Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Mortgage: Fixed 30 years interest rates

Ja Rhule

By Ja Rhule,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
Posted

Oh I know... I will pay around 200k in interest over 30 years... So the question is... Should I lock my rate? Whatcha guys think? My close date is Oct 26th.

Yes, lock the rate if you can get below 3.5.

Ask for a 1 time free float down, or at least tell them that another company is offering you one for free.

You can lock at todays price, and if it drops between now and your close date you can change it then for free.

Not all banks will do this but many will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jase Apprentice

Jase

Posted
Posted

Is it that you can't or won't? What is the real difference in payments?

If you're locked in to a 30 year, you're almost better off renting.

The difference between a 30-year and 15-year mortgage rate isn't much these days. (0.5%-ish?)

That translates to 30-40 dollars extra on each payment per $100,000 of mortgage to pay a 30-year mortgage off in 15 years versus paying off a 15 year mortgage off on-schedule.

the insurance against losing your job is worth it to me to go with a 30-year over a 15-year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
Posted

What's the insurance against loosing ur job u talking about?

He is just saying that if push came to shove he could go back to original lower payment of the 30 year if he were to have a bad month, or lose his job.

Otherwise he would pay extra toward the principle every month and make it act like a 15 year.

Funny thing is though, less than 5% of the country consistently pays more that the mortgage payment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thefuzz Mentor

thefuzz

Posted
Posted

Is it that you can't or won't? What is the real difference in payments?

If you're locked in to a 30 year, you're almost better off renting.

Disagree, the tax benefits and very low mortgage rates offset that by at least a few hundred dollars per month.

I am not talking house vs. apt, but house vs. equal house on rental market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jase Apprentice

Jase

Posted
Posted

He is just saying that if push came to shove he could go back to original lower payment of the 30 year if he were to have a bad month, or lose his job.

Otherwise he would pay extra toward the principle every month and make it act like a 15 year.

Funny thing is though, less than 5% of the country consistently pays more that the mortgage payment.

I used to be one of the 5%.

Then I had another kid. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MadHatter Rookie

MadHatter

Posted
Posted

If you can swing a 15 year, rates are better still and costs are significantly reduced over the life of the loan.

Unless you are about 45 years old or older, entering into a 15 year mortgage is not smart. Given the extremely low interest rates on mortgages and the tax dedictiblity factor, you are better off paying a lower payment and investing the incremental amount.

Not to mention that the mortgage tax credit is the primary reason that most Americans are able to itemize their deductions. By having to take the standard dededuction (instead of your itemized deduction with mortgage decuction), you are likely to pay a higher effective tax rate.

Again....30 year mortgage and invest the additional amount that you would have paid on the 15 year mortgage. You will come out better off 99% of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MadHatter Rookie

MadHatter

Posted
Posted

I can't imagine.

What's funny about that is people don't realize how much an extra $50-$100 per month every month toward principle will do for you.

Literally save you tens of thousands of dollars.

But when the effective rate is only about 2% (actual rate minus the impact of it being tax deductible), you are better off investing the additional $100. You are almost guaranteed to earn significantly more than a 2% return over a several year period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyberjag Newbie

Cyberjag

Posted
Posted

Unless you are about 45 years old or older, entering into a 15 year mortgage is not smart. Given the extremely low interest rates on mortgages and the tax dedictiblity factor, you are better off paying a lower payment and investing the incremental amount.

Not to mention that the mortgage tax credit is the primary reason that most Americans are able to itemize their deductions. By having to take the standard dededuction (instead of your itemized deduction with mortgage decuction), you are likely to pay a higher effective tax rate.

Again....30 year mortgage and invest the additional amount that you would have paid on the 15 year mortgage. You will come out better off 99% of the time.

I think Dave Ramsey would thoroughly disagree. :)

And you're assuming that the balance would actually be invested. How often does that actually work out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • SmokinwithWilly
      Who is Tepper’s favorite player?

      By SmokinwithWilly · Posted

      I am too. Frank became completely disinterested in the HC job after the draft. 
    • CRA
      Panther fans sound off on Bryce

      By CRA · Posted

      down 24 and we get our first possession in the 3rd and what happens?  run TE checkdown TE checkdown run run run RB checkdown TE checkdown run TE checkdown incomplete TE checkdown run now on the 4 yard line- Renfrow TD and POOF!  3rd quarter is over.  That's not a team even trying to get back into the game in reality.  That's just the Panthers taking freebies to make it look respectable in the end and guess what? Bryce gets to pad on 6/7 to his stat line in exchange for making the 3rd quarter disappear.  Not sure the hyper focus on the depth of the corners.  Cardinals were going to simply drop and allow the easy stuff underneath.  Which they did.  Did they play a random short yardage play a little different? Sure.  That doesn't' mean they weren't just letting the Panthers overall eat clock to bring the game to an end.  The Cards strategy was fine on D.  You just don't generally see teams implement it as early as they did but they were up pretty big.  It's the other units for the Cards that fugged the plan up.  again, it's 3 drives,  the ONE in the 3rd quarter and only drive of the entire quarter and the 2 to open the 4th.  Cardinals gave Bryce stuff in exchange for clock  (and the result was slow long drives eating the clock).  The rest of the game? They didn't.  The rest of the game outside of those 3 drives the Cards weren't in garbage allowance mode and Bryce stunk
    • SmokinwithWilly
      Panther fans sound off on Bryce

      By SmokinwithWilly · Posted

      But a serious question is, does he not see a guy come open because he misses seeing them on the field, which happens to every QB, or, is his vision blocked by the wide bodies in front of him instead of the helmets other QBs experience? For instance missing a wide open Chuba. Did he not see him or could he literally not see him? I tend to think the latter is a far bigger problem than we're being led to believe it is. 
×
×
  • Create New...