Support NeoGAF

[ezrarh]

Buffalo still has a long way to go but the progress in the last 20 years is amazing, hell even the last 5 years.

I felt myself fortunate to find a decent paying job in Buffalo right out of school about 7 years ago. Allowed me to pay off debt, get some savings although I mistakenly bought a more expensive car than I should have. The city has some great neighborhoods and affordable classic homes that would be well over a million here in Denver. Love all the old architecture there. I got transferred elsewhere but starting there set me up to eventually buy a property here in Denver. I would have been find staying in the city if I didn't get transferred. And for someone that's interested in revitalizing older buildings and neighborhoods and not already rich, I think Buffalo has a lot of great opportunities.

The other factor people seem to gloss over here is that cities not only offer jobs but a dating market. If big cities are where all the young people move to, then that's where you're going to want to go if you're single. You're not finding a partner that's not already divorced with 3 kids in the middle of nowhere. It helps a lot to have a partner - makes thriving in larger cities much easier.

 

[JoeNut]

You should be able to take out a personal loan to cover the deposit. But like the first thing a mortage adviser tells you is that you can't do that.

you're missing the point of what a deposit is.

 

[SlickShoes]

But that isn't the case, there are a lot of cities where buying is a lot cheaper than renting, as seen in this very thread; but if everyone wants to live in SF, then it's obvious and expected that prices will go up. It's a simple supply demand curve.

There is also a vicious cycle, because if prices go up quickly, then more people want to enter that market.

Housing is not limited. Housing in big city centres is; it's different.

I think the defeatist attitude is yours, not mine. If I'm finding excuses to stop living my own life, because I can't afford a house near friends, family or other interest, and I say the fault of all this is from others, then you are the defeatist. Make a new family, find new friends, find other interests and move on with your life. /preach

Housing is limited though, in the UK the government sold off most of their housing stock and didn't continue to build houses. When the market collapsed in 2007 business house builders slowed down massively.

There already isn't enough housing for the government to put people in that are living on the poverty line, they are renting through private landlords instead which is a huge fucking mess.

 

[ZackieChan]

I generally agree with the bald bastard, but I feel the whole 'stop complaining and do something' spiel only works when you have certain factors in your favour and you have a semi good level of social mobility.

I still believe that the Internet evens a lot of that out, but I'm done arguing 😉

 

[QuicheFontaine]

you're missing the point of what a deposit is.

I really don't get the point

 

[Ron Mexico]

I really don't get the point

I'll try it this way-- the reason they want you to have the cash and not do it as an additional unsecured loan is to show (on paper) your personal investment into making good on the loan.

Is it fair? I'm not here to make that call. But that's the reasoning in a nutshell.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

I'll try it this way-- the reason they want you to have the cash and not do it as an additional unsecured loan is to show (on paper) your personal investment into making good on the loan.

Is it fair? I'm not here to make that call. But that's the reasoning in a nutshell.

But if I can get an unsecured loan for that amount, surely that would demonstrate my credit worthiness?

And there are "repercussions" (presumably, I've never taken a personal loan) for not paying aren't there? So I would be "personally invested"

 

[Zoe]

But if I can get an unsecured loan for that amount, surely that would demonstrate my credit worthiness?

And there are "repercussions" (presumably, I've never taken a personal loan) for not paying aren't there? So I would be "personally invested"

You're forgetting that you having that loan will have an effect on paying the bigger loan, your mortgage.

 

[Tain]

The older I get the more socialist I become.

Many of my friends and relatives are terrified of automation. They don't have anywhere near enough stability to settle down. The future is rife with uncertainty and a lot of it is due to our societal refusal to change the way we do things, continuing to put emphasis on a dated concept of "work" that is being lost at a rapid pace to automation and outsourcing.

Capitalism will either destroy us all or be destroyed. It's not sustainable for much longer.

maybe they should just take up STEM and make the next uber. easy.

 

[fredrancour]

But if I can get an unsecured loan for that amount, surely that would demonstrate my credit worthiness?

And there are "repercussions" (presumably, I've never taken a personal loan) for not paying aren't there? So I would be "personally invested"

loans are all about "we think you can pay this much debt in this much time." if a bank ever agreed to a no-down-payment setup, the total size of the mortgage you'd get approved for would be smaller.

down payments are also there to ensure that they at least get a little bit of the loan back if you flake.

Also, having the credit score to get approved for a smaller personal loan and having good financial planning aren't really guaranteed to go hand in hand. you might have a fantastic credit score living exactly at your means and saving nothing up. That would make entrusting you with a massive loan look more risky to the bank. they'd rather loan their hundreds of thousands of dollars to people who've already demonstrated a tangible bit of success at long-term planning (or have rich relatives to lean on).


granted, i am not a banker, but that's how i think it works.

 

[Ron Mexico]

But if I can get an unsecured loan for that amount, surely that would demonstrate my credit worthiness?

And there are "repercussions" (presumably, I've never taken a personal loan) for not paying aren't there? So I would be "personally invested"

No, because the repercussions of defaulting on an unsecured personal loan (essentially, they can torpedo your credit, garnish your wages, obtain a judgement for collection, etc. but there's no tangible collateral to offset) are substantially smaller than the repercussions of defaulting on a mortgage.

Again with apologies for sounding like a broken record, not saying this is necessarily fair-- but it is most definitely the rationale being used.

And that's not to even mention the other also valid points above.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

No, because the repercussions of defaulting on an unsecured personal loan (essentially, they can torpedo your credit, garnish your wages, obtain a judgement for collection, etc. but there's no tangible collateral to offset) are substantially smaller than the repercussions of defaulting on a mortgage.

Again with apologies for sounding like a broken record, not saying this is necessarily fair-- but it is most definitely the rationale being used.

And that's not to even mention the other also valid points above.

Ah alright, I think I'm getting it. You've been very patient btw!

Edit:

You're forgetting that you having that loan will have an effect on paying the bigger loan, your mortgage.

Maybe they could reduce the total amount they would be willing to lend due to that effect, rather than having a blanket ban on using borrowed money for the deposit?

Edit2:

I already have a mortgage, but I always wondered about this stuff.

 

[Prime crotch]

I moved back from London to Lisbon because "no way in hell it can be any worse than here" and welp, yeah it's the same everywhere right now

I generally agree with the bald bastard, but I feel the whole 'stop complaining and do something' spiel only works when you have certain factors in your favour and you have a semi good level of social mobility.

There's also a history of erasing from history how much state efforts helped social mobility in the past, few men pulled themselves fully by their own bootstraps.

 

[JoeNut]

I really don't get the point

But if I can get an unsecured loan for that amount, surely that would demonstrate my credit worthiness?

And there are "repercussions" (presumably, I've never taken a personal loan) for not paying aren't there? So I would be "personally invested"

Above have already said what i'd say anyway but on top of those, if you haven't put anything down as a deposit, you're not really invested in owning it, if you don't pay and the bank repossess your house, they lose out on the money they would have made from the interest in your mortgage over the 30 years or whatever.

You being "personally invested" because you might go bankrupt doesn't bring the bank any sort of security, because they'll have lost out on the money you owed them in interest already.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Yup, had my graduate job (UK) for 2 years (decent pay) and not even close to a downpayment on the house. Been saving as much as I can each month.

Government schemes (if you can call them that) aren't that helpful, and it's incredibly upsetting and depressing. Don't want to live with my folks, but what options do I have?

 

[TyrantII]

I generally agree with the bald bastard, but I feel the whole 'stop complaining and do something' spiel only works when you have certain factors in your favour and you have a semi good level of social mobility.

People hustled in 1929 as well. It didn't matter in 1930.

That's the problem with that sort of advice, because it's not really advice since more are hustling than not to live the life they want to get to. People aren't complaining and sitting on their thumbs. They know history and even those that don't can feel the finger pushing them down under the water as they're trying to swim. They feel the meritocracy slipping

Talking about and trying to change policy so we don't hit an iceberg like we did in 1929 isn't complaining. It's trying not to repeat that history and hopefully saving trillions in wealth and stopping needless suffering should it happen again.

 

[TheExodu5]

Not the case in Ottawa, Canada.

I could rent a 2 bedroom appartment for $1200-1500. Instead, I bought a 4 bedroom fixer-upper semi-detached for $270K. My mortgage payments with property taxes are as low as rent. Having the minimum 20% down helped, of course.

Now, I had to buy in a suburb of course, but financially, it still makes more sense to buy than rent if you can afford it here, especially since interest rates are very low (~2.5%).

 

[Ron Mexico]

Ah alright, I think I'm getting it. You've been very patient btw!

Edit:



Maybe they could reduce the total amount they would be willing to lend due to that effect, rather than having a blanket ban on using borrowed money for the deposit?

So the reason why they wouldn't just lower the mortgage amount is the risk involved with lending 100% of the property's value. Think of the lender in this case as being worried to the point of paranoia-- all but consumed with the amounts of what ifs. What if the borrower can't pay and the value of the house drops? They're essentially trying to minimize their own risk/exposure any way they can.

So for instance stateside, there are loan programs that only require minimum amounts (such as 3.5% for the FHA program) down-- usually a key for first time buyers. Sounds great, right? It is...sort of. Those loans also require mortgage insurance (PMI)-- essentially an insurance policy that protects the lender from the what ifs above which adds to your monthly payment amount. Now, with rates being as volatile as they are, that could still be well worth it, even including the PMI, but that's another discussion for another time-- although I would wholeheartedly recommend the Home Buying OT as there's all kinds of folks in all kinds of scenarios.

And as for the patience-- much appreciated. I've been in banking for 16+ years now. Semi-related to the whole topic-- this wasn't what I imagined myself doing for a living whatsoever but I found a niche and went for it. Especially considering the reputation a lot of bankers have, I at least try to shed light where I can.

 

[KarneeKarnay]

I would move wherever the work was, but most places I've contacted won't give me the time or day, because I don't live near them.

 

[HandsomeCharles]

Yup, had my graduate job (UK) for 2 years (decent pay) and not even close to a downpayment on the house.

Government schemes (if you can call them that) aren't that helpful, and it's incredibly upsetting and depressing. Don't want to live with my folks, but what options do I have?

It sucks, but it can be done. First, where do you want to buy? House prices vary massively depending on location. For example, my friend just bought a 3 bed flat for around £80k in Dundee, whereas in about to move to Edinburgh and my options for a (nice) 2 bed place are going to be starting at nearly double that.

The second thing to do is sacrifice. If you go with a help-to-buy scheme you should only need a 5% deposit. Let's say that's 10k. Now, figure out how much you spend per month and what you can do to reduce it. Rent is the big one. Are you prepared to move in with other people? How about live with your parents? Doing something like that can have a serious impact on how much you can save!

If you can save £250/month then that's £3k a year. After three years you'll probably have your deposit (assuming you get some kind of raise to make up the additional 1k)!

You have to also remember to live within your means. Whenever you get a raise or a bonus, don't spend it. Continue on exactly as you were, put any additional cash into savings. You just need to be diligent and you'll get there eventually.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

So the reason why they wouldn't just lower the mortgage amount is the risk involved with lending 100% of the property's value. Think of the lender in this case as being worried to the point of paranoia-- all but consumed with the amounts of what ifs. What if the borrower can't pay and the value of the house drops? They're essentially trying to minimize their own risk/exposure any way they can.

So for instance stateside, there are loan programs that only require minimum amounts (such as 3.5% for the FHA program) down-- usually a key for first time buyers. Sounds great, right? It is...sort of. Those loans also require mortgage insurance (PMI)-- essentially an insurance policy that protects the lender from the what ifs above which adds to your monthly payment amount. Now, with rates being as volatile as they are, that could still be well worth it, even including the PMI, but that's another discussion for another time-- although I would wholeheartedly recommend the Home Buying OT as there's all kinds of folks in all kinds of scenarios.

And as for the patience-- much appreciated. I've been in banking for 16+ years now. Semi-related to the whole topic-- this wasn't what I imagined myself doing for a living whatsoever but I found a niche and went for it. Especially considering the reputation a lot of bankers have, I at least try to shed light where I can.

Thanks dude, that's genuinely interesting. Speaking of insurance, in the UK I think it's pretty much mandatory (they certainly do strongly suggest during the lending process) to insure the house from the date of exchange of contracts. I guess that's to minimize their risk too? Like, they wouldn't make their money back if the house burnt down and you couldn't make the payments.

Edit:

It sucks, but it can be done. First, where do you want to buy? House prices vary massively depending on location. For example, my friend just bought a 3 bed flat for around £80k in Dundee, whereas in about to move to Edinburgh and my options for a (nice) 2 bed place are going to be starting at nearly double that.

The second thing to do is sacrifice. If you go with a help-to-buy scheme you should only need a 5% deposit. Let's say that's 10k. Now, figure out how much you spend per month and what you can do to reduce it. Rent is the big one. Are you prepared to move in with other people? How about live with your parents? Doing something like that can have a serious impact on how much you can save!

If you can save £250/month then that's £3k a year. After three years you'll probably have your deposit (assuming you get some kind of raise to make up the additional 1k)!

You have to also remember to live within your means. Whenever you get a raise or a bonus, don't spend it. Continue on exactly as you were, put any additional cash into savings. You just need to be diligent and you'll get there eventually.

Get married! Two people living together spend less than two separate people living individually. Plus you (probably) now have two salaries going into the pot

 

[TheExodu5]

You have to also remember to live within your means. Whenever you get a raise or a bonus, don't spend it. Continue on exactly as you were, put any additional cash into savings. You just need to be diligent and you'll get there eventually.

Yep. That's where I don't do so well. I make $25K more than when I graduated, and still somehow manage to spend every penny. I coupd definitely do a lot better with some self discipline.

 

[HandsomeCharles]

Yep. That's where I don't do so well. I make $25K more than when I graduated, and still somehow manage to spend every penny. I coupd definitely do a lot better with some self discipline.

To be fair, this bit is hard. I'm incredibly lucky to have had parental support during University (I.e I didn't pay rent) and had the sense to save pretty much every penny I would have otherwise spent (from part-time jobs).

Since graduating my monthly outgoings have been exactly the same regardless of any salary increase, and I'm now in a position where I'm looking to buy my first property later on this year (I'm 25 btw, for reference).

I also always have tried to figure out the most cost-effective way to do things. Not buying a phone every 2 years, using cash back schemes etc. It all adds up eventually.

 

[Dougald]

Get married! Two people living together spend less than two separate people living individually. Plus you (probably) now have two salaries going into the pot

This is basically it, I've been living with my (now) wife since I left university. Without two combined incomes we'd never have saved the £50k I eventually put down on our house

 

[Ron Mexico]

Thanks dude, that's genuinely interesting. Speaking of insurance, in the UK I think it's pretty much mandatory (they certainly do strongly suggest during the lending process) to insure the house from the date of exchange of contracts. I guess that's to minimize their risk too? Like, they wouldn't make their money back if the house burnt down and you couldn't make the payments.

In addition to the mortgage insurance I mentioned earlier, there's also a requirement for homeowners' insurance which you're talking about there. Thinking about it, it does sound a bit crazy to be carrying 2 separate insurance policies whose function overlaps heavily, but I digress.

Your homeowners' policy (from the lender's side) is for just that-- in the event something happens that would jeopardize their collateral (again, paralyzing fear of risk), they want to be certain they're getting paid. In the event of a total loss, the lender gets paid first. In the event of a smaller incident, the lender may request you send them invoices/estimates for the work, as the check from the insurance company will be made to both you as the owner AND the lender as the lien holder.

It's also why 2nd mortgages, home equity loans and lines of credit, etc are generally priced higher than a first mortgage. The more mouths to feed, the more those at the bottom of the list get nervous and price their risk accordingly.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

It sucks, but it can be done. First, where do you want to buy? House prices vary massively depending on location. For example, my friend just bought a 3 bed flat for around £80k in Dundee, whereas in about to move to Edinburgh and my options for a (nice) 2 bed place are going to be starting at nearly double that.

The second thing to do is sacrifice. If you go with a help-to-buy scheme you should only need a 5% deposit. Let's say that's 10k. Now, figure out how much you spend per month and what you can do to reduce it. Rent is the big one. Are you prepared to move in with other people? How about live with your parents? Doing something like that can have a serious impact on how much you can save!

If you can save £250/month then that's £3k a year. After three years you'll probably have your deposit (assuming you get some kind of raise to make up the additional 1k)!

You have to also remember to live within your means. Whenever you get a raise or a bonus, don't spend it. Continue on exactly as you were, put any additional cash into savings. You just need to be diligent and you'll get there eventually.

lol I live with my parents and have done since college. I save £500-600 a month. What now? I have around £7k already. You also forget that with the bare minimum deposit you're risking a difficult to pay monthly mortgage.

Buying an apartment is the most obvious thing to do, but they're very hard to move on (leasehold etc)

 

[Rbk_3]

Just out of pure curiousity - if cities like Toronto and Vancouver are too expensive why not look into surrounding rural areas. I know commuting sucks but maybe you also can find work elsewhere. Is it the lifestyle/stigma in cities like those that keep people there?

Exactly. I live 2 hours outside of Toronto and we just bought a 10 year old detached home for $250k last summer and it would probably be pushing 1 mil in Toronto. I don't commute to Toronto though.

 

[bosseye]

The second thing to do is sacrifice. If you go with a help-to-buy scheme you should only need a 5% deposit. Let's say that's 10k. Now, figure out how much you spend per month and what you can do to reduce it. Rent is the big one. Are you prepared to move in with other people? How about live with your parents? Doing something like that can have a serious impact on how much you can save!

If you can save £250/month then that's £3k a year. After three years you'll probably have your deposit (assuming you get some kind of raise to make up the additional 1k)!

Agree, but the issue a lot of people have is they make the sacrifice, they save the money but in those years they're saving, the market continues to move away from them. 10k saved suddenly doesn't get you what it did 3 years ago and you end up tantalisingly behind the curve everytime.

 

[witchedwiz]

I think I mostly interpret Zackie's words in a positive way as he has good intention. There's a lot of problem in our societies that needs to be changed. However, I also see a lot of people not willing to change and improve so they can have a better life. They are stuck in the old ways and seem anti-intellectual which generally rubs me the wrong way. I tell them to learn this and that which will help with their jobs and they will straight up just tell me no. It is not because they got families to take care of or whatever, it's because they are not interested. So then I became uninterested in helping them. With the way technology is advancing so fast now, I find myself having to do a lot of personal studies in my own free time so I can either keep up with work or simply have more skills so I can become more valuable at work. My friends who do that are generally doing much better at work and have are having better careers because of it.

We do not live in the same kind of time as our parents, which is unfortunate. People need to be more creative and work harder than ever to have some semblance of a good life. The key to our work now is transferrable skills. Having many cross area skills that allows you do move between jobs, companies and/or industries. That way, if one industry goes bust in your city, you can transfer to another. Otherwise, people must face the possibility of moving to where the jobs are, no matter how far or hard it may be.

This over and over..
I had my father coming in Milan to visit me..
As usual less than 1 hour ago he finished his "why do you always work and spend some of your freetime to work"-spiel...
His a good man, and much more progressive then men's his age..
But.. People in their 60s will easily ignore a lot of problem that arte typical to newer generations..
1) you chase your job, meaning that you will move to switch jobs or even move while doing the exact same job as always..
2) you job hop a lot... Gone are the days when you could expect promotion or raise simply because you did your job very well for an extended amount of Times..
3) you need to take refresher.. This is especially true in any tech related job.. If you don't keep your skillset fresh, you will be One of the many that will take a penny for their time...working knowledge is no longer set in stone, or updated every now and then.. You have to work hard to stay relevant.
4) your job now is what you are doing, where you are doing.. Your job will be what a company will need, where a company will need it
5) even with all the aforementioned, you might not succeed... The bar for living vs scraping by has risen.. A lot.. You want a 80 sqm apartments in a decent place of london? Ahahahahahahah good joke, son!
You want to buy a summer house//winter house? Ohboy....
By 30 nowdays your lucky If you've started the mortgage (that will run at least for 20 years), so a second house, a place to spend the summer owned directly and not rented are memory of the past...

such is life nowdays i guess..

 

[titiklabingapat]

It doesn't help that the 'I Got Mine, Fuck You' attitude is on full display in the form of NIMBYism especially in supposed liberal cities. 'Ruining the character of the neighborhood' has become a longhand for it and essentially saying fuck you to newcomers. Shit needs to be squashed.

 

[Cyrano]

This thread makes me wonder how bad things have to get before people actually start to realize there's a more fundamental problem than "not working hard enough."

 

[titiklabingapat]

This thread makes me wonder how bad things have to get before people actually start to realize there's a more fundamental problem than "not working hard enough."

Probably when the ratio of poor to rich people is about 1:20. Right now, the middle class is still too big for most people to get out of their comfort zone in the West, but it is obviously getting reduced in an alarming rate.

 

[Foffy]

This thread makes me wonder how bad things have to get before people actually start to realize there's a more fundamental problem than "not working hard enough."

Much worse.

The great decoupling and loss of coal, retail, and trucking may not even be enough.

Shit yoself. We're in for a spooky ride.