NolaLovingClemsonFan

quote:

---

The worst one to me is Indiana, but I also completely understand that there’s recency bias here.

---

This x1000, especially bc of what has happened to overall quality with the transfer portal. Typically we as humans are guilty of recency bias, but it’s sort of accepted that humans have always gotten bigger, faster, stronger so there is some reason to defer to recent performance.

With these structural changes, though, the overall quality of play has absolutely regressed at the uppermost level. Back in early 2000s and mid 2010s, the dominant programs used to absolutely stack talent that they had developed for ages before actually playing any of the kids. It’s night and day from what we see now where kids are jumping left and right, no continuity, new systems constantly.

A team like 2018 Clemson, that is current behind Indiana, would absolutely baptize that team. 2018 Clemson dog walked a Bama team that folks were saying greatest ever before the game.

What that Indiana team did relative to the current level of competition was incredibly impressive, but if you put them on the field with that or any of those LSU / Bama / UGA teams, it would be a massacre.

quote:

---

Last season was season 5. Season 6 comes out soon. And Season 8 just started filming. That’s not a typo. Season 7 is already finished (filming at least…no idea about edity, ect).

---

It’s the most reliable, consistent, well-made show out there. They come out seemingly like clockwork.

Season is def legit, but damn Rahenera is such an awful ruler lol. It’s so frustrating it’s almost laughable.

quote:

---

This is a great question. My girlfriend and I are thinking about getting married and houses in our desired area are in the $700k range. We take home about $24k a month and could technically afford it but after property tax and insurance we would be at about $6k a month. I am frugal and am not very comfortable with this but she’s adamant she wants the good school district. We are 34 and 31 so at this point in our lives we only want to buy once

---

Y’all take home $24K a month and are worried about covering a $6K a month note?!? That hits the 25% rule, and I don’t think the 25% rule scales very well personally. You’d still have $18K after mortgage for monthly living. Doesn’t strike me as pushing it at all.

Wtf how no VAR? That French defender’s arm looked like it was extended and kept him onside!!!

quote:

---

Then what happens when...

AC blows out
Roof leaks and Insurance says not their problem
Named storm deductible hits
Wife has twins
One of you gets laid off lots of bad scenarios.

Only time I would do that is to flip it in a growing market.

---

No doubt. All of our monthly budget calcs are independent of a 6 month emergency fund, but this would def make topping that back up harder if we ever did have to dip into it.

quote:

---

If you are secure in your job then go for this.

The conventional wisdom of buying small, then upgrading once you have kids can be really REALLY poor from a financial perspective. No one likes to take this into account, but buying/selling and moving costs money. A lot of money at times.

The A+ neighborhood will also more likely appreciate faster/weather downturns better. There's probably a good chance that if you pass on the A+ neighborhood now, you may never get back.

I was in an A+ neighborhood, moved for work, then just a couple years later moved back. Despite making more than double what we made when we originally bought in the A+ neighborhood, we were priced out once we moved back. We still got into a great neighborhood, but the "get in" price for the neighborhood we really wanted (and had previously owned) went astronomical and we just couldn't make the numbers really work unless we cut back on other things like investments, which we weren't willing to do.

Obviously if you have variable income, or are in a vulnerable/cyclical industry, it may not be wise to max out your housing budget, but if it's reasonably doable with your budget and income, I would 100% go for the A+ neighborhood.

As you mentioned in your post, if you have a path, it can be really amazing to be secure in your home for decades vs knowing that you will want to move as soon as the opportunity presents itself. The psychological effects of knowing you're where you want to be vs knowing deep down you want to move can be substantial.

You may very well be house poor for a few years, but if a refinance opportunity or two pops up and/or your income naturally increases over the years you'll be very very happy you bit the bullet now. Maybe your businesses go absolutely bonkers, but there's a real possibility that you'll be house poor anyway if you ever decide to move to the A+ neighborhood down the line. Personally, I'd rather be house poor younger, with younger kids vs house poor in my prime earning years with older kids in the home.

---

You just summed up everything I think about when considering doing it. Thank you for that!

I’d say we’re both in fairly stable industries. The biggest variable, as someone mentioned, is if the wife wants to hang-up the cleats after kids. She’s adamant she doesn’t, atleast not until there are multiple kids so I feel like we have 3-4 years before that would happen.

In my mind, we could save during those 3-4 years, she should be able to sell the business for a comfortable exit if she ever did retire, and by that time, if my business is doing what we expect it to do, then we’d be fine.

That’s the argument for doing it. I know it’s not a given either way, but I do agree with the house poor young vs old comment, 1000% agree with that. Most of my friends with young kids don’t do shite (in a good way) besides stay home and play with their kids. Once they’re teens and beyond we’d wanna take em places but shite, when they’re young, grilling and hanging at the house seems like a great time to pinch pennies!

My wife and I are looking at homes, and we have what I would say is a reasonable budget that should allow us to either get a small, somewhat dated but still nice home in an A location or a newish, bigger home in a B location.

In each scenario, we should be able to get a nice option, but either will likely be a 7-10 year home. We don’t have kids yet but plan to, and the small home in the A location will likely get too small once we do, while the big home in the B location doesn’t feed into the middle and high school districts that my wife wants. So in each scenario we’d need to move.

I had accepted that and always assumed it would be the plan, but we just found a home that is full family sized in an absolute A+ neighborhood. It is something that we could afford right now, so we’re not being entirely reckless, but it would be absolutely slamming the top of our monthly budget, way more than I’d ever expected to pay. It also would assume that we do make more in the future as we know our expenses will go up once kids come along.

Anyone ever gotten real aggressive like this? I don’t love the idea of the stress. Right now and with our finances on the previous home options we’d looked at, we’re very comfortable and don’t really feel that strained. This would be the exact opposite of that. We’d need to be laser focused on each month’s budget.

Part of me hates that idea, but another part of me actually thinks that level of discipline will actually be good for us longterm as right now there’s a pretty sizeable gap between what we bring in and what we spend so we do have alot of the fvck-its on dumb spending. I also love the idea of basically not having to move for decades. I know you can never know with life, but both of us own our own companies and they’re local companies so I don’t imagine we’ll ever have a work reason to move. There wouldn’t be a space reason to move here, and I look back now at some of the families I grew up around who are in the same house now that they were in when I was a kid (30 years ago), and I think to myself damn that type of stability would be incredible.

Anyone gone through this type of analysis with their SO, and anyone actually took the plunge on this type of a stretch?

And just like that, instead of 2-0 it’s 1-1

Cleats to the face. Call VAR to make that a red.

How could that POSSIBLY be a free kick for Mexico?!?