I saved up a big (to me) chunk a few years ago, thought I was there. Expected the red carpet to roll out. Nooooope. There were people buying houses for $100k more than the asking price, sight unseen, within a week or two of the house being listed. My little $40k deposit was adorable, in comparison. I had no chance. Then Covid, life, etc…
The 100k+ over asking was the big deal because that never made it into the housing data properly so prices looked like they were lower than they were and we don’t have accurate comparison data now
Was it in a desirable location? Our tourist town went out of control with our of state buyers during the pandemic, but property values have adjusted back some and the market competition is gone. If you still have some of that $40k now might be a better time. My wife and I just did the federal First Time Homebuyers class and wound up getting a USDA rural development loan, they wouldn’t even let us put a down payment to lower our payments.
I am a skidmark that cannot believe that I live in a house that I “own”(have a mortgage). And I am so much less pessimistic about anybody’s potential to do what I did. I am happy to answer some questions. I make $22 an hour and my wife makes $17, the loan officer told me I almost make too much for the program.
They don’t actually need regular payments for 10-30 years. They need you deposit that down payment cash ASAP so they can lease it to billionaires and crypto exchanges.
Idiocy.
The bank doesn’t get the down payment. The person selling the house does.
You pay that person the down payment, and the bank pays them the rest.
Honestly there’s loads of great reasons to hate banks but lots keep it real and avoid making up nonsense.
Banks typically ask for you to have cash in hand (deposited), or equivalent leverage, to qualify for loans in the first place.
The bank I used actively tried to get me to go with less down payment, and subsequently take out a larger loan.
But yes it is the height of idiocy to say, ‘down payment deposit’ when ‘qualifying assets’ is a more accurate term for the transactions function.
They need you deposit that down payment cash ASAP so they can lease it to billionaires and crypto exchanges.
No, this is patently false and borne of a misunderstanding. Idiocy.
When providing a mortgage, how does a bank get money to lease to billionaires and crypto exchanges?
Banks do leverage mortgage debt. Essentially the same process, in turn.
But how do they lease your deposit to billionaires and crypto exchanges?
The deposit is to cover expenses/losses that arise out of defaults. Housing loans have been lile this forever. Not everything is a conspiracy.
the deposit is the keep young, inexperienced and glowy-eyes people from making commitments they don’t have the stamina to handle.
it happens a lot that 20 year olds want to buy a house with their new partner that they think they’re gonna be together with for the rest of their lives, only to have it all fall apart 5 years later. forcing to you save up a bit before actually buying the house means you go through a lot of experiences before you actually buy a house, which makes it more likely that you’ll have the far-sightedness that’s needed to actually buy a house. :)
Not necessarily young but inexperienced yes
That’s one thing, but there’s definitely a factor of “if there’s a market downturn AND we have to foreclose, we don’t want to lose too much”.
The house you’re buying is the collateral for their loan. If you took out a loan for 100% of the value of the house and are immediately unable to make payments, the bank then owns the house. For them to simply break even, they’d have to sell the house for more than you paid for it to cover the various costs (lawyers, agents, etc.) If the reason you’re unable to make payments is that the economy crashed and housing prices tanked as a result, the bank couldn’t hope to break even on their loan.
The down payment is basically a way to ensure that in the bank’s worst case scenario they still don’t lose money. In theory, the bigger the down payment, the lower the risk for the bank, and the better a rate you should get on the loan. Multiple banks should all be trying to be the one to give you a mortgage, and should be trying to compete by shaving their margins as tight as possible given their risk tolerance. Of course, it doesn’t always work out that way, but there’s a reason for what they’re doing and it’s not just to screw over their customers.
They can’t really ensure a positive worst case scenario. 15% is the minimum down payment where I live unless you use extra collateral, but a home could lose half its value if there’s a major economic downturn.
They’re just mitigating bad scenarios, not anything close to the worst case.
The worst case scenario is that the Earth is hit by a giant asteroid. At that point what does a little risk hedging in a financial transaction matter?
I hate to break it to you, but mortgage payments are not cheaper then rent anymore. Obviously depends on your mortgage and money down and all that, but if you expect to pay half as much for mortgage payments as you did for rent, you’re going to have a very bad time.
Surely, this depends a lot on what market you’re in. If you’re in a very expensive area and need to take a big loan with a high fixed rate, I can see that being the case but renting the equivalent place would probably be extremely expensive too.
This isn’t true in my experience at all. Either rent is cheap where you are or you’re looking at expensive houses or not for a 30 year period. The rate currently is around 6-9%. It would only be more expensive if the house is. No other hidden fees
Parents and brother went in on a house together so he could live near work. Rents out the main floor for $3750 a month (3 bedroom) and that covers the mortgage so he can afford to pay the utilities and lives in the basement.
I am coming to realize that my rural perspective is pretty different, and that lots of people live in way higher cost of living areas than I do. My biggest suggestion is if you don’t like expensive housing, get out of the city.
This really isn’t as easy as it sounds. Moving means you lose your support system of friends and family etc. Some people have children and need the grandparents to help watch them during the day as just one example. Job opportunities are likely not the same. While their current city job may not pay a lot the opportunities from that job could lead a lot higher but of course life choices can be a gamble. On top of all of that, moving long distance is difficult and expensive.
I have a highly intelligent friend from a small southern town and he moved out of there because he recognized there weren’t any opportunities for someone with talent but no capital. Sure he could have stayed and bought a cheaper house but he’d still struggle to make the payment on his small salary.You realize the headquarters of Walmart are in Arkansas? There are plenty of very high paying jobs in significantly more affordable places. Also if you pay 1/4 less for a house, and add daily childcare it’s still gonna be cheaper. People literally do it all the time, the whole concept of the suburbs was created so that people could afford houses.
I moved to the small town. I’m a college drop out, there’s always labor in the country, and I guess I just don’t want as much from life as other people. I’ll be happy working maintenance the rest of my life of it keeps providing.
This is an unpopular take, but that is reality. It really is affordable out here! If you want more income, learn to repair reliable japanese beaters and commute a little. It’s less busy than the city, and it may bore some, but it keeps the bills paid, the kids fed, and the 401k growing.
I tried and here are some places I have looked where the average home is $810,000 come to find out.
Pinedale, Wyoming, USA Ennis, Montana, USA
These are in the mountains about 1 hour from the nearest big city of Jackson, Wyoming and Bozeman, Montana. I guess I need to look in the deep sticks.
Are you really confused why those properties are expensive? Those are both desirable locations in regions with quickly growing populations. How about Livingston, or Butte?
The problem is some jobs are only inside the city
We know.
There are a number of people that have a home in the country with their family, and they travel to the city to work. Sometimes they are homeless during the work, or rent a small room.
No, it is not the ideal solution, but it is a solution. Fixing the housing situation is beyond most people’s power, and it will take a long time for those trying to fix it to actually fix it.
Very dependent on the field. A lot of jobs are concentrated in a handful of major cities, mostly very HCOL but with high salary. That’s why remote work becoming bigger partially caused the housing surge nationwide.
If city folk starts coming to rural area, they will start complaining that city people are jacking up property prices.
“Landlords” are probably one of the oldest grifts in the book.
if you can’t afford to own a home would you rather have no options to use one temporarily while you get back on your feet?
That’s not the point, and I can’t tell if you’re being genuine or arguing in bad faith. Do you want me to take the time and effort to explain why what you said is capitalist BS? I’m happy to if you’re genuinely interested in learning.
I’m aware it’s capitalist, however the alternatives tend to restrict what individuals can own significantly more than what I find acceptable
Should corporations be allowed to own private housing?
if residential properties are cheaper per square foot than storage units, then absolutely
Yep, that was a litmus test to determine if you’re worth my effort. You failed.
Mao did nothing wrong.
except for causing that famine.
And while we’re ranting about this, can we throw PMI and whomever came up with it on the bonfire where they belong?
Your telling me that I need to pay for you to have insurance in case I default while your also charging me interest who’s very purpose is to offset risk? Why am I paying to offset your risk FUCKING TWICE AND HOW IS THIS FUCKING LEGAL.
Shit infuriates me. I want all the bankers to get William Wallace on live TV, recorded and played back once a year during a mandatory viewing window so that we never, ever, forget.
This is one of the reasons my wife and I took so long to get a house. I refused to pay this absolute SCAM. So we saved up to put 20% down. What a crock.
Interest is not intended to offset risk?
Interest provides a return on capital.
If you have $1 youre not using you might let someone else use it if they incentivise you by giving you an interest in their need.
If you give $1 to 100 different people you might increase the rate for some of them to offset your additional risk, but thats not the purpose of Interest.
Part of interest calculation is risk. That’s why higher credit score leads to lower interest, it’s less of a risk to the lender.
PMI is double dipping. They can pick one, either a flat across the board interest rate for all borrowers or PMI.
Didn’t mean to imply it was entirely about risk.
The financial illiteracy of lemmy users always amazes me.
PMI is not double dipping.
It keeps the risk reasonable so that interest rates can remain reasonable.
With no PMI there’s extra risk that would need to be priced in to interest.
No one likes PMI, but it’s not evil.
Ok, your loan has been determined to be higher risk therefore you have to pay more. Why did we need to invent a second payment called PMI instead of just charging a higher rate to higher risk borrowers? Why do interest rates need to remain “reasonable” ?
That’s a good question actually.
In Australia, some 60 years ago, banks wouldn’t lend over 80% of the purchase price for a property.
The federal government created a government department to provide lenders mortgage insurance. It wasn’t a free government service, but a good example of the federal government stepping in to do something private enterprise wasn’t able to.
Since then of course that department has been privatised, like everything else, so private institutions provide that service now.
There do remain some differences between LMI and just simply extra interest. Notably LMI is a once off payment, and it can be included in the loan.
More recently, the Australian Federal Government has rolled out a scheme to pretty much abolish LMI. They’re just going to guarantee the loans for free.
The alternative would probably be (much) higher interest rates until you get below 80% LTV at which point you’re “allowed” to refinance…but no bank will ever remind you of this in hopes you forget…or prime will skyrocket and you’ll be stuck in high interest for an unknown amount of time.
I think you should put away the monkey paw before they get more inspiration.
Also if you were to default they would take your house and get the insurance money
Its legal because value comes from ownership, not from doing things.
And if that sounds insane; you’re a fucking commie.
Is it ironic? We can’t know nowadays.
The vibe I get is that they mean it as a compliment
Im responding to someone saying laws not protecting the weak from the strong is a failure, so i think we’re pretty well i!to surrealist nonsense fantasy land.
Shit infuriates me. I want all the bankers to get William Wallace on live TV
Thanks for the hearty laugh
The first time I applied for a loan, I didn’t have a credit card yet. And they were like:
How can we know you’re responsible with money?
Because I haven’t needed credit in the past and I’m still alive, idk? Having enough liquidity to not need credit would seem to suggest I’m good with money.
But maybe your parents are paying for everything
Ok? How does using a credit card change that?
Considering how much data they can get on anyone, this process seems pointless and outdated, except to give them somewhat arbitrary power over who can get a loan.
Not that I like such private data to be available at any institutions fingertips, but so it is these days.They are NOT looking to see if you are responsible with money. They are looking to see if they can make money off of you, so they want you to be a heavy credit user. Before I bought my house I made sure to take out two credit cards and just buy random shit on them for a few months because that boosts my credit score drastically which then made it easy to get the loan. Banks HATE people with limited debt because it means you are not a loyal customer that they could make money off of. Yes, it makes no sense but that’s just how the economy works. Even if you don’t have any reason to buy things on credit, you still should. Even if you are very financially responsible, you should always have “stupid debt,” by that I mean debt for the sake of debt, because banks love that shit and it’ll help you out if you ever actually do need a loan for something.
Because people that quickly pay off their principal and avoid accruing interest don’t make the Credit Card companies as much money. They prefer people that are bad with money, sort of like how police departments don’t accept applicants that do too well on the tests.
That’s the impression I get too
But it’s plausibly deniable enough because you can still get decent credit score if you pay off your credit before you pay interest. It’s a numbers game for them, I expect, but still.
I went from an apartment that cost ~$1250/mo. To a mortgage that costs ~$4300/mo. Just got the “privilege” of owning a home (and paying for all repairs myself).
I can only afford this because of the people I’m sharing that cost with. We’re all on the deed, and we all have a stake, and claim to, the house. Four of us.
My payment didn’t really change.
The only way we could get to the point of a down payment is that one of the four of us has been saving for something like this since they were in highschool. Because of their effort, we had enough for a down payment.
And I’m lucky to be in this position.
What a fucking crock of shit.
Despite all of this, I’m hoping the market takes a dive so the rest of you can do the same at a much more affordable rate. I’ve already spent the money and I’ll be spending years paying it off. I didn’t buy a house up objectively save money, I bought a house for stability. I never want to move ever again. There are good reasons for that which I won’t get into. I promise that I will have ZERO issues if you all get a better deal than I did. I hope you do, and I hope the housing market, specifically the rental/flipping/“income property” markets crash, hard.
In the same way, I’ve paid off my school debt, I’m in favor of school debt forgiveness. I also enjoy pretty good health, I’m in favor of universal healthcare. I’ve never caused, not been the victim of a fire, I’m in favor of fire departments.
I could go on.
Good luck everyone.
In the same way, I’ve paid off my school debt, I’m in favor of school debt forgiveness. I also enjoy pretty good health, I’m in favor of universal healthcare. I’ve never caused, not been the victim of a fire, I’m in favor of fire departments.
That’s commie talk son. We pull the ladder up behind us in America.
I’m glad I don’t live in America then.
aren’t you lucky
Damn $4300 a month. I thought my $2600 was steep.
Right before we moved my rent had gone up to $2500 so it was a push. Now when we first started living there the rent was $1400 and the landlord had even refied so his mortgage was cheaper at the end. When we were moving up and he drove up in a brand new Rivian that I’m pretty sure I basically paid for…
To be fair, it’s a pretty large home. I’m living with my SO, my brother and his wife and there’s a couple of offspring that needed space too. Our house has ~5 ish bedrooms. Considering the number of people who live here, it can feel small. If it was just me and my SO, this would be humungous.
But that also means that we have four fully grown adults helping with the mortgage. So my share of the mortgage is around $1100 ish, per month, and we split most of the household bills, so I usually throw in about $400 more to help with that. I personally pay about $1500/mo.
My SO does the same, and we’ve encouraged my brother and his wife to also do the same. If everyone pays $1500 towards the house every month, we have more than enough to cover all the bills (electric/gas/water), as well as shared things like the Internet. Also that’s enough to cover the house insurance.
Yeah that actually sounds a little better than me. I’m the main bread winner and I’m responsible for almost all of it. It can be a little stressful at times
Yeah, I went from $1200 rent to a $1300 mortgage but the city added $50k more value to the assesment so between taxes and insurance it’s going up to $1700/mo next year so that’s fun. I don’t know how many more years of that I could afford cuz $2600 just isn’t doable for me :/
And on top of that, they made any alternative illegal! You want to live in your van? Illegal, you want to build a tiny house? Illegal. It’s insane
You can’t even get an apartment here without making a ton of money. Cheapest studio apartment here is $1,500 a month. I have to prove i make $4,500 a month just to barely qualify, which i don’t. Then they charge you so much for application fees, and then utilities they overcharge for, it’s all a scam.
Not buy a house, inherit a house from our boomer parents.
Three kids, one house, we hunger gaming this shit?
'Cos two of us are married, there’s kids and that house only has three bedrooms and no land for extensions
(I kid of course, mu sister is inheriting my house when I inevitably explode)
Who didnt reverse mortgage it to pay for extravagant vacations.
They’ll sell it to pay for the elderly homes.
You’ll only inherit the clay ashtray that you made for them in 3rd grade.
Boomer parents: emotionally abuses you for your entire childhood/teenhood
Me: Has severe depression
Boomer parents: “WHY ARE YOU SO LAZY AND UNGRATEFUL, USELESS EATER, BURDEN ON SOCIETY” then proceeds to threaten to leave me out of the will.
Funny thing is, she also threatens to leave my older brother out of the will. Basically she tries to make us hate each other, and we do hate each other. My entire family is dysfunctional. They are all conservatives, racists, LGBT+ phobic, has the toxic masculinity mentality, ableist af. They think anyone with a slight disability deserves to get executed because its “a waste of resources”. This is why I dislike my ancestral homeland, it reminds me of hatred and intolerance.
Edit: Technically they aren’t boomers, but I’ll still call them boomers because they share that same boomer mindset.
Where y’all finding houses for 500/month with a 25k downpayment?
Seems cheap af. If you only did a 25k downpayment the mortgage would certainly be more expensive than rent where I’m at.
There will be shitholes in bum fuck nowhere but in this area rent will not be 1k lol
I bought a 2 bedroom single family home in South Carolina last year for $86k with only $11k down, 7 minute drive from the city center of the capital city (Columbia). Mortgage is $480/mo. Cheap houses absolutely still exist if you’re willing to live in areas where “nobody wants to live”
Would have been standard fare in Sweden until recently, but that’s obviously an outlier
My house was cheap in a shit area (like knuckle draggers shouting at hotels shit) and that cost me £800 a month 20 years ago.
And that was with a massive deposit. Still, paid that shit off now.
Actually i guess the bigger issue is that we’re gonna be unemployed in 15 years due to a declining demand of human labor and then who pays back what?
Today you could afford the pay-back rate, but not in the future, and the banks are well aware of that.
Right? You don’t need to exist long term. Fuck off and die, meat.
Joke’s on them, I have a 15-year mortgage on my condo. (Lower interest rate than a 30-year mortgage, USA, ymmv)
There is no declining demand of human labour, and there is no indication that it will ever happen. The way the labour is performed is changing
People don’t want to twerk anymore!
At this point, yeah I would twerk on OnlyFans just to get a mortgage…
We have back problems now, Lauren.
They did this before it worked out really well around 2008
Lemmy: blames capitalism for making loans too hard to get.
Also Lemmy: blames capitalism for making loans too easy to get.
More like blaming capitalism for the fact that it’s necessary to get a loan just to afford something as basic as shelter
I mean, imo people should be allowed to buy a piece of land and then live in a tent there as long as they arent dumping raw sewage on the ground in a metro area. But you can’t do this almost anywhere due to a number of factors which aren’t capitalist, so much as they are just bad ideas. Eg, minimum lot sizes, which mandate you must buy a lot of land, rather than only the amount you need. Or setback requirements, which mandate that you waste a substantial portion of that land, increasing the incentive to buy more land so a larger percentage is useable. Or absurdly low maximum occupancy limits (eg, in my city it is illegal for more than 2 unrelated people to live in the same home). Or sfh zoning, which restricts dense housing development to an absurdly small portion of land. Or using property taxes rather than georgist land value taxes, which allow speculators to sit on land indefinitely, waiting for the value to go up, rather than selling it to someone who would put it to good use. Or auto oriented infrastructure, which ensures that you will have to own a car to get from one part of town to another.
Remove these barriers, and basically everyone would be able find an apartment to live in, or can buy a small patch of land. On these small patches of land, individuals could start living rent free with just a walmart tent, a jug of water, and a 5 gallon bucket to poop in. Homelessness would be solved almost overnight, and it would cost basically nothing. From there, individuals unburdened of the need to pay rent or mortgages, could save money to put towards paying the city to install water, sewer, and electric infrastructure; pour home foundations; build framing, roof, and siding; etc. And once a minimal home was built, they could build additions over time, also without taking out loans.
This process would replicate the way cities were traditionally built for the last 5000 or so years, and after about 30 years or so, we would start to see these areas become some of the most attractive and desireable parts of our cities.
You’re describing slums, favelas, and shantytowns.
I’m describing the way humans lived and built cities since the dawn of civilization. Start small. Improve over time.
What we have isn’t capitalism those banks should have gone under
I would agree. Or really, those banks shouldn’t have existed in the first place in that form - a “too big to fail” institution should be broken up before they can fail with a prudent economic policy.
But to lemmings, it’s still capitalism.
It’s almost like capitalism is bullshit
