You can't go home again

[Mulligan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R I think that if I had a potential monthly mortgage payment of $2,000, I'd consider living in a refrigerator box under a bridge, instead. Seriously, I want to live someplace nice but being owned by a house has never been my goal in life.

W2R, I don't know how Trulia can come up with such a number, but I guess people do it. That is not net income either. My gross about $6500 so that is $2000. But more importantly is my net which is about $5k, which would be significantly lower if it was earned income and having SS and Medicare coming out. "Owned by a house" is the correct term as that is way past being "married to a house".


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[FIREd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mulligan I am with you Zesty and for the same reasons, but 50 years of living here and knowing this lifestyle only is probably the main reason. If San Diego had a population of 20,000 and new 1500 sq. ft. ranch homes went for $145,000 I imagine I would have moved there already. I was just reading another middle class home affordability problem for certain areas of country. They defined it as 31% of your monthly income for principal, interest, taxes, and insurance... Well that would mean my monthly mortgage payment could be over $2,000 a month. That is just insane to me. Mine is around $700 and I think that is plenty high. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When I lived in the south, a $2,000 monthly PITI bought a lot of house. Far more than we ever needed in fact. We were spending ~$1,200 a month for PITI for a nice house in the best school district in the city. And that's when interest rates were higher than they are today.

[bmcgonig]

Quote:

Originally Posted by samclem It works out for some people. But if the cost of housing is already high, it may mean that little is left over for conventional investments and a very high percentage of net worth is tied up in (illiquid) real estate. If the market continues to be strong when it's time to jump, then that's great. But it can lead to a very narrow "bet." Some people did great by concentrating their 401K investments in company stock, but it's not an approach that is widely recommended.

I think the premise of the strategy is that your salary is commensurate with the price of housing in the area. If it is then that extra salary u get over living in a lower cost area is going towards expensive real estate that can be cashed in later. When I moved to the Bay Area the salaries were definitely higher.

[RetiredAndFree]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zesty I'd take flyover country over the coasts any day! Everything is cheaper, and the areas are less crowded and more quiet.

But there is a reason for all that.

In all seriousness, I think I'd curl up and quietly die were I away from places like the West Coast that literally buzz with energy.

It's nice that we have enough diversity here for everyone to find their nirvana.

[HFWR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RetiredAndFree But there is a reason for all that. In all seriousness, I think I'd curl up and quietly die were I away from places like the West Coast that literally buzz with energy. It's nice that we have enough diversity here for everyone to find their nirvana.

I can get a buzz no matter where I am...

I could not live in a small town, or isolated rural area. Nice to have sports teams, museums, etc. though frankly I only occasionally use the city amenities.

[Mulligan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HFWR I can get a buzz no matter where I am... I could not live in a small town, or isolated rural area. Nice to have sports teams, museums, etc. though frankly I only occasionally use the city amenities.

The advantage of a Midwestern town for me anyways is that you can live in a small rural town and still be able to be in the parking lot of a professional sports team in under an hour. No major suburban sprawl. I recently had to fly into Los Angeles for a connecting flight during the day and got an amazing view of the metro area. The sprawl of humanity is everywhere. It is hard for me to fathom that the LA metro area alone has twice as many people as the state of MO has in it's entirety.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[athena53]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mulligan The advantage of a Midwestern town for me anyways is that you can live in a small rural town and still be able to be in the parking lot of a professional sports team in under an hour.

Yep- DH and I were together in NNJ for 13 years and went into NYC together only once before we moved- for a "farewell dinner" with family. Too darn much hassle. Where we are now, we've got the major league stadium but also a well-regarded art museum and a new music hall that's getting rave reviews for its acoustics within an hour's drive. We saw the latest hot European countertenor in concert at a local community college that's within bicycling distance. My job, before I retired, was within walking distance of an Apple store, Tiffany's, Wliiiams-Sonoma, Kate Spade, all that stuff the shop-till-you-drop types covet.

All the good stuff, far less hassle.

[HFWR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mulligan The advantage of a Midwestern town for me anyways is that you can live in a small rural town and still be able to be in the parking lot of a professional sports team in under an hour. No major suburban sprawl. I recently had to fly into Los Angeles for a connecting flight during the day and got an amazing view of the metro area. The sprawl of humanity is everywhere. It is hard for me to fathom that the LA metro area alone has twice as many people as the state of MO has in it's entirety. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm not much closer to downtown Dallas than I was to the nearest metro area from my hometown. I just find that I can hide easier in the burbs than in a small town. A medium-sized city, with a university for cultural diversity and such, might be doable. But small towns are just too parochial...

[Keim]

Quote:

Originally Posted by athena53 Yep- DH and I were together in NNJ for 13 years and went into NYC together only once before we moved- for a "farewell dinner" with family. Too darn much hassle. Where we are now, we've got the major league stadium but also a well-regarded art museum and a new music hall that's getting rave reviews for its acoustics within an hour's drive. We saw the latest hot European countertenor in concert at a local community college that's within bicycling distance. My job, before I retired, was within walking distance of an Apple store, Tiffany's, Wliiiams-Sonoma, Kate Spade, all that stuff the shop-till-you-drop types covet. All the good stuff, far less hassle.

Ssh! Let the city folk think they are the only ones with culture and amenities. Keeps our country areas and "fly-over" states affordable.

PS-Am I the only one that thinks "fly-over" state is a horrid term? It just wreaks of snobbery to me.

[Calico]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keim Ssh! Let the city folk think they are the only ones with culture and amenities. Keeps our country areas and "fly-over" states affordable. PS-Am I the only one that thinks "fly-over" state is a horrid term? It just wreaks of snobbery to me.

I don't care for the term, but as long as they keep flying over us and leaving us our peace and quiet, low traffic, and low COL, they can call us anything they like! My town frequently makes the list of "top 10 cities to live" and we groan every time. PLEASE keep flying over us, all you folks who crave the "buzz" - we have too many folks here already!

[Walt34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calico PLEASE keep flying over us, all you folks who crave the "buzz" - we have too many folks here already!

My sentiments exactly!

I have absolutely no desire whatsoever to go back where I grew up. It was then a nice place. No more.

Long-time residents here complain about the traffic. I'm thinking "You have no clue what 'traffic" is". That's traffic jams at 3:00 AM Sunday morning. And yes, it happens where I used to live.

[FUEGO]

I definitely detect some "exclusivity" among those that favor high COL cities.

In my limited lifetime of experience (which is dwarfed by those who have a few decades on me), I have seen more folks move to the "desirable" high COL cities (like SF, LA, NYC) and eventually move on somewhere else with a lower COL or move back home to the Raleigh area. Common reasons include to be near family or to be able to afford a house with a yard, a garage, and a driveway where they can park their family's cars and enjoy a >20 minute commute to almost anywhere.

I think there is a steep decline in marginal utility with extra units of "culture". Having 100 local microbreweries isn't 5x as awesome as having 20. Having 250 awesome chill bars or clubs isn't 5x more awesome than having 50. Having 50 amazing museums isn't 5x better than having 10. Having a choice of 100 fine dining restaurants isn't 5x better than having 20. I love living in the city, but I don't think having more "city" near me would make it significantly better.

[FIREd]

When I moved to California from Alabama, people in Alabama predicted that I would hate living in California and people in California assumed that I moved because I hated living in Alabama. Wrong, wrong, wrong. I like both places for different reasons and I don't get why people get so bitter over what is "desirable" for each one of us..

[unclemick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moemg Not to be corny but "Home is where your heart is " .

Kansas City of course. That's where I met a Missouri farm girl/widow and got married at age 70.

greater Portland, Seattle, Denver, New Orleans were ok in prior decades but no desire to move back.

Will visit friends and relatives several times a year but move back?

heh heh heh - No.

[Koolau]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO I definitely detect some "exclusivity" among those that favor high COL cities. <SNIP>

I hope I've never come across as "exclusive". It's certainly never been my intent. I moved to Honolulu for a host of reasons (weather, "big" city - compared to where I came from, friendly people, mountains, ocean, etc.) All the things you might guess and maybe a few more. I know full well it is costing me MUCH more than where I lived in the heartland (easily twice - maybe closer to three times). Still that was my dream. But, it was never about being exclusive (although I admit to rubbing it in on the rare occasion when it's 80 here and 10 back home, heh, heh.)

But back to the original topic - you can't go home again. Actually, I do it every summer - to the very house I grew up in. I still have some of my old toys there and there are still BB holes in the ceiling of my old room (my mom was a SAINT!) If I ever had reason (economic or otherwise) to move back to the area, I could gladly live out my days in the old homestead. But, right now, I get the best of both worlds. YMMV.

[jjquantz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO I definitely detect some "exclusivity" among those that favor high COL cities. ... I think there is a steep decline in marginal utility with extra units of "culture". Having 100 local microbreweries isn't 5x as awesome as having 20. Having 250 awesome chill bars or clubs isn't 5x more awesome than having 50. Having 50 amazing museums isn't 5x better than having 10. Having a choice of 100 fine dining restaurants isn't 5x better than having 20. I love living in the city, but I don't think having more "city" near me would make it significantly better.

Fuego, I agree with you when it comes to the marginal utility of items that are present in multiples. However, the real attraction of a city, to me, is that one can find people who share niche interests in a larger city that are absent in a smaller or even medium sized city. The reality is that I only need one quiet restaurant for dinner, which I might find in the hundreds in hundreds of cities in the US, but I would also like to have one (or more) period instrument performing groups, one opera company, one symphony orchestra, one art museum with a collection of Dutch still lifes, one natural history museum with a collection of dinosaur skeletons, one group of amateur musicians to play baroque music with, etc. The marginal utility of one over zero is quite large, especially when there are several identifiable items in question

The advantages of a city are not found in the multiples of activities that are enjoyed by the majority of the population, the advantages of a city are in the ability to find those small groups of individuals who share oddball interests.

Unfortunately, the concentration of people needed to make this happen brings with it a whole bunch of problems, neatly summed up as high COL.

My wife and I have lived in a small town of 5600 (5 years), a college town of 50,000 (15 years) and cities of 200K (2 years), 500K (5 years, twice), and 1,000,000 (one year). Although we loved the quiet of the two smaller options, we need the larger cities to find the friends and activities that we enjoy. I don't see how this is "exclusive".

[FUEGO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjquantz I would also like to have one (or more) period instrument performing groups, one opera company, one symphony orchestra, one art museum with a collection of Dutch still lifes, one natural history museum with a collection of dinosaur skeletons, one group of amateur musicians to play baroque music with, etc. I don't see how this is "exclusive".

Yeah, me neither

Quote:

My wife and I have lived in a small town of 5600 (5 years), a college town of 50,000 (15 years) and cities of 200K (2 years), 500K (5 years, twice), and 1,000,000 (one year). Although we loved the quiet of the two smaller options, we need the larger cities to find the friends and activities that we enjoy.

We live in one of those 500k cities, so I know what you mean. We enjoy the amenities of this mid size city. We also enjoy moderate COL. I don't know if we have all those particulars you list, but I think we do. We don't patronize the arts as often as we should I suppose, but it's nice to know you can browse through pretty paintings or catch a top flight orchestral performance without driving more than 10 minutes.

I like the diversity of people in the city. Close friends in our neighborhood include artists, graphic designer, architects, computer programmers, car parts accounting clerk, jazz musician, SQL database whiz, hairdresser, clinical researcher. English is spoken, but so are a lot of other languages. I seem to find enough to keep me busy without seeking out subniche groups of people with very focused interests, but I'm sure there wouldn't be a lack of those groups if I got bored and went looking.

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keim ... PS-Am I the only one that thinks "fly-over" state is a horrid term? It just wreaks of snobbery to me.

I don't take it as snobbery, I just think it's a weird, vague term, and I cringe when I hear it. Why not just give the City/State or area? It always strikes me as someone is trying to be 'hip' when they use the term, and I just think it sounds silly. I don't even know what it means. I live within an hour of one of the busiest airports in the country, so planes 'fly-over' us routinely (normally high enough there is little/no noise - except when they are circling in bad weather).

So am I in 'fly-over country', or since we are near one of the largest cities in the country, is that different? I just don't get the term - use something more descriptive please.

I guess that belongs in the 'pet peeves' thread.

-ERD50

[FIGuy]

I've spent years on both coasts, living in the big city. I also grew up in the mid-west and currently live in small town Texas, but am out in the bay area all the time for work. I probably hear one derisive thing about "flyover country" on each trip. Just because it isn't specifically being stated by anyone here doesn't mean that we haven't fragmented in this country.

Small town: no traffic, less culture, lower pay, cheap living.

Big city:killer traffic, culture (if you have time / money), proportionally higher pay and COL.

Take your pick. You can set yourself up with the good and skip the most of the bad in either case. I used to live cheap in DC while making city money. Now I live even cheaper in rural TX while making city money. Only a fool buys a life they can't afford in either place. We just spend the hours driving to culture on the weekends that we skip sitting in traffic on weekday mornings.

[Mulligan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 I don't take it as snobbery, I just think it's a weird, vague term, and I cringe when I hear it. Why not just give the City/State or area? It always strikes me as someone is trying to be 'hip' when they use the term, and I just think it sounds silly. I don't even know what it means. I live within an hour of one of the busiest airports in the country, so planes 'fly-over' us routinely (normally high enough there is little/no noise - except when they are circling in bad weather). So am I in 'fly-over country', or since we are near one of the largest cities in the country, is that different? I just don't get the term - use something more descriptive please. I guess that belongs in the 'pet peeves' thread. -ERD50

Probably not fair to you ERD, but I am afraid you are lumped in with the rest of us "fly overs". I did check the definition and it was referred to as pejorative, so I do not believe the coastal people are jealous of where we live.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk