I need somebody to help me find a blue state where I can afford a 4 bedroom 2400 sf home.
I’m at twice the median income in my city and my house cost 280k built in 2020. Not to mention interest these days really kill the possibility of moving when I got a 2.75% interest rate and no PMI.
Thanks for the try but I’ve had a 35 year old house the energy consumption difference and upkeep cost is astounding compared to my current new build.
But yea I don’t think I’ve considered NE I’ve been everywhere else. I think that’s also fairly safe climate change wise? Or maybe it was a specific state according to pbs eons.
35 isn’t old for a house. It’s a one-time insulation upgrade. Maybe new appliances and lights, but other than that I don’t see a problem? Idk. I don’t own a home because I make less than the median income and homes start at 800k here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Not trying to be antagonistic, just stating my situation as a vent :)
I really am interested in knowing the details of why a 35 year old house is a no-go for you.
I am a bit curious where the balance is for how much shit you’ll put up with if it means a lower cost of living (or bigger/cheaper home, anyway). I’m personally of the stance I will pay (or give up) a significant amount of money to live in a good, mostly sane place.
It’s obviously a balancing act. Nobody will give up all their money to have marginally better emotional safety. But where is the line? How much better do things have to be in a different place (or how much worse in your current place) to accept, say, a small apartment that costs a solid third of your income? Or inversely, would you put up with a Gilead situation if you got a sprawling mansion out of it?
I need somebody to help me find a blue state where I can afford a 4 bedroom 2400 sf home.
I’m at twice the median income in my city and my house cost 280k built in 2020. Not to mention interest these days really kill the possibility of moving when I got a 2.75% interest rate and no PMI.
stares at you in Australian
hysterical laughter
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/64-Turner-Ave-Torrington-CT-06790/197790219_zpid/
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/337-S-Windham-Rd-Willimantic-CT-06226/58124097_zpid/
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/235-Harland-Rd-Norwich-CT-06360/61996278_zpid/
Thanks for the try but I’ve had a 35 year old house the energy consumption difference and upkeep cost is astounding compared to my current new build.
But yea I don’t think I’ve considered NE I’ve been everywhere else. I think that’s also fairly safe climate change wise? Or maybe it was a specific state according to pbs eons.
35 isn’t old for a house. It’s a one-time insulation upgrade. Maybe new appliances and lights, but other than that I don’t see a problem? Idk. I don’t own a home because I make less than the median income and homes start at 800k here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Not trying to be antagonistic, just stating my situation as a vent :)
I really am interested in knowing the details of why a 35 year old house is a no-go for you.
I am a bit curious where the balance is for how much shit you’ll put up with if it means a lower cost of living (or bigger/cheaper home, anyway). I’m personally of the stance I will pay (or give up) a significant amount of money to live in a good, mostly sane place.
It’s obviously a balancing act. Nobody will give up all their money to have marginally better emotional safety. But where is the line? How much better do things have to be in a different place (or how much worse in your current place) to accept, say, a small apartment that costs a solid third of your income? Or inversely, would you put up with a Gilead situation if you got a sprawling mansion out of it?
Same boat here.