The benifits of selling a house!!!!!

[Nat]

No body seems to have much going on so I thought I would tell my story. I read Egon's post on the joy of fly fishing, and it reminded me of Vickie and I selling houses. We married in 1973 and promptly bought our first "love nest". It needed a few things fixed, so being the handy guy that I am I went to work. The purchase price was 10,000. Not a lot by todays standards, but a fortune to us then. I added a carport, a fireplace, and central heat and air conditioning, and did a good bit of painting and general fixing up. Our payments were 108.00 per months for 10 years and I was sure we couldn't make it so I worked all the overtime I could and did small welding jobs on the side. My Christmas present from Vickie that first year was a Craftsman 235 AC welder.
We lived there for 2 years and then sold it for 19,900.00. I thought we were rich. We then built a new house and our payments were 235.00 for 20 years. Now I was starting to wonder if I was really getting ahead. We lived there almost exactly 1 year and sold it for 49,000.00. Again we made a good profit, so we started on the next new house. I bought a 20 acre tract of land and started on house # 3. When it was finished I suddenly had payments of 425.00 a month for 30 years. I told Vickie I couldn't stand to make any more money on houses, or I wouldn't be able to afford it.
Well, we sold that one also after 4 years. We now had a family of 4, so I bought a 5 acre tract and started on #4. We lived there for 12 years, and both thought it would be our last. The # 1 son went off to college, and it seemed to big and empty, so we sold it and started on #5. I took 8 months of working on it and also had the busiest season ever putting in pools. I should have left well enough alone, but when baby daughter # 2 went off for a higher education, then got a job and bought her own house it seemed to big and empty, so guess what. I sold that house and bought the 7 acres we just finished building on.
Now as all of you are witnesses, I ain't agoing to do it again.
My hands hurt, my back hurts, my knees done bend like they used to, and I can't rest nearly as fast as I used to. This time I know I can't afford to make any more money on houses.
I still have the welder she bought me that first Christmas, and still have the best partner/friend/lover/cook anyone could ever hope to have, some things never change,Later, Nat

[Pat]

Nat, See if you can spot the trend... The house I am just about moved into has about 5000 sq ft of indoor living space plus a two story shop plus 48x21 shed plus 3 car garage etc. Previous house of about 20 years was a bit under 1500 sq ft and had an attached car port. House before that was about 800 sq ft with a detached garage we never had a car in. I too don't want to continue the trend as it would be too much $ and two much work.

The 800 sq ft was one of two houses on q postage stamp lot in a so so neighborhood. We paid $17K for the pair and really woried about where we were going to get $125 EVERY month for 20 years. We traded that property for the 160 acres with 10 ponds that we just built on.

[img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Pat [img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[Nat]

Hey pat, I'm going smaller for the last three times, instead of larger. I'm not sure I could find Vickie in your house. I'd have to call her on the phone. I bet I'd have to pack a lunch to go sit on the front porch.
What kind of time frame for completion?BTW, I agree with the other posted on you putting in a RV site for all us RV'ers who want to see more of OK.
I sure don't want to camp in New Orleans area anytime soon, those folks sure need our prayers and best wishes.
We camped just outside on NO a couple years ago in Bayou Signette State park and I'm sure it is underwater now. I hope no members of this board are displaced by this huge storm.
Later, Nat

[Pat]

Nat, To use a bit of Egon's jargot... SHE WHO MUST BE OBEYED influenced this last escolation. I'm just the architect... I just did what I was told... I was just following orders... I can only accept about 1/4 of the blame... OK, maybe 1/3! I caused the basement and the garage-shop.

Where in the house is Vickie? A new parlor game, replacing "Where in the World is Carmen San Diego." Actually there are built in intercom stations scattered through the house. Alternatively if you got clever and monitored the IR motion detector inputs to the alarm panel with a bit of interface hardware and some software you could track her movements as she moved through the house with little extra cost or effort.

About Katrina and similar...

I really feel sorry for the folks who have no control over where they are (kids etc.) but I have a rather different view as relates to adults.

If I were the benevolent dictator in charge of disaster mitigation I would make it such that NO ONE would rebuild a second time in a generally improvident location. An example sceanario: You live in a low lying flood prone location. You get flooded out. Your insurance and any assistance from Governmental agencies can either 1. help you rebuild where you are but this removes you from any future Government disaster assistance and permanently marks your property as not qualifying for suce assistance ever again. OR 2. An arbitration panel tries to find a suitable trade for you that is located in an area not prone to repetitive damage. If successful the trade is made and your old property becomes government property and is never used for human habitation again. Large tracts of newly acquired Government property can be leased for agricultural use, made into parks, or other provident uses but not private residences or anything requiring repetitive intervention by governmental agencies. Ahhh, The new Florida Federal National Seashores recreational area. Open to all citizens for day use and camping for nominal fees. OF course if you have the determination to go it alone, you could retain private ownership of disaster prone property, sans Government assistance.

Look at an extreme but REAL instance, BANGLADESH. Most of Bangladesh should not be used for human habitation. Why is it? Because it is there and so useless that the empowered don't want it. The poor, the homeless, the folks who can't do better are attracted to it BECAUSE IT IS THERE and the competition is not as difficult. It has always and will always be subject to storm damage. It is NOT A PROVIDENT LOCATION for human habitation but it is occupied and it is a burden on the welfare agencies of the world to CONTINUALLY render assistace to people living where it is patently absurd to expect to be able to live.

There are similar areas in the US, not just hurricane targets but also areas repetitively subject to flooding. Why should MY INSURANCE rates have to be raised so that people can repetitively rebuild in a known flood prone area? Why should my tax dollars continually be wasted rebuilding in a BAD location?

There are areas and circumstances where it might be in the national interest to provide assistance in engineering projects to protect regions from flooding. Protecting a general region from flooding might be more economical, over time, than rebuilding all thle individual scenes of destruction over and over and over. It might cost as much in taxes as it costs us all in insurance, in the short run, but could be a better deal in the long run and cost less over a person's tax and insurance paying lifetime.

Want to live in Florida in sight of the beach? OK but there is a fairly stiff Federal surtax on your property tax used to fund disaster relief. Why should the midwest be milked to pump up someones wishful thinking in Florida. I am not sure it should be optional but if it were and you opt out of the Federal program YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN.

Everyone in the country should pull together to assist any citizes in ceratin situations. Repetitively rebuilding in clearly improvident locations is NOT one of those qualifying situations and is a wrong headed waste of our tax dollars. You can't remain in the buisness of underwriting the lifestyle choices of a small percentage of the population at great expense to the uninvolved forever without expecting a backlash.

[img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Pat [img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[egon]

Sounds cruel but if one wants to live below the water level one may have to expect some water in their life.

Egon

[Nat]

Pat,you said what I think. This whole country was founded on the principal that government shouldn't run our lives, but the first thing out of the mouth of those folks that have been rescued( after ignoring repeted warnings to leave) is some body (ie, the government) needs to help us. I am all in favor of helping people, I was raised that way, and the bible tells us we are supposed to help less fortunate folks. God knows those people in NO need a lot of help, but I'm not in of the mind that I need to pay to rebuild NO.
Galveston Texas was raised 9 ft, to stop the flooding, and it worked. AND, the whole country wasn't asked to pay for it. The rest of the US wouldn't be hurt if there was no Galveston TX, so the people of TX did it themselves.
Speaking of Texas, the whole country needs to drop to their knees and give thanks for Texas, the job they are doing for the refugees from LA is outstanding. That is some of the most selfless things I've ever seen.
well enough of my soapbox, I'll let someone else get up on it for a while, later, Nat

[Pat]

I know I risk offending someone with my disaster aid comments but please note that I have NO ill will toward the innocent folks who have been betrayed by "the system." Take, for example, New Orleans. The situation there was predictable, a ticking bomb, a roll of the dice... you roll enough times and you get snake eyes.

If it is determined that New Orleans is a National Treasure, National Historic location or some such and as such should be preserved then we the taxpayers should build sufficient flood control measures to protect it. If, on the other hand, it is a slum in need of urban renewal we should have removed the populaltiion by right of imminent domain and condemnation procedurres and made other use than residential property of the area. To just let "status quo" ride till it becomes a photo op for CNN is not provident.

At the least, definitive information should have been presented to the populace years ago, detailing the consequences of a hurricane so they could be responsible for making decisions regarding their own welfare and safety.

A parting shot... See all the brave tourists suffering mightily? The Hurricane did not swoop down on them suddenly without warning. They choose to ignore the prudent actions required to AVOID the problem, instead relying on wishful thinking that THEY are special and will be spared any inconvenience. So they waited to see before inconveniencing themselves and upsetting any vacation and travel plans. Well, they have seen now but expect hurculean efforts to be expended on their behalf because they were too stupid and self centered to do the prudent thing.

[img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Pat [img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]