MC/UMC Joe and Jane now demands to have 5000 sq.ft minimum with his and her walk in closets, showers, baths, a bunch of useless sitting/library/gym rooms, a room for each kid, with dedicated office and dedicated guest room, nice finishes that are trendy (god forbid it's the dated granite of wrong color cabinets, the horror!), no smells of any kind, high fancy ceilings and spacious halls, perfect floors and everything from the latest HGTV videos or designer home catalogs. And if the house falls short they don't want it and don't want to deal with fixing and remodeling anything. Oh, they also want perfect immaculate outdoor spaces and not any annoying natural environment features like trees too close by or sloping or irregular shaped lots or busy streets or certain shape of cul-de-sac or whatever little nuisance irritates them.

I've been on this forum long enough to see all of these complaints over and over again from people you would think were born with a "golden spoon" or are making 7 figure incomes but then they are crying how they cannot afford anything and how older generations or those who bought decade ago had it so easy and got all these "golden nuggets". The "golden nuggets" are the old ranchers and split levels, cramped Cape Cods, and tiny colonials.

Curious- how old are you? Because we make a lot more than my corporate exec uncle did in the 80s but he could afford a really nice home and put three kids through fancy colleges. We’re renting in our 50s and if not for the GI bill, would be taking out college loans for the kids.

All these 70s ranch houses in the suburbs were built for single earner households and that person was likely a government accountant or retired Lt Col . To own that same house now, you need a combined income of $400,000 a year.

I just don’t agree that I’m entitled for thinking $1 million should buy me more than a run down 80s colonial with a squatter in the basement. I really dislike most new construction but I’m also not willing to be house poor over something untouched since it was built in 1982.

I’m old enough to remember when $150,000 bought you a nice house and $300,000 was fancy. Now I need $1.4 in cash and waive inspections. Crazy.

But you are entitled-why are you still expecting 80’s prices 40 years later? Life all over the globe is more expensive now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always stunned by how many people defend these insane prices. Is this the forum for foreign investors?

Can I afford a shit shack on my $400 income? Yes, I can. But WHY would I spend $1.2 on a hideous 60s ranch house that needs to be gutted or a cheaply made, horribly designed townhome? But that’s about all I can get. Not wasting my money.

Your problem is that standards changed so much that every MC/UMC Joe and Jane now demands to have 5000 sq.ft minimum with his and her walk in closets, showers, baths, a bunch of useless sitting/library/gym rooms, a room for each kid, with dedicated office and dedicated guest room, nice finishes that are trendy (god forbid it's the dated granite of wrong color cabinets, the horror!), no smells of any kind, high fancy ceilings and spacious halls, perfect floors and everything from the latest HGTV videos or designer home catalogs. And if the house falls short they don't want it and don't want to deal with fixing and remodeling anything. Oh, they also want perfect immaculate outdoor spaces and not any annoying natural environment features like trees too close by or sloping or irregular shaped lots or busy streets or certain shape of cul-de-sac or whatever little nuisance irritates them.

I've been on this forum long enough to see all of these complaints over and over again from people you would think were born with a "golden spoon" or are making 7 figure incomes but then they are crying how they cannot afford anything and how older generations or those who bought decade ago had it so easy and got all these "golden nuggets". The "golden nuggets" are the old ranchers and split levels, cramped Cape Cods, and tiny colonials.

Curious- how old are you? Because we make a lot more than my corporate exec uncle did in the 80s but he could afford a really nice home and put three kids through fancy colleges. We’re renting in our 50s and if not for the GI bill, would be taking out college loans for the kids.

All these 70s ranch houses in the suburbs were built for single earner households and that person was likely a government accountant or retired Lt Col . To own that same house now, you need a combined income of $400,000 a year.

I just don’t agree that I’m entitled for thinking $1 million should buy me more than a run down 80s colonial with a squatter in the basement. I really dislike most new construction but I’m also not willing to be house poor over something untouched since it was built in 1982.

I’m old enough to remember when $150,000 bought you a nice house and $300,000 was fancy. Now I need $1.4 in cash and waive inspections. Crazy.

My friend showed my chart tracking women’s lib with home prices.

Fact is in DC women now earn 102 percent of men. So dual income couples today are making 102 percent higher than in 1972 when it was single earners buying houses. People could afford a greater mortgage and wanted bigger, better and more expensive homes.

And with so many attending college men make more too.

Sucks as in 1972 a blue collar man could afford a nice little starter home and have a stay at home wife.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What size house do you need?

3br, 2ba. Relatively newer build. minimum half acre

I literally laughed out loud at this.

Which is why OP is talking about moving. Easy to find elsewhere, as are jobs, esp. in this remote market

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always stunned by how many people defend these insane prices. Is this the forum for foreign investors?

Can I afford a shit shack on my $400 income? Yes, I can. But WHY would I spend $1.2 on a hideous 60s ranch house that needs to be gutted or a cheaply made, horribly designed townhome? But that’s about all I can get. Not wasting my money.

Your problem is that standards changed so much that every MC/UMC Joe and Jane now demands to have 5000 sq.ft minimum with his and her walk in closets, showers, baths, a bunch of useless sitting/library/gym rooms, a room for each kid, with dedicated office and dedicated guest room, nice finishes that are trendy (god forbid it's the dated granite of wrong color cabinets, the horror!), no smells of any kind, high fancy ceilings and spacious halls, perfect floors and everything from the latest HGTV videos or designer home catalogs. And if the house falls short they don't want it and don't want to deal with fixing and remodeling anything. Oh, they also want perfect immaculate outdoor spaces and not any annoying natural environment features like trees too close by or sloping or irregular shaped lots or busy streets or certain shape of cul-de-sac or whatever little nuisance irritates them.

I've been on this forum long enough to see all of these complaints over and over again from people you would think were born with a "golden spoon" or are making 7 figure incomes but then they are crying how they cannot afford anything and how older generations or those who bought decade ago had it so easy and got all these "golden nuggets". The "golden nuggets" are the old ranchers and split levels, cramped Cape Cods, and tiny colonials.

Curious- how old are you? Because we make a lot more than my corporate exec uncle did in the 80s but he could afford a really nice home and put three kids through fancy colleges. We’re renting in our 50s and if not for the GI bill, would be taking out college loans for the kids.

All these 70s ranch houses in the suburbs were built for single earner households and that person was likely a government accountant or retired Lt Col . To own that same house now, you need a combined income of $400,000 a year.

I just don’t agree that I’m entitled for thinking $1 million should buy me more than a run down 80s colonial with a squatter in the basement. I really dislike most new construction but I’m also not willing to be house poor over something untouched since it was built in 1982.

I’m old enough to remember when $150,000 bought you a nice house and $300,000 was fancy. Now I need $1.4 in cash and waive inspections. Crazy.

But I still don’t get how you can have that income and equity and feel like you can’t spend $1.4M on a house?

Seriously. A lot of my friends are in the $200-$300k combined income bracket with two relatively equal incomes, and most are in homes around or a little less than $1 million. At $350k income OP definitely has options.

I do agree that the housing stock in general around here leaves something to be desired though and maybe that’s OP’s real problem. It’s brand new McCraftsmans and older, 70s/80s stuff that hasn’t been kept up well. We have far fewer of the nice older homes, the real craftsmans and bungalows and Tudors and stuff, that they have in parts of the west coast and the Midwest.