Borrowers took on huge debts during the housing bubble from a combination of greed, foolish optimism and an abundance of toxic mortgage options.
Irvine Home Address … 10 HOLLINWOOD Irvine, CA 92618
Resale Home Price …… $975,000
{book1}
Gimme the microphone first, so I can bust like a bubble
Compton and Long Beach together, now you know you in trouble
Ain't nothin' but a G thang, baaaaabay!
Dr Dre and Snoop Dogg — Nuthin But a G Thang
It was all about Greed. The G thang took over. The stories of the Great Housing Bubble are seldom black and white, right or wrong, good or evil. Some of the characters are despicable and deceiptful, but the majority are ordinary folks who succumb to greed, foolish optimism about the future of housing prices, and the market prowess of realtors and mortgage brokers.
Although the media likes to portray loan owners and innocent bystanders who don't deserve the hardship they are facing, the reality is more nuanced. People may not have fully understood the Option ARM, but they certainly did understand that (1) they would have a low payment for a few years, (2) their house would double in value and (3) they would make a fortune — or so they thought.
Few buyers during the bubble contemplated the risks they were taking on. Even today, people are buying with the false assurance that prices have bottomed and that they cannot lose on real estate. ARMs are still popular despite their obvious risks at the bottom of the interest rate cycle, and few people consider the near certainty of an increasing house payment to be a potential problem. Everyone will be make much more in a few years, right?
Many buyers today are making the same mistakes of bubble buyers; they are buying from greed and fear and an overly optimistic set of assumptions about the future of resale prices and interest rates. We are not learning the lessons of history… or are we? How many of today's buyers witnessed the bailouts and numerous government market props and reason that if things go bad the government will step in to bail them out too? The government's response is loaded with moral hazard.
Drowning in home debt
(Money Magazine) — A transfer in 2005 landed Air Force major Richard Hallbeck, his wife, and two kids in Southern California smack in the middle of the real estate bubble. Home prices in the area had doubled in the past five years and were still climbing. So the Hallbecks swallowed hard and bought an $845,000 four-bedroom in a suburb of Long Beach.
The $3,800 monthly payment was high but affordable on two incomes. (Laurie, now 37, worked as a claims adjuster.) And they figured the market was so strong that when they had to move again, they'd at least break even. "Our house actually appraised over what we paid for it," Richard, 42, recalls wistfully.
Since then, area sale prices have fallen 26% — when properties sell at all. Meanwhile, the recession cost Laurie her job, and the payment on the couple's adjustable-rate mortgage will jump $800 in July. Next year Richard will face mandatory retirement from the Air Force, and his pension will be a third of his current $117,000 income.
Can these people honestly say they "swallowed hard" before they bought this house? That suggests they actually contemplated the risks involved and made an informed decision. This couple, like thousands of other buyers during the bubble were assured by everyone involved in the transaction that everything would be fine, and all of their friends were telling them the same. If they swallowed hard it was to down their celebratory drinks when they got the house. They were about to make a fortune.
All that's got the Hallbecks anxious to move to a more affordable city — like Dayton, where they used to live. But they're just as anxious about how much they could lose on the sale of their house.
A similar home down the street lists for $655,000, $21,000 less than the Hallbecks' outstanding mortgage. At that price, the couple would be out $231,000, including their down payment and closing costs. "The stress has really worn on us," Richard says.
The stress over this huge mistake is exactly why people shouldn't do what this couple did. it is the reason I didn't do what this couple did. They should be stressed. They have already lost a quarter million dollars, and if they sell now, it will also damage their credit. There are consequences for participating in a massive Ponzi Scheme despite the government's best efforts to foster moral hazard by eliminating the consequences.
Nationwide, about one in four home mortgages are now underwater, meaning borrowers owe more than their places are worth. No surprise, California and other bubbly states — Nevada, Arizona, and Florida — lead the nation.
While a bevy of new federal programs aim to help, underwater owners who want to move still face uncomfortable choices: Postpone the move and continue sinking money into a pit; sell for a loss, forfeiting the down payment and some savings to close the deal; desperately try to enter into a short sale; or simply walk away and face the consequences of foreclosure. If you (or your kids) are in this situation, here's how to think about the options.
This article had my attention up to this point. I knew it could go one of two ways: (1) it could discuss the real options truthfully including strategic default, or (2) it could be a load of crap written to appease lenders who want people to stay and keep paying? Any guesses before we move on?
Keep on keeping on
If you don't have to move and can afford the payments, it probably makes sense to soldier on and wait for housing prices to recover, says Denver financial planner Ross Schmidt. Moody's Economy.com projects that prices in 61% of metro areas will return to recent peak levels by 2015.
Here is a half-truth disguised as good advice. First, the projections from Moody's is overly optimistic as shill studies tend to be, and second, the 39% of metro areas where prices will not reach peak levels by 2015 include most of California, Nevada, Arizona and Florida — the areas that bubbled most.
If you live in one of the harder-hit cities — which may take 20 years to rebound — and you're more than 25% underwater, your house won't be a financial asset anytime soon. But as long as you're happy to stay in it for many years, that may not matter.
May not matter? Bullshit. Timing Does Matter. It matters a great deal to the family that will have to do without the significant resources going to a bank for debt service. Lenders need to feel the brunt of their foolish losses. Losing money causes the pain that prevents them from doing it again. Banks should never have extended oversized loans to people who couldn't afford the payments. People renting from the bank at overpriced rates are screwing themselves and enriching stupid, greedy bankers.
In the meantime, you may be able to cut your loan balance — and lower your payments — through a new federal program that refinances existing loans into smaller FHA loans. To qualify, you must be current on payments — but it's up to the lender to agree to it.
I am sure the lenders are lining up to reduce loan balances of those who are paying on time… Not. What possible incentive do lenders have to participate. Unless the borrower becomes a problem to lenders by refusing to pay the note, there is no urgency for lenders to do anything.
The Hallbecks might have been eligible for some of this aid, but Laurie is eager to move with the kids by this fall, rather than waiting until Richard retires — which will be in the middle of the school year.
Beg the bank for a break
What if you need to get out of the house? The Hallbecks initially considered renting their place out. But they'd probably lose money, given the spread between their mortgage payment and rental prices. Becoming a landlord is a risk even in areas where you can cover carrying costs, as you're still on the hook in between tenants, says Maryland financial planner Timothy Maurer.
The fact that rents are much less than the cost of ownership is exactly why this was a stupid purchase to begin with. There was no viable plan B. Renting for negative cashflow is stupid, particularly with an ARM where the negative cashflow can become even more negative.
A cleaner option may be to ask your lender for a short sale, in which it would accept less than the loan amount. To convince the bank, homeowners must show they're at risk of default because they can't make payments or are so deep underwater that they're likely to bail. (With $155,000 in savings outside of retirement accounts, it's unlikely the Hallbecks will qualify.)
Why would a bank agree to a short sale if the borrower has assets? Banks don't want to tell borrowers they don't have to pay the bank even if they can, unless the US taxpayer is paying the difference.
It can take months to arrange a short sale, if you're successful at all. So for best results, work with a "distressed-property specialist," a real estate agent who has experience negotiating with lenders. At realtor.com, select "SFR" under Find a Realtor to search for this type of specialist.
Notice the plug for realtor.com? Who do you think sponsored this story?
Also seek free advice from a certified mortgage consultant, whom you can find via makinghomeaffordable.gov, suggests Melinda Opperman, of Springboard Nonprofit Consumer Credit Management. Such an adviser can help you determine whether your loan type allows the bank to come after you for money later. He or she can also help ensure the loan is reported as "settled" to the credit bureaus. A mortgage listed as "settled for less than agreed" can damage your score the way a foreclosure would.
Not exactly. For the truth, please see How Delinquencies Impair Credit Scores:
After a mortgage delinquency, the two scores [680 and 780] would look like this:
• After 30-day delinquency, 680 score drops to 620 to 640; 780 score declines to 670 to 690.
• After 90-day delinquency, 680 score falls to 595 to 610; 780 score goes to 645 to 665.
• After foreclosure, short sale, or deed-in-lieu, 680 goes to 575 to 595 and 780 drops to 620 to 640.
• After bankruptcy, 680 drops to 530 to 550; 780 declines to 540 to 560.
Speaking of foreclosure, University of Arizona law professor Brent White says walking away may make sense financially if you're more than 40% underwater and could rent a similar house for less than your mortgage bill. But doing so has consequences, not the least of which may be a guilty conscience. Foreclosure stays on your credit report seven years — and can cut a 780 score an average of 150 points, per Fair Isaac. That can affect everything from your insurance premiums to your employment potential to your future ability to buy a house.
Do you think Dr. White really set the bar at 40% underwater? Didn't that strike you as such a high threshold that few find themselves in that situation? I believe the reporter intended it that way. Default rates go up dramatically at the water line. People are generally better off if even a little underwater if rents are less than the cost of ownership.
Guilty conscience? LOL! More lender fantasy and projection. I predicted previously that by the end of 2010, there will be no guilt and no stigma associated with strategic default. Lenders have played on borrower guilt for too long, and borrowers are starting to see if for the manipulative lie that it is.
I have an I-Phone with the local AT&T service. The AT&T network in Irvine really sucks, and the moment Verizon gets the I-Phone to work on its system, I will cancel my AT&T contract and pay the early termination fee. I won't feel any guilt about breaking my contract, and it won't make me immoral.
Eat the loss yourself
For the Hallbecks, the best — and fastest — option may be simply selling the house and paying any difference between the sale price and the mortgage out of pocket, says Maurer. That is a good, if not particularly palatable, choice for homeowners who have significant savings and aren't deeply underwater. Selling this way eliminates any credit risks.
Since Money first spoke to the Hallbecks, they have listed their home and attracted an offer of $655,000. That would've meant shelling out the $21,000 difference, plus some $40,000 in commissions and closing costs. So, the couple decided to hold out for more. "Hopefully," says Richard, "our expectations aren't too high."
I would love to joke about the stupidity of their decision, but with the restricted inventory condition caused by lenders refusing to foreclose and clear out the squatters, some desperate buyer may bid them up enough to get them out at even. This is exactly what the banks want. They need a small army of knife catchers to take advantage of the artificially low interest rates and bail out the banks through direct acquisition.
More than the temporary increase in prices, the bear rally does one other very useful thing for the banks: it gives existing borrowers false hope that them may not be underwater soon. If borrowers really accepted that it will take ages to get back to the surface, many more would strategically default. If lenders and keep borrowers in their homes long enough, borrowers become invested in their own bad decision, and they will stay long beyond the point where staying makes sense. 
Guilt and paying the mortgage
Have you ever wondered why people associate guilt with certain terms of mortgage contracts? If you examine the terms in the promissory note and mortgage arrangement, the lender is making a loan, and as a contingency in the event an borrower does not repay the loan, the lender has the right to force a public auction to resell the property to obtain their money.
Prior to our era of widespread squatting, failure to repay the loan resulted in a borrower losing the house they consider their home. A borrower who was capable of making the payment but didn't was causing their family to lose their home.
In normal circumstances, losing the house would not be in the best interest of the family, and it could be argued that losing the house is immoral as it harms the family. However, in our current circumstances with prices in many markets well below the loan balance, losing the family home — which may be emotionally painful — is better for the family than sustaining a crushing debt load.
The old moral reason for paying the mortgage to keep the family home is superceded by the greater moral imperative to provide a financial future unfettered by crushing debt.
There is another way to view this transaction. It is the banks that were immoral when they made loans without regard to a borrower's ability to repay. They put people into homes under terms that were not sustainable, and they caused the pain we are witnessing today. Making the loan was immoral, walking away is the just response.
Raiding the Equity Piggy Bank
- Today's featured property was purchased for $900,000 on 1/17/2003. The owner used a $650,000 first mortgage and a $250,000 down payment.
- On 3/31/2004 she liberated some equity with a $730,000 refinance.
-
On 10/29/2004 she refinanced with a $767,000 Option ARM.
- On 12/22/2005 she obtained a $250,000 HELOC, but she may not have used it.
- Total property debt is $1,017,000.
- Total mortgage equity withdrawal is 367,000 including her down payment.
- Total squatting is at least 1 year.
Foreclosure Record
Recording Date: 03/31/2010
Document Type: Notice of Sale
Foreclosure Record
Recording Date: 09/28/2009
Document Type: Notice of Default
Because of the behavior of owners like this, even those who should be sitting on mountains of bubble equity are broke. There is no move-up market. First-time buyers with significant wage savings are sustaining our housing market. What is typically only a small fraction of buyers now comprises the entire buyer pool.
Irvine Home Address … 10 HOLLINWOOD Irvine, CA 92618 
Resale Home Price … $975,000
Home Purchase Price … $900,000
Home Purchase Date …. 1/17/2003
Net Gain (Loss) ………. $16,500
Percent Change ………. 8.3%
Annual Appreciation … 1.0%
Cost of Ownership
————————————————-
$975,000 ………. Asking Price
$195,000 ………. 20% Down Conventional
5.07% …………… Mortgage Interest Rate
$780,000 ………. 30-Year Mortgage
$203,495 ………. Income Requirement
$4,221 ………. Monthly Mortgage Payment
$845 ………. Property Tax
$233 ………. Special Taxes and Levies (Mello Roos)
$81 ………. Homeowners Insurance
$140 ………. Homeowners Association Fees
============================================ 
$5,520 ………. Monthly Cash Outlays
-$1035 ………. Tax Savings (% of Interest and Property Tax)
-$925 ………. Equity Hidden in Payment
$387 ………. Lost Income to Down Payment (net of taxes)
$122 ………. Maintenance and Replacement Reserves
============================================
$4,069 ………. Monthly Cost of Ownership
Cash Acquisition Demands
——————————————————————————
$9,750 ………. Furnishing and Move In @1%
$9,750 ………. Closing Costs @1%
$7,800 ………… Interest Points @1% of Loan
$195,000 ………. Down Payment
============================================
$222,300 ………. Total Cash Costs
$62,300 ………… Emergency Cash Reserves
============================================
$284,600 ………. Total Savings Needed
Property Details for 10 HOLLINWOOD Irvine, CA 92618
——————————————————————————
Beds: 4
Baths: 0003
Home size: 3100
($315 / sq ft)
Lot Size: 6140
Year Built: 2001
Days on Market: 35
MLS Number: P728911
Property Type: Single Family, Residential
Community: Oak Creek
——————————————————————————
Atractive home in Oak Creek, very comfortable and inviting for entertaining. One bedroom and office downstairs. The beautiful home is very nicely layed out. There are many conveniences including an artium with an inground spa, built in BBQ with electric and gas in the beautiful back yead. The gated community offers pools, tennis courts, trails and is walking distrance to shopping. Located on a cul de sac street within the community.
Atractive? layed? artium? inground? yead? distrance?
How much was she making as a claims adjuster to justify buying a
$845k home? Say they had a total income of $168k (14k/month). At the $3800/mo payment, they were only at 27%. Just P&I on $650k would have been $3900 at 6%, they had an arm (resetting now). Call it $4k. Taxes + ins + hoa adds ~$1k to that, so fully amortizing they were at $5k/mo. Now DTI is 36%.
Their problem was more pushing their DTI and home they went after than merely just timing. Had they bought a $425k home, with a FRM, they wouldn’t be in as rough shape. They also wouldn’t have liked what they could get at that price and might have decided to rent instead of going after exotic financing. Requiring them to qualify for the loan at the fully amortizing payment or max interest rate would have saved them trouble.
What the Major did wrong was try to play by the rules and use a big downpayment. Now all his hard earned money he saved went up in smoke. The idiots (smart ones) who bought down the street from him put zero down. Other than a credit blemish, they lose nothing. See where we are goig here…
My dad was in the service and it was pretty common that people buy real estate when arriving at their new job and sell when leaving. This worked for a long time because real estate only goes up and you can’t lose with it…haha. Any service member who bought during the peak bubble is pretty much screwed now. Unlike the private sector, the military really frowns on such things as foreclosure, BK, etc. I’ve even heard of people losing rank for bouncing a check…the military is a world where there are severe consequences for bad decisions.
Foreign intelligence services love folks like this as their financial problems make them nice juicy targets for compromising state secrets in exchange for cash. No doubt that this article will represent a security risk to his superiors – I am surprised that he consented to publish his story like that….Unless his job is being embellished by the author which would not surprise me either.
They should have taken the 655K offer and paid the difference. Waiting for more is a Fool’s errand. I like how these silly little “projections” tell us prices should reach peak again in 2015 – OH WELL then, I didn’t realize what a foregon conclusion this was. Prices are just taking a brief nap and will wake up again in 2015 so I might as well wait for them. These price projections are the most idiotic voodoo nonsense ever. They make all kinds of static present day assumptions that are not going to hold true when projected off into the future. It’s all crystal balls and WeeGee boards – and this guy is betting his financial future on it?
These people just bought too much house. The author of the article wants to make a victim out of a military person; one whom the general audience is likely to feel admiration for. Leave his job out of the article and the story is sudenly another couple of house debtors who walked into the two income trap and got in over their heads.
They will strategically dishonor their payment obligations shortly hereafter in order to strongarm some concessions from the bank.
I like the way you think. This is a matter of national security. A high ranking officer in the air force is facing foreclosure. He is now more susceptible to a Chinese spy buying his house at full value and some technical data on the F-22 raptor.
zubs:
Its more complicated than that.
~Misstrial
In recent times, military people and civilian contractors just rent. We are in their income range and rent, not sure what’s wrong with doing that other than not playing “pecking order.”
That’s what the Major should have done as well, and my thinking is that he and his wife thought they could cash-in off Cali real estate and use the winnings to retire in low-cost OH. ohh…
That’s the game plan for out-of-staters: buy in Cali and drive up the cost of real estate there and sell for a lot more than you bought and retire to a low-cost state.
Trouble is things worked out differently than they planned and like crawling the Infiltration Course, the Major failed to account for all threats….
To make a long story short, if they wind up in foreclosure or losing a stellar credit rating, my educated guess is that he will lose his clearance or be downgraded to a Classified Clearance level.
~Misstrial
Well, I’m second to no one in my respect for our armed services, so Major Hallbeck — I salute you, sir.
That said, he probably didn’t KNOW he was going to be mandatorily retired…the Air Force is an up or out organization. If you don’t get promoted, you are out. Still, not a smart move since, with his next promotion, he would probably have to move somewhere outside of California anyway(in fact, now that I mention it, there are hardly any AF bases in California any more). So, the sob story aside, they probably bought the place as an investment, or maybe for ‘eventual’ retirement. He may have made the classic blunder (aside from the one of about not getting involved in a land war in Asia) of assuming he was going to get a promotion, not getting it, and finding himself unemployed. I have some sympathy for his position.
Still, there is something we aren’t being told — the AF almost always provides nice housing for its officers and families on the base. I don’t understand why they had to buy a house. I think that just lends credence to my suspicion that this was really an ‘investment’ for them, not a ‘necessary’ purchase as the article implies.
I’d guess that it was definitely intended as an investment. Certainly they took on a mortgage that they never were going to pay off. Keep it for a a few years, then sell and make a huge profit off of the appreciation, just like all the stories they were hearing about. In fact, if moving back to Ohio was the long-term plan, it would have been brilliant if the timing was earlier by a couple of years.
Like IR said, looking for a big, easy profit and not being restrained by honest advice from realtors or lenders, and not looking themselves for where the problem with their plan might be.
And $117k plus benefits for a Stateside job? The military serving in combat zones or unpleasant places overseas deserve every cent and possible benefit they get and more. But remember Linda Tripp, the $80k+ secretary (and that was over 10 years ago, secretary pay will be much more today)? Some parts of the Defence budget can be cut in these deficit times.
Ah, I remember Linda Tripp. I thought I had a good job, and then realized SHE was making more money than I was…
Freetrader:
You are correct about on-base housing for officers.
On-base officer housing is actually very nice and would be comparable to a TH in Aliso Viejo or RSM at many installations.
My guess is that they purchased in order to ride the property valuation upwards.
~Misstrial
If you exclude FL, CA, AZ & NV, what percentage of mortgages are underwater?
http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/info-NEGATIVE_EQUITY_0911.html
I don’t know when this data is from, but it shows 23% of mortgages underwater. 47.3M total US mortgages, 10.7M underwater. FLCAAZNV have 5.5M underwater out of 13.6M total. So non-FLCAAZNV mortgages, 15% are underwater. Still higher than I expected. If you normalized for size of the loans, you’d probably see a bigger impact from those states – they account for 29% of mortgages, but 33% of all US property value.
Check out net-homeowner equity. For the state as a whole, NV has -14% equity!
Great WSJ link, that chart is extremely interesting.
Your 3.9% inflation rate for Irvine is suspect. For Southern California as a whole it has been closer to 4.5% out pacing National inflation. Predicting inflation for a small city is probably not wise to begin with..
Update for those keeping score: it’s May and you can still get a mortgage for under 5%.
Update on Greece: Europe considered all consequences and started the printing press.
The couple profiled is pretty lucky-they can actually sell the property if they are willing to bring money to the table (which they have in savings). Or they could walk away and let the bank deal with it, taking that $155k to buy a house in a cheaper area using 100% cash. They should be able to live fairly well on the $40k/yearly pension if they have no mortgage. Irviners need to remember that $155k can buy a nice sized house in probably 95% of the country. If he is retired, they doesn’t need to move where there is work (and they can always find a retail job or something to supplement their pension if they want).
I suspect that the Major will not be retiring any time soon…
From TFA:
That does not mean he is retiring. He can go get himself a job in the Military Industrial Complex somewhere. He does not appear to be on his last leg judging by the photo.
Yes, in horrible, Socialist Europe you get your pension when you retire. If you keep working, your pension does not start, or is significantly reduced/taxed. In California public “service” at least, it seems that you can retire, collect a full pension at 80% of your last, inflated salary, and get hired back as a consultant for your previous salary or more. 2 paychecks without a HELOC, and let the good times roll!
A $40k pension is not that much, but on top of another salary it is not so bad.
My neighbor does this. He also changed himself into an S corp.
So in socialist europe, you just work under the table and collect pension. Kinda like unemployment here.
“Irviners need to remember that $155k can buy a nice sized house in probably 95% of the country.”
That’s a nice comment but it’s similar to telling someone they can buy SPAM instead of steak for dinner. Obviously it’s true, and understood by the buyer. The buyer still buys what they can afford and desire. Anyone who wants to buy in Irvine can decide to buy in Corona today. Fried SPAM is delicious to some, but not everyone.
So you are saying that 95% of the country lives in the SPAM housing equivalent since they don’t live in Irvine.
I’m saying that the vast majority of the US is not very desirable and is priced accordingly. Disagreeing with me
is a blessing, since you can buy a house for $155K and not worry about the Irvine Housing blog or San Francisco, LA, New York equivalents.
Really? I am curious what makes 95% of the country undesirable. And don’t tell me that it is “the weather”….
Go buy a house for $155K so you can begin your happy life. Who cares what you or I think, the market speaks for itself.
I don’t want to buy something though if it is going to mean dining on fried spam in the 95% of undesirable land in this small country. I need your help, Obi-Wan. Tell me what makes 95% of the country undesirable so that I may remain vigilant in my search.
This is one of the reasons I like watching HGTV shows like House Hunters or “What you can get for the money”. Its really amazing to see the price differences around the country (and the world). I actually thought that the people on Real Housewives of Atlanta had money, until I found out you could get a mansion there for half a mil.
I’m looking to buy next year in the Greater Boston area, and even here there are huge price differences in towns that border eachother. You cross that townline and bam, your house is worth 50% more. Schools, access to public xportation, jobs, crime, presence of sex offenders, the “class” of your neighbors… that all can be converted in $$$.
THe problem occurs when the snake eats itself and the premium itself becomes a part of the premium. (Of course, I overpaid, this is Town X!, its a privledge!)
If anybody is going to be dining on fried spam, it going to be the idiots who bought near the peak or are currently buying in overinflated areas like Irvine. I don’t care what anybody says, that 4K/month mortgage really gets into the way of enjoying life. Sure they can claim they own a loan on a property in Irvine…I don’t know if that makes them better people. I know plenty of people who live in the “undesirable” part of the country who’s lives are much better than the pretenders here in OC.
PR,
It’s not the 95% of the country is undesireable, it’s that the mystique around this 5% is such that in an environment of zero risk, and upside dependant on the amount of leverage you could secure, tons of people doubled down here ’cause of the nice weather’.
There are tons of beautiful places to live around the country, depending on what your tastes are. So cal will command a premium, because it is a nice place to live, but right now, that margin is still way out of whack as we unwind this great mess that we created.
BTW, I think I know who you are. You argue just like a dude I use to work with… ; )
Oh boy, another Arizonan with a chip on his shoulder…
Look, we’re not asking you to agree with us. In fact, we’re VERY happy that you do NOT agree with us! It’s not like we want more people moving to SoCal. We’re thrilled that so many people feel that living in SoCal just isn’t worth the price.
Please just be content with your opinion and allow us to peacefully have our own opinion without people with an inferiority complex getting all huffy at us.
TIA,
Darth
P.S. Yes, some (but not all) of it is the weather.
I have an inferiority complex?
But PlanetReality stated that 95% of the country is undesirable. To me, that sounds like “superiority complex”. I simply asked him to expand on his thoughts a little more so I can steer clear of that ugly 95%.
He was stating his personal preference. It was an opinion. A statement of priorities for spending his own money. You are not obligated to agree with him, and he was not trying to pass off his opinion as fact.
Coincidentally, I share his opinion (one of the few that we share). Get over it already! You made your choice, now live with it. You don’t need us to validate your life, and we certainly don’t need yet another huffy Arizonan to validate ours.
-Darth
Finally someone who understands, I’m not trying to impose my view on anyone. David can live and be happy wherever he wants. That can be a $155K house in Riverside, or a $750K house in Irvine. If you are able to make that choice you are fortunate. Some people like canned meat and some people like whole food’s steaks.
Nah, he wasn’t passing off his opinion as fact or anything of the sort. I just simply read too much into all that “the vast majority of the country is undesirable” humble opinionry. What makes you assume that I am looking for validation? Seems like that’s what you are looking for….
It doesn’t just have to be Riverside. It could be Iowa or Maine or Nevada or South Carolina or 95% of the rest of the country.
Geotpf, I agree, I used Riverside as an example. In 95% of the country you can buy a home with cash for the same price as an Irvine down payment. The folks buying with hundreds of thousands in cash understand this and buy in Irvine anyway. I don’t understand why this bothers David. If you want a $155K house there are plenty of places you can live both inside and outside California. You can’t always get what you want, you get what you need..
There are few, very few, from THOSE states likely to ever say anything like Geotpf, Planet, or Darth. I’m stuck in CA…and when I mention where I live to those not stuck here I get apologetic looks, but there is nothing verbally said (manners). These guys live to post that they have OC property/debt and would like everyone to believe that it means something…I can picture them speeding down the 405 in a HELOCed Mercedes w/ a sense of self-entitlement unmatched. Sure, keep telling yourself it is worth the extra money to live in Irvine…or anywhere in the OC. Everyone wants to live in Irvine, though the 95% you are better than have never heard of it. Please…millions of people and nothing to show for it but jumbo loans. For all the OC claims to be, tell me how many real different makers do you see coming out of the OC? zip.
Tyler Durden: “These guys live to post that they have OC property/debt and would like everyone to believe that it means something.”
Nope, I’m renting. I’m not nearly stupid enough to buy at these prices when I can rent for nearly half that. No, seriously, my rent is only slightly over HALF of what it would cost me to own the house I’m living in here in Irvine (but much higher than what it would have cost me to squat in it on the taxpayer’s dime).
Tyler Durden: “Everyone wants to live in Irvine, though the 95% you are better than have never heard of it.”
I don’t know how many other ways to say what I’ve already said: WE. DON’T. NEED. YOUR. VALIDATION.
I don’t know why you see my personal preference as some sort of attempt to put you down. I get that you don’t want to live here. I’m even happy that you’ve made that choice! Go live your life. Your preference matters nothing to me. I’m baffled as to why mine has such an enormous impact on you.
Tyler Durden: I can picture them speeding down the 405 in a HELOCed Mercedes w/ a sense of self-entitlement unmatched.
Nope, the car I drive is a leased Camry from my employer, because my job is field-based. The car we own and that we drive as little as possible is a 2006 Hyundai that was rehabbed from a front-end collision by the previous owner. I paid for it in cash saved from my wages. I haven’t had a car payment since 2003. Other than a lingering student loan for some MBA classes taken years ago, I’m debt-free.
Tyler Durden: I’m stuck in CA
I doubt that. If you are, it’s certainly not for financial reasons. You could achieve a significantly higher spread between income and expenses almost anywhere else in the country. I recommend a serious attempt to un-stuck yourself. That chip on your shoulder would probably decrease in size if you did.
TD: For all the OC claims to be, tell me how many real different makers do you see coming out of the OC? zip.
Like I said, we aren’t looking for validation. Go live your life. Go make a difference or whatever it is that you need to do in order to feel like a whole human being.
-Darth
Sigh. This “issue” always comes up, every few months or so, every since this blog originated. Part of the problem, and one of the reasons why this blog began, is the “Irvine is special” disease. Irvine is not special. Santa Monica is special. Manhattan is special. San Francisco is special. Irvine is… Irvine. Above average, like a Californian Lake Wobegon. Irvine cannot over the long haul support prices anywhere near the abovementioned cities–that it did even approach these lofty heights is an historical anomaly, and a perfect example of the bubblemania of the aughts. That’s why this blog has been one of the more fascinating of all the bubble blogs: how long can the suburban pretenders pretend?
Pass the popcorn.
I guess it depends on your definition of “special”. If a terrible place to raise a family is “special”, then I agree with your analysis. I spend a lot of time in Manhattan, SF and Santa Monica and I have no desire to raise my children there.
irvine schools are good compared to other california schools…that’s it. the majority of students have never been out of SoCal (other than a trip now and then to visit their dads in taiwan). The robot kids have zero life experience. They go on to have limited world views and then they have kids…assume that the rest of the nation has got nothing on them…etc etc…50%DTI is normal for a rotting crap box condo…
…it is an oasis from most of SoCal…but that’s it…most of the jobs are in the imaginary sector…and I don’t mean Disney….10%unemployment will stick around.
I’m a little new here…but I’m pretty sure your response was an attempt to validate that you don’t need my validation. Right? Why else respond? To that other 95% driving through Irvine would cause the following response: This is a pretty nice, although lifeless, suburb.
But they probably don’t even know about the termites.
“Santa Monica is special. Manhattan is special. San Francisco is special. Irvine is… Irvine. ”
err…. I’ve been to all three.
Santa Monica is a dump.
San Francisco has nice places, I’ll grant, but it’s very crowded, heavily taxed and the politics are nuts.
Manhattan is uber crowded and on the dirty side.
Irvine, OTOH, is pretty clean, with good schools and has access to good culture as well. If you’re to raise a family, if you don’t want to be robbed, etc… Irvine is a very good place to live.
The fascist HOAs you’ll find in SM, SF and Manhattan…
So, if you want freedom, move to the high desert in Nevada. Otherwise don’t make such nummskull comments.
“San Francisco is special”
Yep, it is special. Bayview-Hunters Point….mmmmm….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayview-Hunters_Point,_San_Francisco
Special indeed.
A former San Josean
“The robot kids have zero life experience. They go on to have limited world views and then they have kids…assume that the rest of the nation has got nothing on them…etc etc”
That I have to agree. But then they all crank out Harvard/Yale degrees and become the next Asian Blankcheque at GS and eating our taxes for lunch.
And your point being?
Exactly, and those areas still have a premium over Irvine. If Irvine was manhattan or SF prices would be twice as expensive. Any way you slice it Irvine offers something unique in the most banal way. Hilarious but true and difficult for many to understand. The premium in manhattan and SF will continue to increase at a faster pace than Irvine’s premium.
“The premium in manhattan and SF will continue to increase at a faster pace than Irvine’s premium.”
I don’t know where you get this premium feedback loop idea, but I think it is rather crazy. I guess trees really do grow to the sky….
“If you want freedom…..” Damn me again, I thought I *WAS* living in a free country, but it appears I have to move to a special part of the country in order to get it. Gotta love people who love giving UP their freedoms in order to be safe.
Those that want to give up freedom in order to obtain security, deserve NEITHER.
Sooner rather than later, America will rot from within because americans don’t even KNOW what freedom is anymore.
I’m on my own freedom now, I only follow laws that I believe to be right, just like you all pass laws that you think are right and infringe upon the God given rights of others. I simply cannot wait to get on some jury trials, then I get a chance to help obtain “justice”. Can’t wait.
Ah…the too-difficult-for-any-of-us-to-understand argument…thank you, Irvine resident; there IS a complexity to it I will never understand.
My point was that one of the main reasons people buy in a high priced area like Irvine is to be near their job. If one is retired, they can live in the other 95% of the country at 10% of the price. The quality of such a house is probably comprable to a more expensive Irvine home-maybe superior since larger lots are likely allowing for larger yards, and one story properties (which are superior in my mind) are also more likely.
IrvineRenter –
The cell phone contract is not a viable analogy. We have to slug this one out again.
A bank loan represents consumption. The bank gives you a dollar and you spend it with promise to repay.
A cell phone contract represents future consumption. Verizon will give you a minutes usage at a cheaper rate at a future date if you promise to maintain the service for so many months.
When you cancel the cell phone contract, you are are cancelling service that has not yet been consumed. You pay a penalty to reimburse the company for the rate you would have otherwise paid had you not been given the cheaper rate for signing the contract. The cell phone company loses nothing other than the prospect of future business.
When you walk away from a mortgage, you are walking away from a loan that has already been consumed and spent.
This is a very significant difference.
If you want your analogy to work, what you have to do is prepay a years worth of cell phone service with your credit card, cancel your cell phone contract, and stop making payments on your credit card. From the logic you are presenting, it would seem that you would argue that it’s the bank’s fault for giving you the credit card so you have no moral problem with sticking them with the bill – they just shouldn’t have made the loan is all.
Not sure how this differs all that much.
The loan is for 30 years, a cell plan for 2 years.
To maintain the same monthly on the cell plan, you promise to stay on contract for 2 years otherwise you pay a termination fee (varies by type of phone/plan you sign for). That fee isn’t to cover any type of lower rate due to contract… it’s to cover the cost of the equipment they subsidized. Some carriers will let you cancel within 30 days with no penalty but you have to give back the phone or pay the early termination fee.
In a mortgage, there isn’t an ETF, so you have to give back the home… or pay off the loan (which is the same as paying the full price of the phone).
How different is that really?
the problem with the mobile phone analogy is that the Verizon network in Irvine sucks just as bad as the ATT network…
I bought a Verizon phone because I was sick of the reception on my wife’s 3GS and have found that the Verizon phone is just as bad.
I’m thinking of investing in a signal strengthener/repeater.
the problem with the mobile phone analogy is that the Verizon network in Irvine sucks just as bad as the ATT network…
I hear this complaint from time to time, and it puzzles me. I’ve lived in Irvine for a little over 4 years now, and I’ve gotten great reception with Verizon the entire time almost everywhere in Irvine. We were dazzled by an offer from AT&T in the summer of 2008, and we tried it for about 6 months. We got near-zero reception at the condo we were living in in Woodbridge at the time, and we got lousy reception at other places around town. We beat feet back to Verizon as fast as we could, and we’ve been very happy with them since returning in Oct. 2008. We did NOT pay any early termination fees to AT&T. The only thing we gave them as we left was the finger (and lots of bad word-of-mouth).
So, while I definitely agree with the bad reception from AT&T, I’ve only had good coverage and service from Verizon.
-Darth
Disclaimer: We don’t live in Woodbury, and I can’t recall ever trying to use my phone there, so perhaps that is a pocket of bad coverage for Verizon.
DF, fair enough…ironically even though it is a mobile phone you end up using it most often around your house…and here in Woodbury both my wife’s 3GS on ATT and my son’s simple Verizon phone get bad reception in the house. I have a Verizon netbook as well with the built-in modem and it works much better when I travel then when I use it here.
My work mobile is ATT however I can verify that it gets bad reception everywhere in Irvine.
“I’m thinking of investing in a signal strengthener/repeater.”
Get a Femtocell….problem solved.
AZDavidPhx,
I don’t agree with your distinction between future and past expenditure.
First, the cell phone contract is not necessarily about future earnings of the carrier. Often, it is to cover the amortized cost of the phone they gave you at a significant discount up front. Part of the fee is to pay in full for the phone you didn’t pay for.
Second, a mortgage contract is not consumption as it is buying a tangible asset that has not depreciated in value with use. When the bank gives you the money to buy a house, the intelligent bankers only give you 80% of the value to cover themselves for any potential decrease in value and any disposition costs should they have to foreclose.
If we were talking about borrowing money for a vacation — which many people did with their HELOCs — then I might see your argument about consumption, but then again, that would simply underscore how stupid lenders are.
To your final point, I would agree that lenders should be more careful about extending unsecured debt. When people default on unsecured debt, the lender often loses everything. I think that is great. Perhaps they will loan less next time or not at all. I see no greater societal benefit that comes from unsecured lending.
I will concede that part of the break fee is the cost of the phone. But that doesn’t change anything.
Would you argue that breaking a cell phone contract and paying an ETF is the same thing as paying for 2 years worth of service using a credit card and then stopping payment on the credit card because some new service offered you some new plan for half as much?
I see an obvious difference between the two and the latter is far more similar to a strategic defaulter’s scenario than the former.
Am I the only one a bit baffled by the salary this man was earning, $117,000 is a lot of money. I don’t know about the Air Force salary structure and it was noted he was near mandatory retirement so maybe this is normal. However, I am shocked at the amount.
Hey, It’s good to work for the Federal Government These Days
No, I am not baffled whatsoever. Welcome to the new world order.
Don’t kid yourself, government salaries aren’t as high as you’d think.
As a former government employee, I would have to agree with this statement. When I graduated from college and began working for the government, there was a generational gap. We had a group of the legacy employees in their 50s and this new generation of recent college grads, with nobody in the middle.
My starting salary was miserably low; after paying rent, utilities, and student loans, there was barely enough for food and transportation. Never mind any money for a new car (which I badly needed at the time) or entertainment. I had friends who didn’t bother going to college and they were making more money as heavy machinery operators, with no loans to worry about paying back.
Back in the day this may have been the norm, but the reality is this is not the case anymore.
Since we are using personal experience as the bar of what is true, I know many younger new federal/state employees living very comfortably, working 35 hours a week, with a great retirement plan, health, dental, and vision benefits. Many recent studies have been release stating that federal and state employees exceed the salary and benefits of those working in the private sector.
Didn’t Obama say that student loans will be forgiven if the student goes into government work…
1. start a school teaching government work.
2. enroll students using student loans
3. profit
I just heard that the sovereign debt crisis is contained. Whew, what a relief!
http://peterschiffblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/is-sovereign-debt-crisis-contained-to.html
Europe figured out that they can play the same game. Print money and let banks invest the 0% money into Sovereign debt. Everybody wins except folks with cash in 0.5% savings accounts.
“Everybody wins except folks with cash in 0.5% savings accounts.”
Are you being serious or sarcastic?
That depends on whether or not the game leads to World War III.
Tax the rich? The rich have the most to loose if the system falls apart. Seems vaguely fair to me.
…except most of the EU has high unemployment…and will be dealing w/ deflation not inflation…but other than that I guess you’re right.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/37061639
Take a look at the below link. Maybe the guy wants to make more money on the way up.
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/05/report-112-million-us-properties-with.html
It’s 11.2Million, not 112 Million properties w/NegEq. 5Mil w/ > 25% NegEq, which is pretty much the threshold point.
Here’s another problem with business as usual:
“Moody’s Economy.com projects that prices in 61% of metro areas will return to recent peak levels by 2015.”
Considering Moody’s track record on ratings and projections recently, I know how much I’d value their quick return to peak levels prediction. It’s not even a case of learning from history or not, how about learning from the present?
Need advice on strategic default. Bought a condo in Irvine for $410K in January 06. I owe $305K now. I could probably sell it between $285K – $300K. Currently, I’m renting it out for $1700/month. The monthly cost of ownership including mortgage, HOA, taxes, insurance is about $2500. I can eat the loss indefinitely. My questions is, should I eat the loss and wait for home prices to rise? Or should I strategically default?
Prices will not rise significantly any time soon, IMHO-you would probably have to wait at least a decade or so. Since you are so close to owing what it’s worth, you might try to sell it for that, or even bringing a small amount of money to the table, unless you are willing to take the hit to your credit report that a short sale or foreclosure would cause. But losing $800 a month for a decade waiting for appreciation is probably the worst option, IMHO.
Thanks for the advice Geotpf. However, I’m not quite losing $800/month. Every month, at least $434 (and increasing) is going towards the principal and I’m able to deduct some of the interest and real estate taxes. Taking these two factors into consideration, i’m about even or losing $100-200/month. Would you still recommend selling or should I stay the course? Thanks ahead of time.
according to a randomly selected online amoritization calculator by 2013 or 2016 you will no longer be bleeding money so long as rents stay the same and you have no vacancy costs (etc). So that’s 3-6 more years of 100-200 monthly loses, or about another $3000-$6000 down the drain after your 20% DP, ~$80k. So you’re essentially paying another $3k to have the potential to recapture some of that $80k. (and save your credit score)
If your loss estimates are accurate and you feel you’ve sufficiently worked in the vacancy and maintainence costs, I’d say holding onto the condo is probably worth it. But, once 2 years(?) has passed your cost basis on a rental for capital gains becomes the condo’s worth at the point you started renting it out, and you no longer have the $500k capital gains shelter. So if it does appreciate and you sell, Uncle Sam will take a cut unless you transfer it into another rental property delaying the capital gains.
A popular practice these days is to skim the rent and not pay the mortgage. Have you considered adding this strategy to your investment portfolio?
I have thought about this option. But I can’t convince myself to do it. I can careless about the lender, but I do care about my tenant.
what kind of loan?
I have a 30 year fixed rate loan at 6%.
Are you being serious?
~Misstrial
Tom,
Your case is borderline which makes it a tough call. I think your best bet is to try to sell into this bear rally and get someone else to take on your debt.
If you were positively cashflowing or near so, I would probably tell you to hold on as there is no compelling reason to sell, but since you are negatively cashflowing, you may want to consider selling or defaulting.
Look at it this way: you have an option contract. This condo costs you money each month like time decay on an option contract. If prices go up, and your option comes back into the money, the small amount you lose each month can be recouped; however, if it takes many years for your option to come into the money, then the negative cashflow is money wasted.
At what point do you give up? Once you decide to wait and see, it will always look like recovery is just around the corner.
If you will make more money strategically defaulting, then you should do it. If the bank is upset about it, they should have read the contract more closely.
this assumes your loan is non-recourse.
from a letter from TIC to all residents of Woodbury dated May 4, 2010:
“In fact, since the neighborhoods known collectively as The 2010 New Home Collection debuted in late January, nearly 400 homes have been purchased, a clear sign that the recession is over – and a clear sign still that Woodbury remains a highly desirable place to live and raise a family”.
I’m sure all the people with NODs in Woodbury are rejoicing now that the “recession is over”! TIC, since the recession is over maybe then you wouldn’t mind helping all the underwater Woodbury homedebtors?
A clear sign the recession is over. TIC is in business to build/sell houses and make a profit…would we expect anything else from them. If I were to purchase one of the Collection houses, I would ask them for a written guarantee that prices won’t go down. Talk is cheap, put your money where your mouth is!
Oh in the meantime Fannie Mae lost another 13 Billion
But who cares – the Irvine Company sold 400 houses! Yee HAAW!
Recession is clearly over[ for TIC ]
I must give credit to the Irvine Company for the way they have handled the public perception of what they are doing. Their marketing message is clear, and their marketing materials are first-rate.
IR, last week (or so) you posted a map of NODs and foreclosures. The square area of Woodbury (bordered by Jeffrey, Irvine, Sand Canyon and Trabuco) was so covered with NOD’s and foreclosures that not a milimeter of open ground peeked through. All these people bought into TIC’s promises to defend property values to one extent or another. How does selling 400 (admittedly very nice) new homes on the edges of the development compensate for the carnage in the core of the development? I know from talking to desperate would-be sellers that the new homes have sucked up all the qualified buyers interested in this neighborhood. Where does that leave the owner of the last generation must-have TIC home? If TIC instead had developed the open space into the promised Woodbury Middle School as well into further value adding (park/pool etc) amenities the first generation Woodbury homedebtors would have been much better off.
The fact is TIC is only interested in the next sale. That would be fine if they didn’t spend so much time falsely promising to care about the people who have already purchased.
RE: AT&T and Irvine reception
If you have bad reception at home, AT & T has a microcell product that just came out you can buy to fix that. Try your local AT&T store.
http://www.wireless.att.com:80/learn/why/3gmicrocell/
I have T-Mobile which recently went to an off-shore (Philipines) call center for its 411 services.
Am considering going to another provider – I’ve had 4 mess-ups since English is not their first or primary language. EX: “San Francisco? Is that a city? How do you spell?”
Does ATT or Verizon have US call centers for 411?
Thanks in advance.
~Misstrial
If a carrier has call centers in USA, maybe they can advertise it like a marketing tool.
“We here at (business name) employ US citizens for our call center help to better serve our customers.”
Disclaimer: for this kind of service we are charging $5 more/month.
The extra charge would be OK with me.
It is tiresome, time-consuming, and wastes my minutes to enunciate and spell everything out for some person in the Philipines etc.
~Misstrial
Sprint’s customer service reps are based in the United States (at least during daytime hours), however it’s easier for me to understand a Filipino accent than it is for the deep-southern drawl from Sprint’s CSRs.
Sprint also outsources service calls to the Philippines during evening hours. There’s no problem with English; the problem is usually the quality of the VoIP call. You’d think a phone company would be able to handle technical problems like that.
Hey IR,
On a completely unrelated topic, I wanted to get your advice on a broker who double-ended a transaction on a REO listing in TR.
The escrow just closed and the exact closing price was the price that I had offered. I had offered 20% down and was pre-qualified and have score of 760+. I was the first to submit an offer but when the final offer was accepted, I was told I was the back up offer. The preponderance of the evidence is that she told her buyer to match my offer and never even gave me an opportunity to counter.
She should have been looking out for the interest of the bank and if the exact same offer came in, should ask for some type of counter bid right?
Obviously the house is gone but is there some agency or state ethics board I can report her to? Will the bank care that they could have gotten more? She has double ended about 40% of her transactions.
If the banks didn’t play enough games with inventory, we have agents doing this BS too. Totally PO. Any advice? TIA.
Tia,
We have been seeing the phenomenon you describe a lot. You are likely seeing exactly what happened in this scenario. I don’t have a problem with the agent double ending the deal, but it is clearly unethical for the agent to give special information to their buyer and cause the seller to get a less competitive bid.
Of course, if the seller is the bank, and if the bank doesn’t care as long as they sell the property, then there isn’t anything that can be done. The bank is truly the aggrieved party in the transaction; although, I know that doesn’t make you feel better since you didn’t get the house.
In the end, you did help the bank get a higher price by bidding on the property. You were simply a pawn of the listing agent to help set the lowest possible price for their buyer. In short, you were used. The really unethical part is that you didn’t know that going in. If you had, you probably wouldn’t have participated.
Post the agents name if you wish to warn others. I won’t delete it.
Hi Tia;
Did the listing agent have the bank or asset manager sign off rejecting the offer? If not the agent has no proof that the offer was presented and you may have a case on those grounds. I recommend that you speak to your agent about going that route, with the right paper trail the listing agent could face fines etc from the board. These agents need to know that people know what they are doing and it’s not acceptable.
I have been dealt with this on occasion and I wish I had time to file complaints.
I’ll disagree.
Yesterday’s definition of “premium” is different from today’s… and SoCal’s.
Irvine offers many things in one place that other cities cannot:
– Safety
– Central location with quick access to 55/405/5.
– New homes
– Open space
– University
– Ethnic dining
– Quality education
– Close to job centers
There are more and some of these are subject to perception, viewpoint and opinion but it’s difficult to name another city in Orange County that can match all of those items.
The long haul started many years ago and Irvine has held its value better than surrounding cities which lends even more to the “premium” perception. And while Irvine may get all the press, cities adjacent to it that share similar traits also share similar premiums. Irvine may not be special to you… but there is large part of both the local and foreign population who think otherwise.
yes, and I would like to add the following:
Each one of my doctors and my dentist are in Irvine.
The quality of medical care is premium care for which residents in other areas of the country would have to do some serious travel to replicate.
EX: A former NM boss chose to travel to Houston TX for cancer surgery and Colorado for Lasik. She would never consider anyone in NM. The dentists there are horrendous and when I temporarily lived in NM I used to drive to Tucson or drove out here to Irvine for even basic services.
Another thing: in OC/Cali you get attentive, driven people working in stores, salons, spas, etc. The caliber of employee is much much better here than in other states. Although there are exceptions, those exceptions are few.
All of this lessens stress of dealing with incompetents. And if you are always busy with tasks of your own, like I seem to be, working with attentive purposeful people is one of the many perks to living in the OC and in Irvine.
~Misstrial
I agree. It is really nice…for Orange County. You are still much more likely to have someone break into your house than most of the country…it is centrally located to all of those heavily congested freeways…and does have new homes with no yard and HOAs…bull$hit on the open space…UCI is average, and you could live somewhere better and save the money to send your kid to a better school with some history…ethnic dining…or if the DTI wasn’t so high in Irvine you could travel and eat the real stuff once and a while…quality education, I guess…if you mean KUMON tutoring leading to higher test scores…
…just trying to play a little devil’s advocate…sorry.
The only problem.. ok second problem since I detest the fascist HOAs… in Irvine is overzealous cops.
Example: A few years ago we were overwhelmed by cute white bunnies that ate my doggone tomatoes and what not.
I wanted to shoot the cute little bastards.
So, I called the County’s Vector Control… sorry, they said, nothing we can do. It they were rats we’d trap them, but cute bunnies.. come on sir, you must be an evil, cruel man.
Well, fresh tomatoes are priceless… So I called the IPD.
I asked them if they could do anything about it… nope, they said. So, I asked them if they minded if I used a gun… a little rifle, a 22…. Oh boy! They gave me the “You must be a Charlie Manson type.. we can not recommend that”.
Heck.. in most parts of the country, I could have shot at the fuzzy bastards with a 45 while smoking a cigar and drinking a good cognac… heck, the local cops might come by and help me out with the cottontailed robbers… But NOT IN IRVINE.
Yikes.
RE: bunnies –
I take it you’ve never been to Orange County Farm Supply?
~Misstrial