土地常識 zt
来源: 表情符号 于 07-06-16 19:50:55 [档案] [博客] [旧帖] [转至博客] [给我悄悄话]
土地常識
一、土地的性質
Agricultural (農業性質土地): A1、A2、RA
Residential (住宅性質土地): RE40、RE20、RE15、RE11、RE9、RS、R1、RW1、RW2、R2、
R1.5、RD2、RD3、RD4、RD5、RD6、R3、R4、R5
Commercial (商業性質土地): CR、C1、C1.5、C2、C4、C5、CM
Industrial (工業性質土地): MR1、MR2、M1、M2、M3
Zoning key
Residential zones
RR-2.5 rural residential; 1 unit / 2.5 acres
RR-1 rural residential; 1 unit / 1 acres
SRR Semi-Rural Residential; 1-2 units / 1 acre
R-15,000 Single Family Residential on 15,000 sq. ft. lots
R-10,000 Single Family Residential on 10,000 sq. ft. lots
R-8,500 Single Family Residential on 8,500 sq. ft. lots
R-7,000 Single Family Residential on 7,000 sq. ft. lots
MDR "Moderate Density Residential of 6.6-15 units/acre
(8 du/ac entitlement density; additional facilities required for higher densitites)"
HDR "High Density Residential of 15.1-30 units/acre
(15.1 du/ac entitlement density; additional facilities required for higher densities)."
MHP Mobile Home Park
Commercial Zones
C General Commercial
CBD Central Business District
CPD Commercial Planned Development
H Hospital
OP Office Professional
RC Regional Commercial
Industrial Zones
LI Light Industrial
HI Heavy Industrial
Special Purpose and Combining Zones
VM Vegetative Management Overlay
O Open Space
SP
Specific Plan
Public and Quasi-Public Facility
H Hospital
P Public
O Open Space
二、土地投資十大要點
1. 可用而平坦的土地
2. 充足的水源
3. 要靠近大都市
4. 有便利的交通網
5. 有縣計劃
6. 有公共設施及預算
7. 目前和將來的學校
8. 現在和計劃中的工業設施
9. 現在和計劃中的商業設施
10. 人口增長
三、土地的稅收
美國聯邦政府征收的稅種:
1、所得稅 Income Tax
(a) 普遍收益Ordinary Income
(b) 資本收益Capital Gains (以投資收益方式課稅)
2、贈與稅 Gift Tax
3、遺產稅 Estate Tax
美國州政府徴收的稅種:
4、所得稅 Income Tax
(a) 普通收益 Ordinary Income
(b) 投資收益 Capital Gains
5、贈與稅 Gift Tax
6、遺產稅 Inheritance Tax
當地城市政府徴收的稅種﹔
7、房地產稅 Real Property Tax
四、土地的交易手續
在美國土地交易手續，是由專門的過戶手續公司（Escrow Company）辦理的，這些公司都須要向政府繳納保証金，取得執業執照后，才能營業。這些公司的任務就是代理買賣雙方辦理一切有關買賣手續，諸如：合同、土地契據、所有權保險、市政府報告、文件登記以及一切資金或費用上的授受等事務。等到賣主將所有文件交給該公司，買主將定金、土地款、委托該公司，一切文件及款項辦理完畢，在買主所有權向政府正式登記之后，該公司就可將一切費用和賣主結算清楚，完成工作。
五、土地開發
土地購置后，在土地的範圍之內，按照土地種類性質，根據各地區、城市的規劃、設計法規進行房屋建築的規劃、設計，它的規劃設計。
六、美國土地的劃分
1 section (段) = 1 mile (英哩) x 1 mile (英哩)
= 5,280 feet (英尺) x 5,280 feet (英尺)
1 Acre = 1,224.26 坪
= 0.42 台甲
= 4,046.88 square meter (平方米)
= 37 公畝
= 43,560 square feet (平方英尺)
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
信用卡小窍门，怎样要回late fee, finance chagre
这可是根据本人与信用卡公司斗争的实战经验总结出来的，与大家分享。
如果你不小心晚付或者少付了信用卡，就会发现下个月有 late fee, finance charge 之类的几十块，很不爽。这个时候你跟信用卡公司argue多半没有什么效果。你可以这么干，先把信用卡balance付清，停用这个卡几天，相信大家都有不少别的卡。等确认信用卡balance是零，再打电话过去。这个时候大家都心知肚明了，不退钱就把卡关掉。我是每次都把钱这样要回来了。如果还是不退钱，这样的烂卡还要它作甚？关了罢
如果你不小心晚付或者少付了信用卡，就会发现下个月有 late fee, finance charge 之类的几十块，很不爽。这个时候你跟信用卡公司argue多半没有什么效果。你可以这么干，先把信用卡balance付清，停用这个卡几天，相信大家都有不少别的卡。等确认信用卡balance是零，再打电话过去。这个时候大家都心知肚明了，不退钱就把卡关掉。我是每次都把钱这样要回来了。如果还是不退钱，这样的烂卡还要它作甚？关了罢
Monday, March 19, 2007
投资油田
我几年前曾在加州Bakersfirld附近买了一块人迹罕至,鸟不生蛋,但有矿产权的土地.后来有石油商的代理人找我签约租赁石油勘探开采权.在与他们打交道的过程中,我也学了一点这方面的知识.
首先说明其它州的情况与加州可能不同,我不了解.
在加州,我们平时说的和做的房地产买卖都是指地表权(Surface right)的交易.在同一块土地上还有其他不动产的所有权并不一定随Surface right的转移而转移.这些权利包括:矿产权(Mineral Right)和伐木权(Timber Right).这些权利与地表权是可以分离的.也就是说同一块土地上的这些权利可能属于不同的主人.
矿产权的交易通常需要专门从事矿产权交易的Realtor来做代理.这需要不同的License.在加州做普通房地产的Realtor据说有50万以上. 但能做矿产权的交易的Realtor没有几个,而且几乎都在Bakersfield附近(那里是加州石油重镇).近几年石油,天然气价格高涨,这方面的交易也变得活跃起来.
在一个鸟不生蛋的地方,一块土地的矿产权的价值可能大大高于地表权的价值.在山林地区,伐木权的价值也很可能大大高于地表权的价值.
说到回抱,就象买LOTTO.那里有没有油,值不值得开采,没有人知道.如果早知道,也就不便宜了.
油商愿不愿意在你的地上开采也要看油商的意愿.
我的情况是,油商在我的地上钻了一口井,每天出十几桶油,我抽头1/6.按现在的油价,扣除运输费,检验费等,我每天可得约$100.相对我当初不到2万块的买进价,我是中了LOTTO.但我相信大部分做这方面投资的都会没有什么回报.
我是7,8年前买的.当时油价很低,高开采成本地区,油商不愿意开采,矿产权也就不值钱.后来油价涨的厉害,矿产权的价格也是飞涨
首先说明其它州的情况与加州可能不同,我不了解.
在加州,我们平时说的和做的房地产买卖都是指地表权(Surface right)的交易.在同一块土地上还有其他不动产的所有权并不一定随Surface right的转移而转移.这些权利包括:矿产权(Mineral Right)和伐木权(Timber Right).这些权利与地表权是可以分离的.也就是说同一块土地上的这些权利可能属于不同的主人.
矿产权的交易通常需要专门从事矿产权交易的Realtor来做代理.这需要不同的License.在加州做普通房地产的Realtor据说有50万以上. 但能做矿产权的交易的Realtor没有几个,而且几乎都在Bakersfield附近(那里是加州石油重镇).近几年石油,天然气价格高涨,这方面的交易也变得活跃起来.
在一个鸟不生蛋的地方,一块土地的矿产权的价值可能大大高于地表权的价值.在山林地区,伐木权的价值也很可能大大高于地表权的价值.
说到回抱,就象买LOTTO.那里有没有油,值不值得开采,没有人知道.如果早知道,也就不便宜了.
油商愿不愿意在你的地上开采也要看油商的意愿.
我的情况是,油商在我的地上钻了一口井,每天出十几桶油,我抽头1/6.按现在的油价,扣除运输费,检验费等,我每天可得约$100.相对我当初不到2万块的买进价,我是中了LOTTO.但我相信大部分做这方面投资的都会没有什么回报.
我是7,8年前买的.当时油价很低,高开采成本地区,油商不愿意开采,矿产权也就不值钱.后来油价涨的厉害,矿产权的价格也是飞涨
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Why Your Home Is Not the Investment You Think It Is
Too many people rely on their home as their primary savings strategy. That's a mistake.
Planning your retirement? Don't bet the house on it.
Your home means a lot of things to you, most of them good. Your home gives comfort and protection to you and your family, and it could well embody all your material hopes and dreams.
But houses have become much more than just places to live. Your home is probably your biggest asset, and the price you could ask for it today is almost certainly much higher than what you paid for it back whenever.
As a result, houses have become substitute credit cards, as profligate owners borrow their equity to finance everything from cars to vacations. Among thriftier owners, the equity they have built up in the family home has become a vital part of retirement planning -- a "fourth leg" of the now-unstable "company pension/personal savings/Social Security" stool that was long the model for a financially secure old age.
More from The Wall Street Journal Online:
• Buy a House Now, or Wait For Prices to Fall Some More?
• Mortgage Refinancing Gets Tougher
• Debating Standards for Mortgage Lenders
Unfortunately for both groups, however, houses are not very good investments. For the grasshoppers, there's nothing quite as stupid as paying off your 2002 trip to Orlando in 2032, when you finally settle up your refinanced "cash out" 30-year mortgage. And for the ants, economic studies have demonstrated over and over that houses (1) cost more than most people make when they sell and (2) rarely match the long-term returns of stocks or other investments.
And that's doubly true today, with much of the U.S. well into a real-estate recession. It's unlikely that homeowners in once-booming areas will see a return of skyrocketing prices anytime soon.
"Real-estate investments suffer serious and sometimes prolonged downturns," writes economist W. Van Harlow in a new study of home equity and retirement from the Fidelity Research Institute in Boston. "A real-estate 'bust' could be quite damaging to an investor nearing retirement who relied too heavily on home equity."
It may be late for a lot of homeowners to read this, but here it goes anyway: It's risky and bad planning to have too much of your net worth in your principal residence. No prudent stock-market player would put 60% or 70% of a portfolio in just one stock, but millions will hold that much or more of their total net worth in just one house.
Food for thought:
• If you bought a house in Los Angeles in 1990, just as the real-estate market turned downward, you would have had to wait a decade for your home's value to return to what you paid.
• If you bought in Rochester, N.Y., in 1980, you would have seen only a mediocre 4% annual growth for the next 25 years.
• If you bought in Dallas in 1986, as the oil boom went bust, your home wouldn't have appreciated at all before 1998.
So with all that in mind, here's a question-and-answer rundown of some financial issues of home owning.
Q: My home is my largest asset. Why shouldn't I rely on it to provide my nest egg?
A: Because a house can be an inefficient means of investing, and it costs far more to buy and operate than you think. Homeowners can easily end up paying more to live in their houses than the supposed "profit" they make when they sell them.
When most homeowners figure their returns, they don't do much more than subtract the price they paid from the price they received. Then they come up with a really big return because they paid only a 10% or 20% down payment. So they figure they made a huge "profit."
But they didn't. That's because the costs of owning a home -- buying it with a long-term mortgage and then paying taxes on it, insuring it, repairing it, renovating it -- sap most of what most homeowners think they make in price appreciation.
Houses are nice financially because there are not many other things you buy that actually go up in value, and not many things can put a six-figure check in your pocket when you sell them. But don't delude yourself: You've already spent most of that check, and you are likely to spend the rest in just a few days when you buy a new home.
Think of your sale proceeds another way: not as a true profit, but as a huge rebate. Some of the thousands of dollars that you paid into the house over the years are being returned to you -- sometimes with a bonus, often without.
Q: But it's certainly better to buy a house than to pay rent.
A: That depends on when you buy, and how long you own. Buy at the wrong time -- like during the kind of buying frenzy that much of the country has just experienced -- and you could well end up wishing you had rented instead.
Boom market or bust, home buying has so many extra costs -- from upfront "points" paid to a lender to title insurance and appraisal fees -- that over the first five to seven years, a renter who invests the equivalent of a down payment in stocks could easily do better overall than a house buyer. Compounding that problem: Most homeowners move within seven years.
As the ownership timeline stretches out to 15, 20 or 30 years, however, the buyer will almost certainly do better than the renter, especially given the tax benefits of paying mortgage interest over traditional rent and the big rebate when the owner finally sells.
But the typical buy vs. rent argument clouds the more important point: A house is an inefficient way of building wealth.
costs_buying_home.gif
Q: But I have to live somewhere! And I have to pay something for a place to live. Certainly it's better to pay "deductible" mortgage interest than rent.
A: Buying a house with a long-term mortgage is just another form of renting.
Mortgage interest is rent that you pay to your lender for the use of its money rather than to a landlord for the use of his house. Yes, the government picks up a portion of that with the tax deduction, but most of your monthly payment neither builds equity nor is deductible. It just goes down the same black hole that sucks up any other renter's money. And it takes 20 years before a typical borrower pays more principal each month than interest.
"I have to pay something" is a rationale that home buyers use for going deeply in debt and paying tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest to buy a house that, they mistakenly believe, will make a big profit for them down the line.
Q: So how much does a house really cost?
A: You can easily end up spending three times the purchase price of a house. Today's buyer of a typical $300,000 single-family home who takes out a 30-year loan will end up paying the price of the house again just in interest. Add 30 years of property taxes, homeowner's insurance, regular maintenance and a couple of big-ticket repairs or improvements, and the total cost of buying the home could easily top out at well over $1 million.
Q: Yes, but the house will be worth much, much more.
A: Maybe, maybe not. Whether you come out ahead depends on where and when you buy. Even cash buyers might be surprised to see that they can't be assured of making a profit.
"The Costs of Home Ownership" table is a simplified rundown on a typical single-family home -- a house that was bought for $50,000 in 1977 -- based on national appreciation rates as reported by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO). Included are modest estimates of other home-owning costs (not adjusted for inflation). To keep things simple, there are no transaction costs, no additional borrowing to finance improvements and no refinancing costs, all of which would drive the expenses even higher. It's not a pretty picture.
costs_home_ownership.gif
Q: Those numbers don't seem realistic for where I live. You can't buy a house here for that kind of money.
A: To be sure, not everyone did so badly as the national average. OFHEO's Home Price Index calculator puts the average 30-year appreciation for a house in the ever-pricey San Francisco metropolitan area at 1,125%, compared with the national average of just 481% (http://www.ofheo.gov/HPI.asp). So if you bought that $50,000 house in San Francisco in 1977, it would be worth about $613,000 today and, assuming much the same costs of ownership, you'd make a true profit of $219,000.
You would have done well in other coastal metro regions, too. The comparable house would be worth about $593,000 in Los Angeles (up 1,085%), $549,000 in New York (998%) and $432,000 in Washington (763%).
But some other big cities didn't fare as well. You'd be in the red in Chicago, where home values rose 463% and the house would be worth $282,000. Your house would be valued at only about $176,000 (252%) in Dallas and just $147,000 in Houston (193%).
Q: But even if I had bought in Texas, I'd still essentially break even. Buying let me live "rent free" for 30 years.
A: Living "rent free" is moving in with your parents or your wealthy lover in Tuscany. You didn't live rent free. You had some of your rent money subsidized and then some more rebated.
Yes, you are sitting on a lot of home value, but you've spent a lot -- probably more than the house is worth -- getting what you have. And you almost certainly lost some investing opportunities along the way while you were spending your money buying the house.
And that's assuming everything breaks your way. If you don't sell at the top of the market, you could see stagnant or falling values for a while. There have been real-estate bubbles before. In San Francisco, where it looks like prices may have hit their high mark in the third quarter of 2006, home values peaked in early 1990 before falling for the next eight years. Houston saw a modest surge in the '80s, followed by an equally modest decline and then two decades of grindingly slow appreciation.
Q: That's still money that I wouldn't see otherwise. Even getting just some of my money back is better than getting none.
A: But there's another kicker. You haven't gotten any money back yet. All you have is a house that's 30 years older than when you moved in. In order to realize your windfall, you'll have to borrow against it or sell it.
If you borrow against a house you've paid off, then you will start mortgage payments all over again.
If you sell it, what are you going to do with that big check in your pocket after you've walked around for a couple of hours feeling richer than you've ever been? You'll probably spend most of it in just a day or so buying another house.
Q: So I'll downsize, find a smaller, cheaper house, buy it and then invest the rest of the money.
A: Prices tend to rise or fall across an entire market. So if you want to stay in the same metropolitan region and save a big chunk of your rebated nest egg, you should be prepared to go significantly downscale -- move to a much less desirable neighborhood.
Consider a hypothetical Washington-area couple who bought their home for $55,000 in 1977.
With improvements and market appreciation they appear to have done quite well. If they sell their house today, they could expect to get something in the neighborhood of $860,000. And they would walk out of the closing meeting with a rebate check of about $550,000, of which about $175,000 would be profit.
But they're facing a tough market where the median price of a condo is two-thirds the cost of a single-family home. They don't have enough money to make the most obvious move down -- from their house to a comparable apartment that would cost around $575,000.
Q: Then I'll move to someplace cheaper, like Houston.
A: You still face borrowing or spending all or most of your cash on your new house -- and you will still have maintenance, property taxes, insurance and other "I have to pay something" costs.
If our Washington couple chooses to leave and move to a cheaper housing market, they will still have costs greater than they think. Popular retirement communities are usually cheaper than big metropolitan areas, but they are not so cheap that sale proceeds will plant them on a country-club fairway and pay for the lifestyle that goes with it.
According to Coldwell Banker's often-cited home-comparison calculator, a house comparable to the place in Washington would cost $439,000 in Fort Myers, Fla., or $407,000 in Orlando. The couple would do a little better moving to Tucson, Ariz., where the comparable house costs $281,000 -- leaving the sellers with less than half of their rebate windfall.
So yes, cashing out in Washington -- or San Francisco or New York -- will give you enough money to buy a nice place on a golf course somewhere in the Sun Belt. And you might have $200,000 or $300,000 left over.
Q: So what can I do if I've planned too much of my retirement around my investment in my home?
A: If you already own your home, you can still rein in your expenses, and diversify your investments. Unfortunately, there's not a lot you can do about reducing many of the costs of home owning, such as property taxes or replacing a roof.
But you do have control over two of the biggest home-owning costs: interest and renovations. Both are big money losers. Even with the tax deduction, most of your mortgage interest is still just wasted rent money. So accelerating your principal payment will result in huge savings down the line. Add $300 a month to the payment on a 6.25%, $300,000 loan, and you'll save 10 years of payments and $83,000 of after-tax money -- enough to put a kid through a public university.
Few, if any, renovations make a profit. A new kitchen or family room might raise the resale value of a house, but rarely as much as they cost to build. And if the homeowner borrows the money, the renovation work could end up costing two or three times what the contractor charged.
If you don't already own your own home, do the math. Don't buy if you think you'll be moving in just a few years. Don't buy a house that's too big for your needs or so expensive that you will strain to pay for it simply because "it's a good investment." It's not.
Planning your retirement? Don't bet the house on it.
Your home means a lot of things to you, most of them good. Your home gives comfort and protection to you and your family, and it could well embody all your material hopes and dreams.
But houses have become much more than just places to live. Your home is probably your biggest asset, and the price you could ask for it today is almost certainly much higher than what you paid for it back whenever.
As a result, houses have become substitute credit cards, as profligate owners borrow their equity to finance everything from cars to vacations. Among thriftier owners, the equity they have built up in the family home has become a vital part of retirement planning -- a "fourth leg" of the now-unstable "company pension/personal savings/Social Security" stool that was long the model for a financially secure old age.
More from The Wall Street Journal Online:
• Buy a House Now, or Wait For Prices to Fall Some More?
• Mortgage Refinancing Gets Tougher
• Debating Standards for Mortgage Lenders
Unfortunately for both groups, however, houses are not very good investments. For the grasshoppers, there's nothing quite as stupid as paying off your 2002 trip to Orlando in 2032, when you finally settle up your refinanced "cash out" 30-year mortgage. And for the ants, economic studies have demonstrated over and over that houses (1) cost more than most people make when they sell and (2) rarely match the long-term returns of stocks or other investments.
And that's doubly true today, with much of the U.S. well into a real-estate recession. It's unlikely that homeowners in once-booming areas will see a return of skyrocketing prices anytime soon.
"Real-estate investments suffer serious and sometimes prolonged downturns," writes economist W. Van Harlow in a new study of home equity and retirement from the Fidelity Research Institute in Boston. "A real-estate 'bust' could be quite damaging to an investor nearing retirement who relied too heavily on home equity."
It may be late for a lot of homeowners to read this, but here it goes anyway: It's risky and bad planning to have too much of your net worth in your principal residence. No prudent stock-market player would put 60% or 70% of a portfolio in just one stock, but millions will hold that much or more of their total net worth in just one house.
Food for thought:
• If you bought a house in Los Angeles in 1990, just as the real-estate market turned downward, you would have had to wait a decade for your home's value to return to what you paid.
• If you bought in Rochester, N.Y., in 1980, you would have seen only a mediocre 4% annual growth for the next 25 years.
• If you bought in Dallas in 1986, as the oil boom went bust, your home wouldn't have appreciated at all before 1998.
So with all that in mind, here's a question-and-answer rundown of some financial issues of home owning.
Q: My home is my largest asset. Why shouldn't I rely on it to provide my nest egg?
A: Because a house can be an inefficient means of investing, and it costs far more to buy and operate than you think. Homeowners can easily end up paying more to live in their houses than the supposed "profit" they make when they sell them.
When most homeowners figure their returns, they don't do much more than subtract the price they paid from the price they received. Then they come up with a really big return because they paid only a 10% or 20% down payment. So they figure they made a huge "profit."
But they didn't. That's because the costs of owning a home -- buying it with a long-term mortgage and then paying taxes on it, insuring it, repairing it, renovating it -- sap most of what most homeowners think they make in price appreciation.
Houses are nice financially because there are not many other things you buy that actually go up in value, and not many things can put a six-figure check in your pocket when you sell them. But don't delude yourself: You've already spent most of that check, and you are likely to spend the rest in just a few days when you buy a new home.
Think of your sale proceeds another way: not as a true profit, but as a huge rebate. Some of the thousands of dollars that you paid into the house over the years are being returned to you -- sometimes with a bonus, often without.
Q: But it's certainly better to buy a house than to pay rent.
A: That depends on when you buy, and how long you own. Buy at the wrong time -- like during the kind of buying frenzy that much of the country has just experienced -- and you could well end up wishing you had rented instead.
Boom market or bust, home buying has so many extra costs -- from upfront "points" paid to a lender to title insurance and appraisal fees -- that over the first five to seven years, a renter who invests the equivalent of a down payment in stocks could easily do better overall than a house buyer. Compounding that problem: Most homeowners move within seven years.
As the ownership timeline stretches out to 15, 20 or 30 years, however, the buyer will almost certainly do better than the renter, especially given the tax benefits of paying mortgage interest over traditional rent and the big rebate when the owner finally sells.
But the typical buy vs. rent argument clouds the more important point: A house is an inefficient way of building wealth.
costs_buying_home.gif
Q: But I have to live somewhere! And I have to pay something for a place to live. Certainly it's better to pay "deductible" mortgage interest than rent.
A: Buying a house with a long-term mortgage is just another form of renting.
Mortgage interest is rent that you pay to your lender for the use of its money rather than to a landlord for the use of his house. Yes, the government picks up a portion of that with the tax deduction, but most of your monthly payment neither builds equity nor is deductible. It just goes down the same black hole that sucks up any other renter's money. And it takes 20 years before a typical borrower pays more principal each month than interest.
"I have to pay something" is a rationale that home buyers use for going deeply in debt and paying tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest to buy a house that, they mistakenly believe, will make a big profit for them down the line.
Q: So how much does a house really cost?
A: You can easily end up spending three times the purchase price of a house. Today's buyer of a typical $300,000 single-family home who takes out a 30-year loan will end up paying the price of the house again just in interest. Add 30 years of property taxes, homeowner's insurance, regular maintenance and a couple of big-ticket repairs or improvements, and the total cost of buying the home could easily top out at well over $1 million.
Q: Yes, but the house will be worth much, much more.
A: Maybe, maybe not. Whether you come out ahead depends on where and when you buy. Even cash buyers might be surprised to see that they can't be assured of making a profit.
"The Costs of Home Ownership" table is a simplified rundown on a typical single-family home -- a house that was bought for $50,000 in 1977 -- based on national appreciation rates as reported by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO). Included are modest estimates of other home-owning costs (not adjusted for inflation). To keep things simple, there are no transaction costs, no additional borrowing to finance improvements and no refinancing costs, all of which would drive the expenses even higher. It's not a pretty picture.
costs_home_ownership.gif
Q: Those numbers don't seem realistic for where I live. You can't buy a house here for that kind of money.
A: To be sure, not everyone did so badly as the national average. OFHEO's Home Price Index calculator puts the average 30-year appreciation for a house in the ever-pricey San Francisco metropolitan area at 1,125%, compared with the national average of just 481% (http://www.ofheo.gov/HPI.asp). So if you bought that $50,000 house in San Francisco in 1977, it would be worth about $613,000 today and, assuming much the same costs of ownership, you'd make a true profit of $219,000.
You would have done well in other coastal metro regions, too. The comparable house would be worth about $593,000 in Los Angeles (up 1,085%), $549,000 in New York (998%) and $432,000 in Washington (763%).
But some other big cities didn't fare as well. You'd be in the red in Chicago, where home values rose 463% and the house would be worth $282,000. Your house would be valued at only about $176,000 (252%) in Dallas and just $147,000 in Houston (193%).
Q: But even if I had bought in Texas, I'd still essentially break even. Buying let me live "rent free" for 30 years.
A: Living "rent free" is moving in with your parents or your wealthy lover in Tuscany. You didn't live rent free. You had some of your rent money subsidized and then some more rebated.
Yes, you are sitting on a lot of home value, but you've spent a lot -- probably more than the house is worth -- getting what you have. And you almost certainly lost some investing opportunities along the way while you were spending your money buying the house.
And that's assuming everything breaks your way. If you don't sell at the top of the market, you could see stagnant or falling values for a while. There have been real-estate bubbles before. In San Francisco, where it looks like prices may have hit their high mark in the third quarter of 2006, home values peaked in early 1990 before falling for the next eight years. Houston saw a modest surge in the '80s, followed by an equally modest decline and then two decades of grindingly slow appreciation.
Q: That's still money that I wouldn't see otherwise. Even getting just some of my money back is better than getting none.
A: But there's another kicker. You haven't gotten any money back yet. All you have is a house that's 30 years older than when you moved in. In order to realize your windfall, you'll have to borrow against it or sell it.
If you borrow against a house you've paid off, then you will start mortgage payments all over again.
If you sell it, what are you going to do with that big check in your pocket after you've walked around for a couple of hours feeling richer than you've ever been? You'll probably spend most of it in just a day or so buying another house.
Q: So I'll downsize, find a smaller, cheaper house, buy it and then invest the rest of the money.
A: Prices tend to rise or fall across an entire market. So if you want to stay in the same metropolitan region and save a big chunk of your rebated nest egg, you should be prepared to go significantly downscale -- move to a much less desirable neighborhood.
Consider a hypothetical Washington-area couple who bought their home for $55,000 in 1977.
With improvements and market appreciation they appear to have done quite well. If they sell their house today, they could expect to get something in the neighborhood of $860,000. And they would walk out of the closing meeting with a rebate check of about $550,000, of which about $175,000 would be profit.
But they're facing a tough market where the median price of a condo is two-thirds the cost of a single-family home. They don't have enough money to make the most obvious move down -- from their house to a comparable apartment that would cost around $575,000.
Q: Then I'll move to someplace cheaper, like Houston.
A: You still face borrowing or spending all or most of your cash on your new house -- and you will still have maintenance, property taxes, insurance and other "I have to pay something" costs.
If our Washington couple chooses to leave and move to a cheaper housing market, they will still have costs greater than they think. Popular retirement communities are usually cheaper than big metropolitan areas, but they are not so cheap that sale proceeds will plant them on a country-club fairway and pay for the lifestyle that goes with it.
According to Coldwell Banker's often-cited home-comparison calculator, a house comparable to the place in Washington would cost $439,000 in Fort Myers, Fla., or $407,000 in Orlando. The couple would do a little better moving to Tucson, Ariz., where the comparable house costs $281,000 -- leaving the sellers with less than half of their rebate windfall.
So yes, cashing out in Washington -- or San Francisco or New York -- will give you enough money to buy a nice place on a golf course somewhere in the Sun Belt. And you might have $200,000 or $300,000 left over.
Q: So what can I do if I've planned too much of my retirement around my investment in my home?
A: If you already own your home, you can still rein in your expenses, and diversify your investments. Unfortunately, there's not a lot you can do about reducing many of the costs of home owning, such as property taxes or replacing a roof.
But you do have control over two of the biggest home-owning costs: interest and renovations. Both are big money losers. Even with the tax deduction, most of your mortgage interest is still just wasted rent money. So accelerating your principal payment will result in huge savings down the line. Add $300 a month to the payment on a 6.25%, $300,000 loan, and you'll save 10 years of payments and $83,000 of after-tax money -- enough to put a kid through a public university.
Few, if any, renovations make a profit. A new kitchen or family room might raise the resale value of a house, but rarely as much as they cost to build. And if the homeowner borrows the money, the renovation work could end up costing two or three times what the contractor charged.
If you don't already own your own home, do the math. Don't buy if you think you'll be moving in just a few years. Don't buy a house that's too big for your needs or so expensive that you will strain to pay for it simply because "it's a good investment." It's not.
家庭理财
在美国的全职妈妈们没有工作，但是只要自己有计划有准备，她们的生活是有保障的。这里我斗胆给不了解情况的筒子们简单介绍一些防御措施，投资渠道，以及政府福利等方面的信息。不敢班门弄斧，只是想把自己多年来积累的一些经验和常识介绍给大家，以供参考。首先声明这只是我个人的一些见解，不是专业服务。本人不负法律责任。
---防御措施---
１。首先要有一家人的医疗保险，通过工作单位购买。还有汽车保险，房产保险或租房者的保险等，都是必不可少的。
２。争取准备相当于６个月的生活费的应急款，以防失业等意外，造成暂时没有工资的情况。
３。购买人寿保险：一般工作单位都会自动提供一倍于工资的保额。此外，现在买寿险 （Term Life Insurance）很便宜。一个健康而不吸烟的４０岁的男人买一份保２０年５０万美金的寿险只需要４００－５００美金一年（具体保费多少网上能查到）。有孩子的家庭一定要有寿险。这点保费无论如何也不能省。对你的家庭太重要了。第一受益人先填全职妈妈。等孩子长大了可以修改，把所有的孩子都考虑到。
４。购买事故至残至死险（Accidental Death and Dismemberment Insurance )：这个更便宜。买２０万的保险只要
１００美金左右一年。如果你ＬＧ工作的单位不提供这项福利保险，你们可以直接找保险公司购买。此种保险，不保因病去世。没有年限，交钱就保，不交就停。孩子小的时候可考虑，因为保费很低。
以上３。４。两项加起来的总额应该是现有年收入的６－１０倍。想保证孩子上名牌大学的家庭，孩子多的家庭要多买，最好在１００万美元以上。）
另外，可以考虑给全职妈妈也买一份寿险。虽然全职妈妈没工作，但她每天所干的事情若需请人来做，还是很花钱的哦！
---投资渠道---
除了买高额的人寿保险，还要积极地进行金融投资。这是个很复杂的话题，希望我能用简洁的语言说个大体清楚。具体操作很复杂，但只要自己花点工夫去学，也不难。
１。 Pay Yourself First。每个月的工资留下足够支付日常开支和零花钱的部分，其余部分通过４０１（k），４０３（b),４５７计划等等退休投资渠道，尽量多投。一般工作单位的 退休计划(Retirement Planning)提供的选择很广。各种共同基金是最常用的。款额直接从工资里扣除，自动送到你在金融公司的账号里，很方便。个人如能花时间精力深入研究，对管理这些投资会很有帮助。注意第一受益人一栏要填上全职妈妈的名字。
４０１(k)和４０３(b)每年的上限是各１５０００美元.现在都有两个选择：
（１）税前(Pre-Tax)投资，可省当年的收入税。但拿钱出来用时要上收入税；
（２）Roth 401(k), Roth 403(b)是税后（After-Tax)投资。先要交当年的收入税，但以后 再也不需要上税了。
４５７计划是个人退休补充计划。是为政府和教育机构的工作者提供的补充退休计划。每年的上限是４万多美元。但这是irreversible的，就是一旦你们在表上填了一个定数，就得一直投到你ＬＧ退休或离开该工作，到时签约才失效。是否考虑此计划，依各家的情况 自定。这是税前（Pre_Tax)投资。
２。 Roth IRA（与前面的Roth 401(k), Roth 403(b)不同）：税后投资。夫妻每人每年还可投４０００美元，有收入限制。请查ＩＲＳ网站或ＹＡＨＯＯ ＦＩＮＡＮＣＥ等了解更多 信息。 Roth IRA可以投入任何一种金融手段：股票，共同基金，政府债券，Money Market Fund， 银行ＣＤ等等。用钱时不上税。
３。教育投资：
（１）。５２９计划。每年每个家庭最多可投１６０００美金，有些州可免州税，以６％算每年可省９６０美元州税。每个孩子账号里的钱有上限，约２３万美金。这项投资由大的金融公司管理，投资人不能自由交换，买卖。孩子上大学从里面提款交学杂费，不用上税。
（２）。Coverdell Education Savings Accounts(原称Education IRA): 每个孩子每年可投２０００美元。投资渠道和Roth IRA一样，很自由。这是税后投资，拿钱出来交学费等也不上税。
（３）。ＵＧＭＡ／ＵＴＭＡ：这种投资要交所得税。填税时很让人头疼。可以不考虑。集中资金投入前两项。
以上是一般家庭需要考虑的理财的几个方面。只是列了个清单，很不详细。大家要自己花功夫去分项仔细研究。
－－－失业及伤亡的福利待遇－－－
下面再说说如遇失业及伤亡事故时，来自工作单位和政府的福利。
１。如果ＬＧ失业 ，可以领取失业金(Unemployment Benefit)，具体金额要与Social Security（ＳＳ）部门联系才能知道。有时间限制，一般是几个月到半年。（具体情况请自己核实。）
２。如果ＬＧ不幸致残：
（１）。你ＬＧ的工作单位可能会继续发一部分的工资给你们。每个家庭都应该搞清楚工作单位的福利待遇都有些什么，估算一下每项能有多少钱。
（２）。ＳＳ会给你ＬＧ和家人伤残福利（Disability Benefits）。每年ＳＳ都会给所有工作的人寄一封信，里面有这方面的信息。或去ＳＳ网站查寻。
３。如果ＬＧ不幸去世：
（１）。领取各种各样的寿险。
（２）。ＳＳ也会给全职妈妈和一个１６岁以下的孩子两份福利（这跟政府救济穷人的 Welfare完全是两码事儿）。加起来一共能拿到三万左右一年，每个家庭能拿到的钱有上限。 即使一个家庭有超过一个未满１６岁的孩子，最多也只能拿到三万左右一年。
（３）。如果你ＬＧ的工作提供传统退休金(Traditional Pension)，你还能从你ＬＧ的工 作单位领取他的退休金，一般是从他达到法定的退休年龄起开始领取。
从上面所有这些列项看，你ＬＧ值很多钱啊。要善待他哦。不要嫌他挣钱不够多。只要你们好生计划，合理投资，你们的好日子可以一直过下去，还会越来越好。
最后要说的是遗产安排。ＬＧ若是去世，留下这么多的钱，没有遗产计划是不行的。要找律师咨询并备好相关的法律材料。夫妻两人还要各自立一份遗嘱，写明一切需要交代的事情，如未成年儿童的抚养人等等至关重要的事。
如果把上面这些事做好了，全职妈妈就可高枕无忧了。不过这只是相对而言。前面没有提到婚变的可能。不过即使真的婚变，ＬＧ也得负担孩子和前妻的生活。离婚时夫妻共有的财产，包括ＬＧ所有的退休计划里的钱，一般都是平分的。但愿不要发生那样的事，对家庭和孩子都最好。
---防御措施---
１。首先要有一家人的医疗保险，通过工作单位购买。还有汽车保险，房产保险或租房者的保险等，都是必不可少的。
２。争取准备相当于６个月的生活费的应急款，以防失业等意外，造成暂时没有工资的情况。
３。购买人寿保险：一般工作单位都会自动提供一倍于工资的保额。此外，现在买寿险 （Term Life Insurance）很便宜。一个健康而不吸烟的４０岁的男人买一份保２０年５０万美金的寿险只需要４００－５００美金一年（具体保费多少网上能查到）。有孩子的家庭一定要有寿险。这点保费无论如何也不能省。对你的家庭太重要了。第一受益人先填全职妈妈。等孩子长大了可以修改，把所有的孩子都考虑到。
４。购买事故至残至死险（Accidental Death and Dismemberment Insurance )：这个更便宜。买２０万的保险只要
１００美金左右一年。如果你ＬＧ工作的单位不提供这项福利保险，你们可以直接找保险公司购买。此种保险，不保因病去世。没有年限，交钱就保，不交就停。孩子小的时候可考虑，因为保费很低。
以上３。４。两项加起来的总额应该是现有年收入的６－１０倍。想保证孩子上名牌大学的家庭，孩子多的家庭要多买，最好在１００万美元以上。）
另外，可以考虑给全职妈妈也买一份寿险。虽然全职妈妈没工作，但她每天所干的事情若需请人来做，还是很花钱的哦！
---投资渠道---
除了买高额的人寿保险，还要积极地进行金融投资。这是个很复杂的话题，希望我能用简洁的语言说个大体清楚。具体操作很复杂，但只要自己花点工夫去学，也不难。
１。 Pay Yourself First。每个月的工资留下足够支付日常开支和零花钱的部分，其余部分通过４０１（k），４０３（b),４５７计划等等退休投资渠道，尽量多投。一般工作单位的 退休计划(Retirement Planning)提供的选择很广。各种共同基金是最常用的。款额直接从工资里扣除，自动送到你在金融公司的账号里，很方便。个人如能花时间精力深入研究，对管理这些投资会很有帮助。注意第一受益人一栏要填上全职妈妈的名字。
４０１(k)和４０３(b)每年的上限是各１５０００美元.现在都有两个选择：
（１）税前(Pre-Tax)投资，可省当年的收入税。但拿钱出来用时要上收入税；
（２）Roth 401(k), Roth 403(b)是税后（After-Tax)投资。先要交当年的收入税，但以后 再也不需要上税了。
４５７计划是个人退休补充计划。是为政府和教育机构的工作者提供的补充退休计划。每年的上限是４万多美元。但这是irreversible的，就是一旦你们在表上填了一个定数，就得一直投到你ＬＧ退休或离开该工作，到时签约才失效。是否考虑此计划，依各家的情况 自定。这是税前（Pre_Tax)投资。
２。 Roth IRA（与前面的Roth 401(k), Roth 403(b)不同）：税后投资。夫妻每人每年还可投４０００美元，有收入限制。请查ＩＲＳ网站或ＹＡＨＯＯ ＦＩＮＡＮＣＥ等了解更多 信息。 Roth IRA可以投入任何一种金融手段：股票，共同基金，政府债券，Money Market Fund， 银行ＣＤ等等。用钱时不上税。
３。教育投资：
（１）。５２９计划。每年每个家庭最多可投１６０００美金，有些州可免州税，以６％算每年可省９６０美元州税。每个孩子账号里的钱有上限，约２３万美金。这项投资由大的金融公司管理，投资人不能自由交换，买卖。孩子上大学从里面提款交学杂费，不用上税。
（２）。Coverdell Education Savings Accounts(原称Education IRA): 每个孩子每年可投２０００美元。投资渠道和Roth IRA一样，很自由。这是税后投资，拿钱出来交学费等也不上税。
（３）。ＵＧＭＡ／ＵＴＭＡ：这种投资要交所得税。填税时很让人头疼。可以不考虑。集中资金投入前两项。
以上是一般家庭需要考虑的理财的几个方面。只是列了个清单，很不详细。大家要自己花功夫去分项仔细研究。
－－－失业及伤亡的福利待遇－－－
下面再说说如遇失业及伤亡事故时，来自工作单位和政府的福利。
１。如果ＬＧ失业 ，可以领取失业金(Unemployment Benefit)，具体金额要与Social Security（ＳＳ）部门联系才能知道。有时间限制，一般是几个月到半年。（具体情况请自己核实。）
２。如果ＬＧ不幸致残：
（１）。你ＬＧ的工作单位可能会继续发一部分的工资给你们。每个家庭都应该搞清楚工作单位的福利待遇都有些什么，估算一下每项能有多少钱。
（２）。ＳＳ会给你ＬＧ和家人伤残福利（Disability Benefits）。每年ＳＳ都会给所有工作的人寄一封信，里面有这方面的信息。或去ＳＳ网站查寻。
３。如果ＬＧ不幸去世：
（１）。领取各种各样的寿险。
（２）。ＳＳ也会给全职妈妈和一个１６岁以下的孩子两份福利（这跟政府救济穷人的 Welfare完全是两码事儿）。加起来一共能拿到三万左右一年，每个家庭能拿到的钱有上限。 即使一个家庭有超过一个未满１６岁的孩子，最多也只能拿到三万左右一年。
（３）。如果你ＬＧ的工作提供传统退休金(Traditional Pension)，你还能从你ＬＧ的工 作单位领取他的退休金，一般是从他达到法定的退休年龄起开始领取。
从上面所有这些列项看，你ＬＧ值很多钱啊。要善待他哦。不要嫌他挣钱不够多。只要你们好生计划，合理投资，你们的好日子可以一直过下去，还会越来越好。
最后要说的是遗产安排。ＬＧ若是去世，留下这么多的钱，没有遗产计划是不行的。要找律师咨询并备好相关的法律材料。夫妻两人还要各自立一份遗嘱，写明一切需要交代的事情，如未成年儿童的抚养人等等至关重要的事。
如果把上面这些事做好了，全职妈妈就可高枕无忧了。不过这只是相对而言。前面没有提到婚变的可能。不过即使真的婚变，ＬＧ也得负担孩子和前妻的生活。离婚时夫妻共有的财产，包括ＬＧ所有的退休计划里的钱，一般都是平分的。但愿不要发生那样的事，对家庭和孩子都最好。
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
精明少妇婚后四年理财心得
一.家用：
1.卫生间里放一，两个桶，收集些较干净的水循环使用。
2.不浪费粮食，买菜时不要买多了。
3.蔬菜，水果在菜场购买，新鲜，便宜。
4.自己能制作的东西，如抄手，酸菜，泡菜等，自己DIY。
5.日常生活用品，荤菜，食用油(尽量买压榨油)，米，调料在大型超市购买，质量较有保证。
6.尽量少购买超市的成品与半成品，那是属于看上去很美，味道不怎么样滴。
7.洗衣粉等洗涤用品用品牌产品(如花王洁霸)质量有保证，洗涤效果佳。
8.家里可准备些粉条，黄花，紫菜的干货，不想弄饭时弄个简单的汤。
9.一周可煲次汤，不要太多，放在冰箱里，不想弄菜时，就煮点菜进去，再炒个素菜，也比上餐馆便宜，卫生。
10.多看看烹饪的网站或博客，学点特色菜。
二.家电：
1.小家电(如吸尘器，豆浆机，果汁机等)大多较贵，而且用处不大，能不买就不买。(目前我家用得最多的就是豆浆机，怀孕时购买)
2.其他家电(电视，空调，洗衣机等)选择品牌货，而且最好在大型的家电卖场购买。质量好，维修方便。
三.出行：
1.如果不是为了面子，选择经济型轿车，代步即可。油钱还有进一步上涨的可能性，小型车用油量比较节约，停车费，保险费等各方面都要少一些。
2.现在的公车都比较好，而且路线也方便，尽量少打车。多走点路也当锻炼身体。
四.保险：
1.养老，医疗，意外三个险种即可，投资性的险种意义不大。
2.保证大人，才能保证孩子，不用给孩子买太多的险，特别是储蓄性险种。相信自己，你自己用这点钱做点小投资也许比保险公司做收益还高一点点。
五.孩子：
1.奶粉可用好一点的品牌，如果有条件，不要给三岁前的小孩喝鲜奶。
2.衣服，鞋子干净，舒服即可，不用买什么名牌，孩子长得太快，不一会，裤子就到脚踝了。
3.给她买昂贵的玩具，不如多花点时间陪她玩或带她出去多看看。
4.给孩子养成一个良好生活，学习习惯比花钱让他们学特长或上名校更有用。
5.很多事情让她自己去尝试，不用样样都代她做完。因为她总归会走自己的路。
六.房子：
1.有条件住好房子或购房做投资固然好，如果条件尚末成熟，不必想到一步到位。中国的房子是五十到七十年的使用期，实际上我们只是把先把租金付完而已。
2.如果有小一点的孩子，在父母家附近比较方便；如果有一份稳定的工作，购房在公司附近可省一笔交通，餐饮费，而且住得近，不用挤车，受些不必要的气。(鱼和熊掌不可兼得也)
七.护肤品：
1.保持好的睡眠与心情远比用昂贵的护肤品管用。
2.可经常看一些护肤品的论坛，看看其他JM的心得。
3.有些较正规的网站，购买化妆品品质有保证，而且价格也便宜。
八.其他
1.书啊这些东西可上当当，卓越这些网站购买，价格便宜得多。特别是打特价或搞活动的时候，而且当当还可上门送货收款。
2.做清洁是件很累人的事情，可找值得信赖的清洁工，钱不多，而且可节省很多时间。
3.一定要经常锻炼身体，有一个良好的身体就是节约钱。
4.上超市时准备个清单，而且减少去的次数，能用信用卡就用信用卡，如果在你经常去的超市有个积分卡，年底会一点点小小的惊喜。
5.多学习，努力提高自己的业务知识，也是升职，加薪和去更好的公司作准备。
6.钱不用看得太重，越看重钱，越累。心理及身体的负担越重。
1.卫生间里放一，两个桶，收集些较干净的水循环使用。
2.不浪费粮食，买菜时不要买多了。
3.蔬菜，水果在菜场购买，新鲜，便宜。
4.自己能制作的东西，如抄手，酸菜，泡菜等，自己DIY。
5.日常生活用品，荤菜，食用油(尽量买压榨油)，米，调料在大型超市购买，质量较有保证。
6.尽量少购买超市的成品与半成品，那是属于看上去很美，味道不怎么样滴。
7.洗衣粉等洗涤用品用品牌产品(如花王洁霸)质量有保证，洗涤效果佳。
8.家里可准备些粉条，黄花，紫菜的干货，不想弄饭时弄个简单的汤。
9.一周可煲次汤，不要太多，放在冰箱里，不想弄菜时，就煮点菜进去，再炒个素菜，也比上餐馆便宜，卫生。
10.多看看烹饪的网站或博客，学点特色菜。
二.家电：
1.小家电(如吸尘器，豆浆机，果汁机等)大多较贵，而且用处不大，能不买就不买。(目前我家用得最多的就是豆浆机，怀孕时购买)
2.其他家电(电视，空调，洗衣机等)选择品牌货，而且最好在大型的家电卖场购买。质量好，维修方便。
三.出行：
1.如果不是为了面子，选择经济型轿车，代步即可。油钱还有进一步上涨的可能性，小型车用油量比较节约，停车费，保险费等各方面都要少一些。
2.现在的公车都比较好，而且路线也方便，尽量少打车。多走点路也当锻炼身体。
四.保险：
1.养老，医疗，意外三个险种即可，投资性的险种意义不大。
2.保证大人，才能保证孩子，不用给孩子买太多的险，特别是储蓄性险种。相信自己，你自己用这点钱做点小投资也许比保险公司做收益还高一点点。
五.孩子：
1.奶粉可用好一点的品牌，如果有条件，不要给三岁前的小孩喝鲜奶。
2.衣服，鞋子干净，舒服即可，不用买什么名牌，孩子长得太快，不一会，裤子就到脚踝了。
3.给她买昂贵的玩具，不如多花点时间陪她玩或带她出去多看看。
4.给孩子养成一个良好生活，学习习惯比花钱让他们学特长或上名校更有用。
5.很多事情让她自己去尝试，不用样样都代她做完。因为她总归会走自己的路。
六.房子：
1.有条件住好房子或购房做投资固然好，如果条件尚末成熟，不必想到一步到位。中国的房子是五十到七十年的使用期，实际上我们只是把先把租金付完而已。
2.如果有小一点的孩子，在父母家附近比较方便；如果有一份稳定的工作，购房在公司附近可省一笔交通，餐饮费，而且住得近，不用挤车，受些不必要的气。(鱼和熊掌不可兼得也)
七.护肤品：
1.保持好的睡眠与心情远比用昂贵的护肤品管用。
2.可经常看一些护肤品的论坛，看看其他JM的心得。
3.有些较正规的网站，购买化妆品品质有保证，而且价格也便宜。
八.其他
1.书啊这些东西可上当当，卓越这些网站购买，价格便宜得多。特别是打特价或搞活动的时候，而且当当还可上门送货收款。
2.做清洁是件很累人的事情，可找值得信赖的清洁工，钱不多，而且可节省很多时间。
3.一定要经常锻炼身体，有一个良好的身体就是节约钱。
4.上超市时准备个清单，而且减少去的次数，能用信用卡就用信用卡，如果在你经常去的超市有个积分卡，年底会一点点小小的惊喜。
5.多学习，努力提高自己的业务知识，也是升职，加薪和去更好的公司作准备。
6.钱不用看得太重，越看重钱，越累。心理及身体的负担越重。
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Five Long-Term Real Estate Picks
Friday March 9, 1:40 pm ET
ByJennifer Openshaw, TheStreet.com Contributor
Like most Millionaire Zone investors, you invest long term. You like real estate because it has a solid long-term, fundamentals-based track record over the long haul.
So why does every real estate forecast you read only take you through the end of this year or 2008 at the latest? Short-term forecasts are nice -- especially if you're a real estate agent -- but as a real estate investor, I like to look at the longer term.
ADVERTISEMENT
I know my crystal ball can't forecast interest rates much better than anyone else's. And that makes predicting specific prices say, 10 years down the road, a real stretch.
So I won't do that. But here's what I can do: I can predict which residential markets are most likely to see strong and sustainable growth over the next decade.
My crystal ball, which employs metro-area facts and figures I recently obtained from industry expert Bert Sperling, combines several factors across some 375 U.S. metro areas:
* Future job growth. To me, the long-term job picture is key to real estate and especially investment real estate growth. My picks have at least a 20% projected future job growth through 2010.
* Affordability. Picks should have modest prices relative to local incomes. I eliminated areas with median home prices more than five times median household incomes, and areas where median home prices exceed $250,000.
* Stability. It's hard to guess where boom-bust markets like Phoenix, Las Vegas, Houston and smaller markets like Texas border towns are going, so I disregarded them.
* Room to move. I want up-and-comers, not markets with the best days already behind them. Those appreciating more than 100% during the 2002-06 boom are out.
Click here for the video version of this story from Jennifer Openshaw.
So here are my five picks.
* Austin, Texas (median home price, or MHP, $176,700; future job growth, or FJG, 28.1%)
As a real estate market, the solid Texas capital city has everything going its way -- steady state-government employment and tech-led private employment bursting at the seams.
As if that weren't enough, it's also home to the University of Texas, and I'm a big fan of college-town real estate. There's lots to do and lots to attract people for a long time, with few downsides.
* Bend, Ore. (MHP $229,000; FJG 30.8%)
Way up in the sagebrush plateau east of the Cascades -- but not too far east to enjoy the skiing -- is the booming and somewhat upscale enclave of Bend. There's lots of wealth here, lots more arriving and the job base isn't just tourism anymore. You may end up living in your investment someday when you retire.
* Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, Ark. (MHP $168,400; FJG 32.9%)
Once a sleepy center mainly known for chickens and trucking, this booming area is sometimes just called Northwest Arkansas after its now busy airport.
Of course, the elephant in the room lies in adjacent Bentonville in the form of Wal-Mart's world headquarters. Wal-Mart employs thousands, but the real story is the growing economic base of companies serving Wal-Mart's needs.
* Fort Collins-Loveland, Colo. (MHP $237,000; FJG 22.9%)
This is another classic college town story (Colorado State University), but with a large and diverse commercial and technology base nearby. Students, professors, well-paid professionals and retirees from other parts of Colorado and elsewhere are drawn to The Fort and its sparkling Front Range vistas.
* Raleigh-Cary, N.C. (MHP $207,700; FJG 20.3%)
This rapidly growing metro complex also includes the college and commercial centers of Durham and Chapel Hill. The economy has so many strengths it's hard to know where to begin. Sitting in the center is the impressive 7,000-acre Research Triangle Park, one of the world's most concentrated bases of applied and basic research with some 150 companies represented.
The area is located halfway between the major East Coast markets and Florida and is picking up new residents from both, as the former retreat from crowding and high prices and the latter from hurricanes. The area is a solid bet.
Of course, for you investors, this just begins the quest. I've brought you to the front of the store. The next job is to walk in and start shopping.
ByJennifer Openshaw, TheStreet.com Contributor
Like most Millionaire Zone investors, you invest long term. You like real estate because it has a solid long-term, fundamentals-based track record over the long haul.
So why does every real estate forecast you read only take you through the end of this year or 2008 at the latest? Short-term forecasts are nice -- especially if you're a real estate agent -- but as a real estate investor, I like to look at the longer term.
ADVERTISEMENT
I know my crystal ball can't forecast interest rates much better than anyone else's. And that makes predicting specific prices say, 10 years down the road, a real stretch.
So I won't do that. But here's what I can do: I can predict which residential markets are most likely to see strong and sustainable growth over the next decade.
My crystal ball, which employs metro-area facts and figures I recently obtained from industry expert Bert Sperling, combines several factors across some 375 U.S. metro areas:
* Future job growth. To me, the long-term job picture is key to real estate and especially investment real estate growth. My picks have at least a 20% projected future job growth through 2010.
* Affordability. Picks should have modest prices relative to local incomes. I eliminated areas with median home prices more than five times median household incomes, and areas where median home prices exceed $250,000.
* Stability. It's hard to guess where boom-bust markets like Phoenix, Las Vegas, Houston and smaller markets like Texas border towns are going, so I disregarded them.
* Room to move. I want up-and-comers, not markets with the best days already behind them. Those appreciating more than 100% during the 2002-06 boom are out.
Click here for the video version of this story from Jennifer Openshaw.
So here are my five picks.
* Austin, Texas (median home price, or MHP, $176,700; future job growth, or FJG, 28.1%)
As a real estate market, the solid Texas capital city has everything going its way -- steady state-government employment and tech-led private employment bursting at the seams.
As if that weren't enough, it's also home to the University of Texas, and I'm a big fan of college-town real estate. There's lots to do and lots to attract people for a long time, with few downsides.
* Bend, Ore. (MHP $229,000; FJG 30.8%)
Way up in the sagebrush plateau east of the Cascades -- but not too far east to enjoy the skiing -- is the booming and somewhat upscale enclave of Bend. There's lots of wealth here, lots more arriving and the job base isn't just tourism anymore. You may end up living in your investment someday when you retire.
* Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, Ark. (MHP $168,400; FJG 32.9%)
Once a sleepy center mainly known for chickens and trucking, this booming area is sometimes just called Northwest Arkansas after its now busy airport.
Of course, the elephant in the room lies in adjacent Bentonville in the form of Wal-Mart's world headquarters. Wal-Mart employs thousands, but the real story is the growing economic base of companies serving Wal-Mart's needs.
* Fort Collins-Loveland, Colo. (MHP $237,000; FJG 22.9%)
This is another classic college town story (Colorado State University), but with a large and diverse commercial and technology base nearby. Students, professors, well-paid professionals and retirees from other parts of Colorado and elsewhere are drawn to The Fort and its sparkling Front Range vistas.
* Raleigh-Cary, N.C. (MHP $207,700; FJG 20.3%)
This rapidly growing metro complex also includes the college and commercial centers of Durham and Chapel Hill. The economy has so many strengths it's hard to know where to begin. Sitting in the center is the impressive 7,000-acre Research Triangle Park, one of the world's most concentrated bases of applied and basic research with some 150 companies represented.
The area is located halfway between the major East Coast markets and Florida and is picking up new residents from both, as the former retreat from crowding and high prices and the latter from hurricanes. The area is a solid bet.
Of course, for you investors, this just begins the quest. I've brought you to the front of the store. The next job is to walk in and start shopping.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)