...on their taxes! After all if you're wealthy enough you can buy the legistation to build the loopholes; our gov is so damned corrupt they're fucking the shit out of us all the way to the bank.
All is fair in love and war.
This thread was a touchy subject a while back on another board so it got out of hand...hoping we can debate on an adult level with facts, vs. insults.
View A. Providers make too much money to be on Government assistance, and most are cheating the government by not paying taxes or only paying a small portion of them. Any woman making 200 plus an hour should not be relying on programs that are made for those who are truly poor and are not getting paid to fk. Those you cheat the system have no business using it.
View B. Just because a provider charges x amount does not mean she is getting that on a regular basis, thus making her "truly in need of assistance" like any other working individual. Should her children go hungry or without healthcare just because she "is" an escort as opposed to a receptionist? She might have only made 200 that entire week, so just because she might appear to be making a lot of money, in reality she is just as broke as anyone else.
So, do you believe that the assistance should depend on the fact that one person in need is no different than another person in need, or do you feel we have no right to ever use the programs because of what we do here? Do you think it's cunning and greedy for women who escort to try and get all they can from the government, or do you feel it should be based on the individual and the needs they might have?
If this thread does not get approved, I will post another d*ck size thread lol.
...on their taxes! After all if you're wealthy enough you can buy the legistation to build the loopholes; our gov is so damned corrupt they're fucking the shit out of us all the way to the bank.
All is fair in love and war.
Gaming the system is and always will be wrong! I've got no problem with those who need help getting it, provider or not, BUT this BS about scumbag politicians justifying robbing the taxpayers is wrong! We need to fire and/or arrest the cheaters whether they are politicians or citizens!
The system has gamed you. Good luck with the misguided faith in what never was and never will be.
There are people who will commit fraud regardless of their income and occupation. Personally, I believe it is unethical for someone to receive government assistance when their income doesn't qualify them for it. But you really can't tell just by looking at someone. Locally, most small businesses start managers out at $10-$12 an hour. Try to support a family of four on that without food stamps. So even though they dress the part (usually in clothes they got from Goodwill) and have the title, they still struggle with poverty. Also locally, I seriously doubt any of the providers are making big bucks. Charging $200 an hour would get them flamed off the local board and with limited advertising available, it seems that 4 appointments in a week is something to celebrate.
So yes, a provider, or anyone else, has a perfect right to use whatever assistance programs are available if they truly need it. I will hedge that by saying that if you're going to use my tax money, I do expect you to pay your share as well.
Hey Folks,
Providers aren't the only ones that take advantage of government assistance.
I have seen drug dealers do the exact same thing.
Here's the funny thing, both drug dealing and prostitution are ILLEGAL.
See the pattern already, folks?
Any illegal activity will have people attempting to profit from it... until... they get caught.
While they are sitting in jail, what happens to their children? The kids go straight to Child Protection Services and be taken to families where they are most likely to fail the family environment. 10 years later, the cycle repeats itself.
As long there is government assistance available, this cycle will continue over and over.
Where does it end?
sunrosc
So yes, a provider, or anyone else, has a perfect right to use whatever assistance programs are available if they truly need it. I will hedge that by saying that if you're going to use my tax money, I do expect you to pay your share as well.
are selling a substance that can do more harm than good....last time I checked even your doctor said having an active sex life was GOOD for overall health. Also, a bust for a hooker is a freaking misdemeanor and you're out the next day...drugs can get you life depending on what kind and how much.
THEY; I'm sure can present a hundred reasons via their highly paid lobbyist why they deserve those subsidies and tax breaks; but deep down inside you know this is just "Wrong!".
One goddamn $200 client per day; seven days per week is $72,800/year. Any sex worker not willing to extend HALF that effort after being "given" the inventory to work with, along with the historic demand for the product has no business asking for a societal safety net hand-out.
I know girls at 150 only seeing 2 guys a week and not because they want to, but because they are just not getting the business. Be it because of looks, location, or whatever, there are providers that are not even making a g a month in this business. So, you think her children should go hungry even if she is trying to do the best to support them?
The "oldest profession" is not the only one to be hit by this artificially prolonged recession. And it is not the only profession outside of the 'mainstream' in respects to usual documentation, drug tests, compensation, tax withholding, unemployment insurance withholding concerns etc that allude "benifits" and systematically preclude government "assistance".
I'm sorry I don't have much sympathy for those you speak; but EMpathy wise I'm shoulder to shoulder with ya'.
I think that if providers go on government assistance programs, as someone who believes in equal opportunity, that hobbyists should also go on the same assistance programs. If I see a provider that is in the higher price range, or see more than one provider a week and it's over my hobby allowance, then I should receive some financial relief from the government for that. An entire system could be created for in network and out of network providers.
Seems fair, reasonable and part of our social democracy.
All's fair in love and hobbying.
Just curious
and claiming it as a company expense. Of course, they don't put "I saw a hooker" on there, but they make up some lame "entertainment meeting" excuse, to get away with it.
Welfare has enormous corruption problems. The worst, and most costly, is corporate welfare. What you are pointing out is absolutely right, and just a tip of the iceberg. Corporate welfare costs this country more than any individual that needs welfare, whether they manipulate the system or not. You're example is really about theft of corporate money by the individual. The most common form is when state of local governments give corporations a pass on corporate taxes to operate in a state or locality.
My point is that if the government is going to use tax dollars to assist a person who is providing, and most likely manipulating the system to get what they need, then hobbyists may want to seek out that opportunity as well. It's unfortunate that we may have to go through those manipulations, but we are obviously not quite at full exposure.
having to feed her children? Sex is a luxury item, not a need. Food, water, clothing, and shelter are immediate needs that people have done worse than fudge on taxes to obtain. I can see how a hobbyist who cheats the system, is still helping those women out though.
No, I don't think so. There are also going to be providers who may apply for welfare who don't have those responsibilities. Did I say I wanted to deny anyone who are is in need? No. Anyone who needs help, food, water, clothing or shelter, should get it, provider or not. There are also may be other choices for a woman, besides being a provider. Does every woman who can't find a job and has to put bread on the table for her family become a provider? No. You seem to want to put some of these women in great need, as being victims. All providers are not victims.
My point was that I don't think that it is fair in our modern world, that a provider should receive money, and not a hobbyist. As you said, hobbyists receiving additional money may actually help those providers that are in greater need. Suppose a provider isn't very good at was she does? But she is very good at hiding what she does in order to get welfare money.
BTW, you might also think about the possibility of instead of having the government take care of providers on welfare, to form a union of providers. Then you can help each other instead of relying on taxpayers. Then you and other providers can have some accountability towards each other by showing how supportive you are of each other. Or not.
Hey Polar,
You are correct that all providers are NOT victims.
In fact, I have seen a few providers clearly state that they got an inheritance from a relative that provides for their financial needs for the rest of their lives.
If that's true, then why bother with providing in the first place?
sunrosc
I paid into the system for 40 yrs and recently had to use it.........i had NO second thoughts about it either.
The people that milk the system and could be working, are the problem.
And the notion that providers are billionaires, is a joke.
Do you really think they wanna lay on their back and fuck old fat guys for a living?? ( the ones i know, don't )
The ones i know, do it because they care enough about their kid or kids, not to let them starve.
BTW...thanks alot DADDY, for not doing your part. Some guys make me sick!!!
You mentioned as an example those providers who "made 200 that entire week", so perhaps your question has more to do with people truly suffering, who I do not think are the mainstay of providers on TER.
I can understand and condone gals, to take advantage of Assistance programs, who get their work from street corners, since they are probably suffering in life more than those of us participating in TER activities, and going to the streets is the only thing they can think of to get by and get to the next day.
It would be nice if Providers (and any man or woman in any kind of a mostly-cash business), who are doing well with their biz, not take advantage of our society by using Government Assistance programs, but it is their personal choice, so who is going to stop them. They have to live with their own concious.
But, Providers here on TER are most likely experiencing a much better personal life than ladies forced to the streets. This is a biz that if decent Providers still in prime years, market consistly, and tour at least two weeks a month, should easily yield $5,000 to $8,000 a week, before expenses, by working only 5 days a week and seeing at least three clients a day. I'm guessing most good ones work the biz three weeks a month. But, even at only two weeks of working hard a month, $120,000 to $500,000 gross a year, before expenses, whether or not they care to report some or all of it as income, is not too shabby.
Anyway.... Again, we live with our own choices, expecially those of us in cash businesses.
I am afraid you too might be buying into the illusion come gals around here love to give off...that they are all filthy rich when in reality many don't even own a car outright much less a home. Many providers make nowhere near what you quoted, and those that do are living in areas where rent is 10k a month for a one bedroom...forget about a mortgage. I agree that if a provider is leasing luxury vehicles and spending thousands on hand bags and shoes, she is not one who would fit the "in need" definition. I am more thinking of providers who are working for someone who takes half because they have not mastered the business mind to be an indy, or for girls who truly are pimped and wish they could do it on their own.
There are women every day who are left with children some scumbag made just by not giving a damn where he shot his load..hobbyists at that. Not only is she left with the shame of having a child for a client who is married and could not give two shits about her, she now has to continue in the business making pennies to raise it because she does not believe in abortion. Have you seen many of the providers out here? Guys mock them all the time saying they would "not fk that for fre" much less pay for it, so it is not as if we are all perfect 10s and 18 years old here. Some women are not getting the low rate they request very often.
The issues have nothing to do with cash business vs W-2 employees. The issue, as I am understanding your question is if a lady is "struggling", is she within her rights to seek out GA. Or as some are starting to babble on your thread..."how much does a lady make"?
IMHO if you qualify for assistance, take the help. The government, in it's infinite wisdom has put programs out there for many people to utilize. Fuck those who think that a gal who is asking 300/400/500+ an hour does not qualify. If a gal has a smart CPA to assist her with preparing the requests...it's amazing how numbers can routinely be manipulated. This has been going on forever, and will continue forever. And the amazing part is, it's ALL legal.
I can't speak for those who feel that morally or ethically it is inherently wrong for someone who "really" doesn't need the assistance to ask for it. Just as we see on this board, there's always going to be those moralists who object to anything THEY don't believe in. So be it.
And just FWIW...there are many gals right here who easily could qualify for assistance. Yet, just as in the real world, many would rather "tough" it out and work a bit harder than take any handouts. That's the part that the "moralists" don't see. But there are those of us who do know the real financial stories of ladies...and know that many would rather NOT take a handout. But even those who do...they have earned that right as well.
And if that is wrong...so be it. But if anyone would like to see how the largest (and smallest) Companies utilize the "government assistance" out there...we can debate that morality just as well.
IMHO if you qualify for assistance, take the help. The government, in it's infinite wisdom has put programs out there for many people to utilize. Fuck those who think that a gal who is asking 300/400/500+ an hour does not qualify. If a gal has a smart CPA to assist her with preparing the requests...it's amazing how numbers can routinely be manipulated. This has been going on forever, and will continue forever. And the amazing part is, it's ALL legal.
I can't speak for those who feel that morally or ethically it is inherently wrong for someone who "really" doesn't need the assistance to ask for it. Just as we see on this board, there's always going to be those moralists who object to anything THEY don't believe in. So be it.
And just FWIW...there are many gals right here who easily could qualify for assistance. Yet, just as in the real world, many would rather "tough" it out and work a bit harder than take any handouts. That's the part that the "moralists" don't see. But there are those of us who do know the real financial stories of ladies...and know that many would rather NOT take a handout. But even those who do...they have earned that right as well.
And if that is wrong...so be it. But if anyone would like to see how the largest (and smallest) Companies utilize the "government assistance" out there...we can debate that morality just as well.
is because so many women put off that bs as an illusion for guys to bite on. Fact is, providing today is nowhere near the money it was back in 2008. I have not made over 8k a month in 2 years, and know very few who do unless they are constantly fking at every chance they get. Most girls in my area are at the 250-300 range, and are getting less than 4 clients a WEEK, not a day lol. Even they are having to run specials, because the money simply is not there like it used to be.
I am one who denied any kind of support from two marriages, because I felt I made enough money to support my lifestyle. I also denied child support from my child's father, and look what mommy does to raise her. I just figured as long as she was on his Health Care insurance and he paid for her needs whilst they were together, that I could take care of the rest and I have for 5 years. With what I claim in taxes, I would not qualify for any assistance other than student loans again, and I have enough of that crap.
I guess my view is individual based, and not occupation based. If you truly need help to provide a better standard of living for your family, I believe you should get it. I also don't think that one should have to live in the ghetto or in any dangerous neighborhood just because some hobbyists ASSume they make too much money...that sounds more like petty jealousy to me, than actual facts.
Folks,
When I read providers posting on the forums that their mortgage is $2,000 per month, staying at overpriced 5 star hotels and they whine about having to pay this and that, well, sorry, it does tend to give out the impression that those providers are indeed RICH!
Enough said,
sunrosc
I am one who denied any kind of support from two marriages, because I felt I made enough money to support my lifestyle. I also denied child support from my child's father, and look what mommy does to raise her. I just figured as long as she was on his Health Care insurance and he paid for her needs whilst they were together, that I could take care of the rest and I have for 5 years. With what I claim in taxes, I would not qualify for any assistance other than student loans again, and I have enough of that crap.
I guess my view is individual based, and not occupation based. If you truly need help to provide a better standard of living for your family, I believe you should get it. I also don't think that one should have to live in the ghetto or in any dangerous neighborhood just because some hobbyists ASSume they make too much money...that sounds more like petty jealousy to me, than actual facts.
Also, thanks for not using this as an opportunity to put each other down for the beliefs we have. I think we have had enough of that, and I am not innocent of it in past threads. I believe anyone NOT taking advantage of the system should benefit from it. In all honesty, many of us who went to school would have not qualified for financial aid had we claimed every dime we made but who does that? Who here has NEVER cheated the system in one way or the other at some point? I know senior citizens selling pain pills to get by, then using that money to go blow at the casino to keep from dying of the boredom of living alone and having no family.
There was a time in my career that I was financially able to support two close friends I met at the hospital by either giving them cash, taking them out to dinner, or buying them groceries...that is not longer the case with an 812 student loan debt each month since I graduated. My eating out 4 days a week turned into twice a month, and shopping at Whole Foods all the time, turned into once every 5 trips to the store.
I am not suggesting that anyone needs all of those things mind you because there are people who can't even afford to eat at all, but I am trying to reiterate that just because a girl "IS" a provider, does not mean she is making a lot of money. I know women in NYC who have to literally work around the clock to pay rent there leaving them not much for anything else. I also know of providers who can't even afford to give their children a nice christmas every year which is why we used to have a drawing on another board for providers in certain areas.
Each christmas 3 providers would be chosen based on their financial needs, and we would all chip in to donate for their kid's gifts. I can't tell you how it felt to actually have the photos of the children with their toys and how thankful they were. I highly doubt it mattered that the money came from hookers either.
One of my former favorites could not pay when her daughter needed to go to the hospital because her ex abused her daughter. She found the help she needed, but had someone not stepped in and helped her pay well things would have been bad. If anyone truly needs the help there is no shame in getting it, provider or no. If anyone can get by without it with careful budgeting and planning they should, provider or not.
happens all the time..i know a provider with 3 kids and three different daddies..she collects a hefty government assistance check every month because of her low income level..she escorts when she can to make some extra cash..i really do not have an opinion if it is right or wrong..as long as she can put a roof over their heads..feed and clothe them properly..thats really all that matters to me..
bill withers summed it up the best.." we all need somebody to lean on"..how true..
by all means you deserve it. IMO
Exactly and I agree that women who find a place in the industry where she is able to be sought out for a cause have no reason to not apply for the help. When someone is a single parent with desire to improve her life and better care for her little ones , while bettering her own future all she has to do is report a part of her income and pay taxes.
The government only cares about the % paid to Uncle Sam.When you feed the government they could care less what you do .
if every man alive was held responsible for the financial upbringing of his children,,we wouldnt even be having this discussion..
aspects of life, including government jobs, people co leasing for a car or house, or simply taking more samples of at the snack section than one's expected to. Even people in power, such as the governosr, a senates, or city council member. These are the people that we trust and elect, and their not immune to corruption. In fact, here in DC, the corruption is so bad, we have new city council members every few months. When the opportunity presents itself, its difficult for some to turn away. Even our mayor is under scrutiny for his involvement for illegal funds.
My point is, the system is designed in such a way to assist people, however, some people can't be trusted and abuse the system. The system in this case is the welfare system, its designed to assist those that truly need it. If you truly need it, then it was specifically geared towards that demographic. Some people don't need it at all, and abuse the system.
There was a Fox News documentary about the welfare system a few days ago. Some of these people that collected their welfare checks specifically said that they couldn't find jobs. However, within their neighborhoods, there were more than 2,000 jobs available. They claimed that they searched, but no one was hiring. That is a lie, and because the government took care of their living expenses, why work? Guess its better to have a monthly check than flipping burgers and physically working. These are the people that should not be qualified for welfare checks.
Anyhow, for those that need welfare assistance, the system was specifically designed for them. For those that abuse it, they are doing a disservice to those that truly need it, which causes more debts to those that support this system.
I think to myself "no jobs my ass." I mean I don't care what time of the day it is, these people are always on the road or in the mall. The entire city can't all be hookers and stay at home moms lol. I am no stranger to hard work which is why I am getting a full-time job soon, but many could get a job and simply don't want to. They are lazy and expect everyone else to pay their way even with the ability to do it themselves. I am totally against people using the system just so they don't have to work, and I believe that any person who is not handicapped or a senior can very well get a job with or without a degree. I won't be making what my degree says I should with my first job, but that's freaking life! You have to start somewhere and WORK your way to the top, and I won't be blowing the upper mgmt. to get there either.
-- Modified on 7/15/2012 8:31:52 PM
...the issue is do they really need it? If they do then there is no question. They should be able to have it.
men in this country, "MAN UP" and quit leaving there wives and kids, to fend for themselves.
MEN, read, The Hidden Value of a Man, by John Trent/Gary Smally... a real eye opener on the condition of men these days.
I hope it has the same affect on you, as it did on me.
You may have to swallow your pride to read it though.
up and leave his wife and kids. He still pays his share of the bills if not all of them, treats his family with adoration and compassion, and just plays with hookers vs. leaving his family for some ass at the office. A man who can't support his kids is a scumbag...no bones about it. A man who sits at home whilst his wife or GF is out turning tricks to support him, is also a scumbag.
MEN, read, The Hidden Value of a Man, by John Trent/Gary Smally... a real eye opener on the condition of men these days.
I hope it has the same affect on you, as it did on me.
You may have to swallow your pride to read it though.
The economy has wrecked so many people from all walks of life that it's almost silly to think that we can pigeonhole anyone of any walk of life into "they don't need assistance" or "they should not be entitled to assistance."
I know Wall Street guys who made mid-six figure incomes who are close to living on food stamps. When you start looking at the income people make, that's only one side of the equation. A friend of mine in CA is convinced that anyone who makes six figures is rich. Live in Manhattan, and you will find that $100k doesn't go far at all.
So I say...if the hookers need the assistance and can qualify, go right ahead.
you can ask this same question removing the hooker part. If prostitution was decriminalized and taxes were collected the issue would be no different than a private chiropractor, or an acupuncturist or basically anyone with a skill/training/talent and a business that depends on it. So yes, if a chiropractor that charges so much per hour cannot meet ends for his/her family, I think there is nothing unethical in collecting benefits.
Now for businesses under the radar, like prostitution, this is no different to people that have jobs here and there, hired without a contract and make a salary that can fluctuate a lot. The issue of requesting government help when you can prove you need it but you really don't comes down to each person's ethics. It's not a free for all; so doing that when one doesn't need it means taking it away from somebody else.
She should report all her earnings and if she qualified as she is making less what ever standard the government sets then she should get it. Just like anyone else that just is not making it. She should also adjust her marketing or get out of the biz as something is wrong.
If she is honestly making more she should not just like anyone else. She is making enough to pay her own way she sould not take from those that can't. If she is not reporting her income and getting benefits she should not, she is a thief and a cheat and I hope they bust her as she is hurting every man and woman who pays their fair share and those that will have to pay the huge debt our country is racking up for these programs.
Now with any business there is ups and downs and part of that is budgeting for them. Not every one is fit to run a business, like escorting or any other business. It take real discipline and planing.
all day. if a hooker makes so little that she rightfully qualifies, its time for a new career. at 200 an hour, 4 hours of work a week can feed a family of 3, bills included. i know, because i feed 3 mouths on slightly less money than that.
if a person really needs it, i say get it, but if a hooker falls in that category...its probably somethin she is doin wrong
Hate to break it to ya, but there are many providers who guys view as too old, too fat, or too ugly to even be here, and many are struggling. What if a provider is also working say a full-time job elsewhere but for min. wage, and she is still not able to support her family? Would would you suggest then? I think your view is biased, but it is your opinion.
You bring up things that are speculation vs. actual facts when you say, At x an hour, x days a week, she "should" be able to do this. Fact is, you don't know what a provider is making. As I said, I know many with a rate as low as 150 only getting 2 clients a week. Who the fk can live on 1200 a month if they have children? If she is living in Section 8 housing and providing, that is not what I would call a quality of living. For what we have to go through many times, I think all of us should have a mansion and drive nothing but luxury cars, but that's not reality.
if a person really needs it, i say get it, but if a hooker falls in that category...its probably somethin she is doin wrong
She is reasonably attractive in the face and has a tight body. She charges as low as $80 a session and probably no higher than $150 a session for nude bodyrub. She has a ridiculously tight and tanned body with nice implants, but she has a young daughter and is on food stamps.
Lots of providers are struggling. Like London said, it ain't always what you think it is, as far as the income.
Same with Wall Street guys, too. I have a friend on Facebook who regularly rants about topics like these, and she is off-base most of the time, because she is always making unrealistic assumptions about things.
Just because you passed the bar, does not mean you're getting business. Though Mr. Serpius would like to make this thread all about me, it's simply not. I am not and have never been on any kind of assistance and quite frankly, I would have qualified when I first started providing because I was not paying taxes as much as I do now. To suggest that I don't deserve to raise my child in a home vs. the trailer park is absurd! I don't live in a freaking Mansion, but yes it is a nice home in a safe location as opposed to living in the city of New Orleans where I had to when I was in school.
I am also not stupid when it comes to my money and how I spend it, so damn right I will have a nice home. I don't pay a car note...never have in all my life, so that 5 or 600 I would be paying goes towards a mortgage which equals a valuable asset, not something that is going to depreciate (sp?).
I was told that I should go on tour regardless of the amount of money I knew I was going to make by this same nut job now starting shit in this thread...talk about irony. Yea, if I did that I would certainly be in the freaking welfare office! I am far from stupid and finance was not a class I slept through lol.
obviously i can only speculate on things, since im not a provider. but i think that a GOOD one should be able to get at least 3 appointments per week. at $250 an hour ( which isnt much compared to a lot of what i see on here) that comes out to $3000 a month, tax free. $3000 a month comes out to $39,000 a year ( 3000 x 13 since there are actually 4 extra weeks in the year, hopefully we are all smart enough here to know that, but i have seen some of the posts on here and know that is not the case). Tax free, $39,000 is roughly $47,000 ( at the very least, probably more) at a normal, taxed job. now, if she also has a legal jon, even a minimum wage, 40 hours a week, she is bringing in another $1100 or so after taxes per month. not to mention the HUGE refund for being under the limit for the earned income credit, plus gettin ALL the taxed money back and money for any kids. so thats another $4000 or more. that just seems plenty of money to live on without the need for extra help. and dont most guys that see high end, or even just well established providers, leave a tip? cant even calculate that, but its safe to say that is probably close to 5 digits by years end.
while it may be true some women are struggling in this line of work, they are the ones i would say need to find another job. men crave sex. men will go to insane lengths for the booty. a lot of providers do things that gfs or wives at home just wont. and a lot of men dont care if they bang you, britney spears, rosie odonnell, or a tranny. as long as they get that nut off. and every woman is beautiful to some men. some like em white, some black, some exotic, some tall, some chunky, some stick thin, etc. if they arent getting the business, i say its something they are doing wrong.
If your lifestyle means living in Manhattan, where the average one-bedroom apartment rents for close to $2500/month. Now if you want a doorman and a central part of the city like where I live, then you're one-bedroom costs are near $3500 to $4000/month.
$150k/year means I can live like a king in most parts of the country, or barely middle class in Manhattan.
even one in private school, that is an extra 7k a year. People who have a mortgate are already a step ahead of those who are renting and leasing a car, so yes, I will justify a home as a viable asset to have and pay on.
Rent is throwing money away...end of story. Leasing a car...same thing. I love the way people like to think "Oh, you dumb whores don't need to pay a mortgage" lol. Yea, we can all live in the trailer park and suck d*ck to live that way...right. If you make 60k a year from providing here and you pay taxes, you're doing average. Most every woman I know personally in this business has another income...it is not what it used to be.
Again, way too broad of a stroke. If I decided I was sick of NYC and wanted to get out of here, my total cost of getting out is one month's rent, which is about $3k. Now, if I owned, I'd need to sell the place, and that could be a shitshow.
Plus, for $3k/month, I can have a reasonably nice apartment. With a $3k/month mortgage...not so much.
Owning is not always better than renting.
you do it. You are not putting into anything that you can own one day, and you are not getting any equity by renting. We have all paid rent at one point or another, but think about how much money we would have invested in a home if we had it back. You're paying off another person's debt when you rent...I collect 800 a month for that very same reason. You don't have to sell to move...you can rent the place out and get that debt paid off while you are moving somewhere else. Real Estate 101 lol.
With the way the economy and the market for housing are today, just about everyone I know is renting out their first home to live in another. Have someone else pay off your first mortgage and go live where you want.
-- Modified on 7/17/2012 11:44:57 AM
While you may be more informed than the average person, there are plenty of morons out there who have no clue how their loans work. And that's scary, but I can't think of a more expensive asset than most anyone will buy in his/her lifetime.
How much equity are you really getting? If you put down 20% and the real estate market tanks, then your equity is less than 20%. And unless you are paying down your mortgage fast, the equity grows VERY slowly.
In this economy, it might very well be better to be defensive and rent.
And renting out a place isn't that simple. Or owning, for that matter. If there's a problem, you have to eat the expense. Renting? Simple. You call the landlord, and the shit is fixed.
maybe you just need to not live in such an expensive place. where i live you can have a two story house with a furnsihed basement, 3 brs and 3 1/2 baths for under 150 grand. in a very "nice" upper middle class neighborhood with good schools for the kids.
It doesn't exist here.
ok. and my point was, why in the hell would one HAVE to live in NYC? if you are doing it, and affording it, thats great. but if someone cant afford to live somewhere like that, move your ass to montana.
Well, I suppose if I went to jail then I'd really be on government assistance.
I pay taxes. A LOT.
if you pay taxes on the money you gain illegally, i question you.
And if you want to know why...PM me
a Louis Vuitton or Chanel bag, and wearing Jimmy Choos to the supermarket. Unless those things were a gift, you have no reason to be using food stamps then spending money on designer labels...ugh!
or the one's in the grocery store with the 2 liter bottle of pop and potato chips paying with food stamps