3 ms·
Well it isn't realistic. For about a year I dated a forensic accountant with a Ph.D. whose job it was to untangle and uncook books. We got on the subject of mo
by cbozeman 6y ago
Well it isn't realistic.
For about a year I dated a forensic accountant with a Ph.D. whose job it was to untangle and uncook books. We got on the subject of mortgages. She said you should never buy a home that costs more than double your yearly salary. If you make $60,000 a year, as she made when she bought her home, then you can afford a $120,000 home. If you make $100,000, then you can afford $200,000.
Entirely too many people, including apparently you, are severely overleveraged on their home loans.
There's absolutely no scenario where your situation makes financial sense to people with in-depth financial education, who are also not beholden to what we've come to accept as the "norm" for financial services.
The reasons she listed for this are myriad. 1) You have to save for retirement. Most people usually do this in the form of stocks, bonds, ETFs, etc., 2) you have, or should be, putting away a minimum of six months of your income in order to survive a job loss, and she recommends at least one-to-two years for people with advanced degrees (M.A., M.S., M.B.A., etc.) because the average time it takes to find another position for advanced professionals is something along the lines of 8-9 months, 3) you have other expenses such as your auto loan or loans, food, insurance, etc., all of which costs money.
Those are only some of the many areas of cost that she and I discussed while we were dating.
There's absolutely no amount of money you can make where your 600% figure makes reasonable financial sense... even if you make $1 million a year, you're still in a $6 million home. Hell if you made $10 million, that's a $60 million home. After taxes, there's still no scenario where that makes good financial sense.
Lastly, I don't want you to think I'm personally attacking you - there's a lot of people in your boat, but its a boat in which no one belongs. These levels of debt are dangerous... the 2008 financial crisis proved that.
- bradlys 6y agoThe person likely is dual income. So, it might only be 3x their household income. Which is perfectly acceptable. Getting a home for 2x your household income is basically impossible in this day unless you’re one very lucky remote worker who enjoys living in the middle of nowhere. I’d say the upper threshold of 4x your annual income is where you’d likely want to throttle back. Any higher, you’re in very high risk or can’t afford it. But trying to get a home for below 3x your income? Basically impossible for most people.
- mixmastamyk 6y agoThere aren't decent homes for sale in my area for less than around 500% of what I make due to various govt interference.
- jb775 6y agoA max of 2x salary for a house is absurd and saving 50% of your salary is overkill and not realistic. What about the opportunity costs? Buying a cheap home makes you miss out on market appreciation dollars, has less rental value, is likely in an area that has a higher likelihood of impacts from market downturns, etc. Also being an ultra cheap-ass has opportunity costs such as costing you personal relationships.