<p>Ouch Zoosermom. We’re pretty lucky. We bought in 1999 and our house is still worth about double what we paid for it I think.</p>
<p>From 1998 to 2005 home prices increased by 45%. Analysts wrote of the coming price correction for the housing bubble. </p>
<p>I couldn’t afford to buy my house now.</p>
<p>Zillow has our house about $90,000 less than what the County Assessment recently raised our house to ( which I am going to try and appeal)
I think Zillows is more accurate if still a little high, considering that most people don’t want to live in an under 1000 sqft house with a fuse box, and only one bathroom. ( It was supposed to be our * starter* house).
Sales are slowing considerably & sellers are having to lower their price-
But at least that has slowed down the flippers who were buying homes, throwing some paint and landscaping in and selling it for double to people who were coming in from even more overpriced areas.</p>
<p>We have lived here for about 25 years & we bought in this neighborhood because it was affordable. ROFLAO. not anymore.
Our loan is now more than what we originally paid, after job loss, refinancing for college tuition, and needed new car ( lower interest than the auto loan) But glad D didn’t apply to a school that needed PROFILE.</p>
<p>San Francisco peninsula, north of San Jose, in a great school district. Houses have held their value in my town; they don’t seem to have declined at all. My house has appreciated 40% in the 5 years I’ve owned it, if Zillow is to be believed. The town next to mine is booming, with multiple offers at 10% over the asking price on those house that have been upgraded with new kitchens & baths. Even teardowns are selling. San Jose itself seems to be struggling, with a large inventory of existing & new houses sitting on the market and many forclosures.</p>
<p>Re government intervention: something aimed at keeping people IN their houses would be positive, rather than something aimed at bailing out financial speculators.</p>
<p>Also in Silicon Valley, near San Jose. Housing in my town is up almost 7% this year, although down a bit in the past two months.</p>
<p>We bought 11 years ago; Zillow has our house valued at a 140% increase over what we paid for it. That seems nuts to me, but then I look at what local houses are selling for (and they <em>are</em> selling), so… gee. (Maybe we’re neighbors, vballmom.)</p>
<p>Sigh, we live in an area where there is plenty of land to build on within the water/sewer/school, even city, limits. We built our house 15 years ago and will live in it until it sells once H retires- how many years that will take is unknown. We have an architect designed house with a great plan/amenities for area, less expensive finishes, it could go in quick time or stay on the market for years. The tax statement “fair market value” stays close to the money invested in it- typical of our area. It is a good thing we plan to downsize when we move from this area, we will probably spend as much on a house half the size… A million dollars is more than you need for a “McMansion” here.</p>
<p>Central coast CA here. Our home was probably about 1 mil a while back. Now appraised at 950K…zillow still shows it at 1.032 mil but it definitely wouldn’t sell for that. Neighbor’s place has been on the market two years. Started at 1.6 now at 1.295. Still hasn’t sold.
I am not compalining though. We never did the refi thing and our original purchase price was in the 300K range. We lost money on PAPER people. </p>
<p>Went to an estate sale locally the other day. A bit of a different take on it than the other poster. I was depressed…left without buying anything. Realized when I got there the family had owned a small business…little girls room still fully furnished and clothes hanging on the closet. Price tags on everything. I assume it was a foreclosure situation.</p>
<p>Really dumb house vs stocks analysis, the writer does not even discuss that most homes only require a 10% down investment and that you get all the increase + you get to live in it. Your stock has little intrinsic usefulness except you can sell it quickly. If you asume typical LTV ratio of 90% the return on the home is FAR greater than stocks in this example.</p>
<p>[Real</a> Estate | Real estate? Stocks? Smart investors have both | Seattle Times Newspaper](<a href=“http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/realestate/2008021755_homevsstocks290.html]Real”>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/realestate/2008021755_homevsstocks290.html)</p>
<p>And you get the big tax deduction! ;)</p>
<p>“Really dumb house vs stocks analysis, the writer does not even discuss that most homes only require a 10% down investment and that you get all the increase + you get to live in it. Your stock has little intrinsic usefulness except you can sell it quickly. If you asume typical LTV ratio of 90% the return on the home is FAR greater than stocks in this example.”</p>
<p>You can use leverage on stocks too. Or you can go with options to get far more leverage. Leverage simply magnifies. You can lose much more money with leveraged investments (houses for example), too.</p>
<p>Stocks in companies like Apple, Cal-Maine, Pan American Silver Mines, GoldCorp, etc. have 1,000 percent returns this century. That’s not too shabby compared to houses.</p>
<p>I prefer to avoid levered investments whether they’re houses or stocks.</p>
<p>We live in a very well located part of Los Angeles. Commute time for my husband: 8 minutes including the elevator. Lots of areas where you can walk to for basics. Public school system. Evidently a house on our street went up for sale for 2.5 two weeks ago…multiple offers…sold 3.2. Needs total gut. I think that rather than eliminate the tax deduction, which keeps major segments of our working force employed by the way…We should also look at the $500,000 deduction and put it back to where it was. We can’t sell our home. We would pay much too much tax. I liked to old rollover system. (and it kept the economy going here in so Cal).</p>
<p>San Fernando Valley, Los Angeles, CA, 3 bedroom, 2 bath, 1900 SF, pool, nice neighborhood:
Height of market in 2006: $680,000
Today: $480,000 (and still dropping).</p>
<p>The only way the bottom will be reached is when prices fall enough so that people earning average wages for the area can afford a home with conventional financing terms…not the exotic mortgages we saw at the height of hysteria.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sage advice for these times… debt leveraging is double-edged sword…amplifies your gains BUT ALSO amplifies your losses.</p>
<p>With the decline in real estate values, the real interest rates in some areas are exceeding 15-20% per year. :eek:</p>