Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

No equity. No family money. Job moved is every 2-3 years and sometimes overseas. Yes, we can stretch for a $1.4 mortgage, but here we get a 70s ranch or cheap, small new build. I don’t see the point. Houses are no longer investments. And we’d be outbid by people paying all cash over asking anyway.

Someone whose job moves every 2-3 years shouldn't be buying anyway

It depends on the city, but the average break even point on home buying is 4-5 years, and there's no market that is lower than 2.5.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 4 bedroom older colonial would sell for $650.

Great neighborhood, kids, close to a lot, schools are fine, and people are happy. It's not new construction, could use a few cosmetic updates , but it's great. My neighbors are all ages, kids all ages, everyone is a professional ranging from banking, gov't, teaching, veterinarian, IT, etc. There are few houses for sale because no one is leaving.

Columbia, Md.

I can find something similar for you in Moco, too.

You can afford a lot, OP, but get realistic.

Columbia is a suburb of Baltimore. It should be cheap.

It is not a suburb of Baltimore. There is plenty of new and old construction well over $1000000 and higher.

I'm suggesting that OP look in older neighborhoods everywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

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?

No equity. No family money. Job moved is every 2-3 years and sometimes overseas. Yes, we can stretch for a $1.4 mortgage, but here we get a 70s ranch or cheap, small new build. I don’t see the point. Houses are no longer investments. And we’d be outbid by people paying all cash over asking anyway.

Someone whose job moves every 2-3 years shouldn't be buying anyway

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.

NP here. Just move to the burbs! We have 5400 sq ft and every single room/area that you mentioned, literally. Built in 2017. We paid $600K this year. I don't get the obsession with certain zip codes. If you want more but want to pay less, move to the burbs.

Suburbs of what city???? DC suburbs an hour away still cost more than that.

Yeah, you can't even get that in western Loudoun for $600k. PP is not in this area.

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.

NP here. Just move to the burbs! We have 5400 sq ft and every single room/area that you mentioned, literally. Built in 2017. We paid $600K this year. I don't get the obsession with certain zip codes. If you want more but want to pay less, move to the burbs.

Suburbs of what city???? DC suburbs an hour away still cost more than that.

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?

No equity. No family money. Job moved is every 2-3 years and sometimes overseas. Yes, we can stretch for a $1.4 mortgage, but here we get a 70s ranch or cheap, small new build. I don’t see the point. Houses are no longer investments. And we’d be outbid by people paying all cash over asking anyway.

OP, I suggest Alabama. Try mountain brook or Vestavia. It’s the nicest Birmingham suburb, has great schools, and you can get a really nice house on a big lot.

This is is $875, so above your desired budget, but it’s amazing: https://www.redfin.com/AL/Birmingham/3660-Brookwood-Rd-35223/home/81039761?600390594=copy_variant&231528114=control&1778901559=variant&utm_source=ios_share&utm_medium=share&utm_nooverride=1&utm_content=link&utm_campaign=share_sheet

In your price range and a 1 acre lot: https://www.redfin.com/AL/Birmingham/3616-Locksley-Dr-35223/home/80948822?600390594=copy_variant&231528114=control&1778901559=variant&utm_source=ios_share&utm_medium=share&utm_nooverride=1&utm_content=link&utm_campaign=share_sheet

.4 acre lot but UNDER your budget: https://www.redfin.com/AL/Vestavia-Hills/3767-Poe-Dr-35223/home/80950306?600390594=copy_variant&231528114=control&1778901559=variant&utm_source=ios_share&utm_medium=share&utm_nooverride=1&utm_content=link&utm_campaign=share_sheet

Columbia is NOT a suburb of Baltimore. And it is hardly "cheap".

Anonymous wrote:My 4 bedroom older colonial would sell for $650.

Great neighborhood, kids, close to a lot, schools are fine, and people are happy. It's not new construction, could use a few cosmetic updates , but it's great. My neighbors are all ages, kids all ages, everyone is a professional ranging from banking, gov't, teaching, veterinarian, IT, etc. There are few houses for sale because no one is leaving.

Columbia, Md.

I can find something similar for you in Moco, too.

You can afford a lot, OP, but get realistic.

Columbia is a suburb of Baltimore. It should be cheap.

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.

NP here. Just move to the burbs! We have 5400 sq ft and every single room/area that you mentioned, literally. Built in 2017. We paid $600K this year. I don't get the obsession with certain zip codes. If you want more but want to pay less, move to the burbs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has to be the same OP who complained they can’t ever take a vacation or fix up their because they have put all their money in savings and retirement and refuse to spend it.

OP here. Not us, but it sounds like us. Cheap/thrifty. Can't spend $$ unless we truly need to.

and by the way - I never said DC proper. Or any specific place. Where we are looking is around Centreville/Chantilly. that is where the parochial schools are where we are sending our kids.

Well, it’s fine to value savings over spending. But don’t complain about how you “can’t afford jack” because you CAN; you just don’t want to spend the money. Or that what you mean by “jack” is a newer house on a half-acre, which is unattainable for most of us. So there’s no point to your thread except trolling for attention. I knew when you said Alabama you were a troll, because I’ve lived in Alabama, and it is a complete shitshow in almost every respect.

have you been to Huntsville or Madison? serious question. that's where we are looking. yes, we can both work anywhere. the property taxes are very cheap, the schools are great and there are a lot of jobs

What kind of jobs? Retail? Fast food?

Saw this article and reminded me of this thread

https://realestate.usnews.com/real-estate/articles/why-huntsville-is-the-best-place-to-live-in-the-u-s-in-2022-23

My 4 bedroom older colonial would sell for $650.

Great neighborhood, kids, close to a lot, schools are fine, and people are happy. It's not new construction, could use a few cosmetic updates , but it's great. My neighbors are all ages, kids all ages, everyone is a professional ranging from banking, gov't, teaching, veterinarian, IT, etc. There are few houses for sale because no one is leaving.

Columbia, Md.

I can find something similar for you in Moco, too.

You can afford a lot, OP, but get realistic.

I think the issue is folks CONFUSE HHI income with single earner income.

When I had three kids aged 1, 5 and 7 I was making 350K like the poster and lived fine and had a place.

But my wife did not work. I paid zero child care. We did not have a babysitter, a maid, I mowed my own lawn, no going out to fancy restaurants and my wife cooked so no take out all the time. We had two used cars in driveway.

Today if I made 350K if my wife worked the childcare would eat up a ton of costs, so would commute, dry cleaning, lunches when she is at work. I am sure she would want a maid, why not take out, pay for Instacart. Heck why drive a used car and go on cheap vacations if she is working so hard. Why dye your own hair. It just adds up.

As a man. Sadly, I worked a place business casual. Pretty much I shopped at KOHLs for basically a golf shirt and kaki on sale.

I also bought a fixer upper. My house was small. I could do my own painting and home repairs.

Today if 350K means you have childcare, leased cars, large house, High property taxes, HOA fee how does that work. Guess what it did not work 10, 20 or 30 years ago.

Dual income with multiple kids is EXPENSIVE.

Guess where I see a lot of SAHMs in the small houses by the Winston Churchill HS you could have bought as recently as 2010-2019 for 550K to 650K. Those young couples put 20 percent down lets say 2013, refinance in 2021 into a 15 year at 2 percent the remaining maybe 300K mortgage and kids walk to school, Moms maybe part time job. Taxes are low. Maybe Dads now make 350K like I did but did not trade up homes. Why? Start a new 30 year mortgage at 50 till you are 80.

My last year I owned my old home I had paid off mortgage. I also grieved taxes a few times and won. My income rose so much my property tax bill was two weeks pay. I had no mortgage. I stayed 5 years like that. Why a job could end any moment. We had lots of rich folks my block who bought in 1970s to early 2000s. But younger folks today buy it, trade up, then trade up next thing they are 55 and laid off with a one million dollar mortgage and 18K in property taxes and two leased cars. Boo Hoo

Lies. lol.

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.

OP, you don't even have kids yet, correct? And yet, you've decided on a specific school so strongly that it's driving your housing search in the ENTIRE DC area? That's not going to work.