Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would wait to buy. Sure you might be able to save a small amount of money if you buy now and have the employer pay for your move - but this is only if everythings works out right. I would not assume that everything will work out right.

Personally, I am risk adverse, and I would never buy in an unfamilier area-

1) what if you don't like the neighborhood, schools don't work out, your husband does not like the commute, etc., - it will cost you **a lot** more to resell and move than to rent for a year.

2) what if you don't like SF or the new job does not work out. Again, it will cost you alot to resell

3) you have no idea what is going to happen with prices/rates this year. If you want to guess, be prepared for the concequences of being wrong. A large percentage of homes in SF are being bought by tech people and Chinese nationals with all cash offers, and these buyers are not affected by interest rate changes.

4) I am from the Bay area, and the desirablity of many neighborhoods really changes street-by-street. I would want to know neighborhood very well before I bought. Also, the prices will faze you, and I would like sometime to get confortable with that market.

5) when you rush to buy, you are forced to buy whatever is available now, even if you don't really like it. If you have a year to look and research, you can really find something you like.

Even if they decided to resell the house in a year (highly unlikely) they could still potentially profit since the housing market is extremely hot and will continue to be for a while.

Anonymous wrote:I would wait to buy. Sure you might be able to save a small amount of money if you buy now and have the employer pay for your move - but this is only if everythings works out right. I would not assume that everything will work out right.

Personally, I am risk adverse, and I would never buy in an unfamilier area-

1) what if you don't like the neighborhood, schools don't work out, your husband does not like the commute, etc., - it will cost you **a lot** more to resell and move than to rent for a year.

2) what if you don't like SF or the new job does not work out. Again, it will cost you alot to resell

3) you have no idea what is going to happen with prices/rates this year. If you want to guess, be prepared for the concequences of being wrong. A large percentage of homes in SF are being bought by tech people and Chinese nationals with all cash offers, and these buyers are not affected by interest rate changes.

4) I am from the Bay area, and the desirablity of many neighborhoods really changes street-by-street. I would want to know neighborhood very well before I bought. Also, the prices will faze you, and I would like sometime to get confortable with that market.

5) when you rush to buy, you are forced to buy whatever is available now, even if you don't really like it. If you have a year to look and research, you can really find something you like.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoops I mean Pacifica. Didn't mean to masculinize it

The schools are REALLY bad there though. I have three friends who live there. One of them actually teaches science classes at one of the elementary schools because otherwise the kids would get ZERO SCIENCE EDUCATION.

Maybe they aren't interested in the public schools. There are excellent private schools in the area and some charter networks like KIPP.

KIPP is not good. We looked into it for middle school. They discipline through humiliation. Lots of screaming at kids like military school. DD takes a bus that picks up about half a dozen KIPP kids and I've talked with them about their school. What they said reinforced my decision that KIPP is not a good school for the average well-behaved kids.

Is this KIPP in SF or another KIPP school? KIPP is not for everyone but I was offering it up an option.

I thought there was an income limit for KIPP. Is that not the case?

Sooo where does it say it is income restricted? The statistic you quoted doesn't include that fact.

For a charter school? Never heard of it. If they accept public funds how can there be an income requirement?

According the kip web page 87 percent of its students nationwide are low income and 96 percent is aa or Latino. Clearly that is not random. There is a very well known public magnet in San Diego that is only open to students whose parents did not attend college.

Like all public schools, charter schools are:
Tuition-free and open-enrollment
Non-sectarian and non-discriminatory
Funded primarily through a combination of federal, state and local tax dollars
Held to state and federal academic standards
- See more at: http://www.kipp.org/faq#sthash.XEV2dkWY.dpuf


For the record but not to take this thread off track.

The only restriction is where the student lives geographically. I assume that is done to assure them a predominantly low income student population -- you don't wind up with almost 90 percent low income students randomly. And not to get too far off the point, CA does allow schools to limit eligibility based on income. Here's the admission standards for the Preuss school I mentioned early (www.preuss.ucsd.edu)

he Preuss School UCSD recruits and enrolls students entering the 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th grade from the greater San Diego area. Eligible applicants must meet three requirements, both at the time of application as well as at enrollment.

The three requirements are:

All families must meet income eligibility criteria as defined by federal guidelines [PDF].
The parents or chief guardians are not graduates of a four-year college or university.
Applicants must submit a completed application by the deadline.

Are there admissions requirements at KIPP schools?
There is no application or selection process to enroll at KIPP. Any student can attend a local KIPP school, as long as they meet the residency requirements of the local school district and there is space available at their grade level.
- See more at: http://www.kipp.org/faq#sthash.XEV2dkWY.4QXzVQli.dpuf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoops I mean Pacifica. Didn't mean to masculinize it

The schools are REALLY bad there though. I have three friends who live there. One of them actually teaches science classes at one of the elementary schools because otherwise the kids would get ZERO SCIENCE EDUCATION.

Maybe they aren't interested in the public schools. There are excellent private schools in the area and some charter networks like KIPP.

KIPP is not good. We looked into it for middle school. They discipline through humiliation. Lots of screaming at kids like military school. DD takes a bus that picks up about half a dozen KIPP kids and I've talked with them about their school. What they said reinforced my decision that KIPP is not a good school for the average well-behaved kids.

Is this KIPP in SF or another KIPP school? KIPP is not for everyone but I was offering it up an option.

I thought there was an income limit for KIPP. Is that not the case?

Sooo where does it say it is income restricted? The statistic you quoted doesn't include that fact.

For a charter school? Never heard of it. If they accept public funds how can there be an income requirement?

According the kip web page 87 percent of its students nationwide are low income and 96 percent is aa or Latino. Clearly that is not random. There is a very well known public magnet in San Diego that is only open to students whose parents did not attend college.

Like all public schools, charter schools are:
Tuition-free and open-enrollment
Non-sectarian and non-discriminatory
Funded primarily through a combination of federal, state and local tax dollars
Held to state and federal academic standards
- See more at: http://www.kipp.org/faq#sthash.XEV2dkWY.dpuf


For the record but not to take this thread off track.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoops I mean Pacifica. Didn't mean to masculinize it

The schools are REALLY bad there though. I have three friends who live there. One of them actually teaches science classes at one of the elementary schools because otherwise the kids would get ZERO SCIENCE EDUCATION.

Maybe they aren't interested in the public schools. There are excellent private schools in the area and some charter networks like KIPP.

KIPP is not good. We looked into it for middle school. They discipline through humiliation. Lots of screaming at kids like military school. DD takes a bus that picks up about half a dozen KIPP kids and I've talked with them about their school. What they said reinforced my decision that KIPP is not a good school for the average well-behaved kids.

Is this KIPP in SF or another KIPP school? KIPP is not for everyone but I was offering it up an option.

I thought there was an income limit for KIPP. Is that not the case?

Sooo where does it say it is income restricted? The statistic you quoted doesn't include that fact.

For a charter school? Never heard of it. If they accept public funds how can there be an income requirement?

According the kip web page 87 percent of its students nationwide are low income and 96 percent is aa or Latino. Clearly that is not random. There is a very well known public magnet in San Diego that is only open to students whose parents did not attend college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whoops I mean Pacifica. Didn't mean to masculinize it

The schools are REALLY bad there though. I have three friends who live there. One of them actually teaches science classes at one of the elementary schools because otherwise the kids would get ZERO SCIENCE EDUCATION.

Maybe they aren't interested in the public schools. There are excellent private schools in the area and some charter networks like KIPP.

KIPP is not good. We looked into it for middle school. They discipline through humiliation. Lots of screaming at kids like military school. DD takes a bus that picks up about half a dozen KIPP kids and I've talked with them about their school. What they said reinforced my decision that KIPP is not a good school for the average well-behaved kids.

Is this KIPP in SF or another KIPP school? KIPP is not for everyone but I was offering it up an option.

I thought there was an income limit for KIPP. Is that not the case?

For a charter school? Never heard of it. If they accept public funds how can there be an income requirement?

According the kip web page 87 percent of its students nationwide are low income and 96 percent is aa or Latino. Clearly that is not random. There is a very well known public magnet in San Diego that is only open to students whose parents did not attend college.

Sooo where does it say it is income restricted? The statistic you quoted doesn't include that fact.