Let's hear Magoo's "relevant" argument...
The 2-year-old post Izzy responded to was about the independence of the Federal Reserve. Izzy's post was not relevant to that.
Let's hear Magoo's "relevant" argument...
You know better than that. You posted the personal networth worksheet to show that a home is an asset.As I suspected, you have nothing.
Wrong. You responded to the post about what an asset is.The 2-year-old post Izzy responded to was about the independence of the Federal Reserve. Izzy's post was not relevant to that.
You know better than that. You posted the personal networth worksheet to show that a home is an asset.
Wrong. You responded to the post about what an asset is.
Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?
Ignoramus.
Oh right. Your net worth argument.
What is my "net worth argument"?
Right. That’s “collateral” for the loan.You see, Husker , you don't understand things on a deeper level the way Iz does.
You know how the Mueller investigation is about HRC? He can explain.
Also, when a bank wants to loan you money and you show them your real estate (that you don't rent out) and your artwork and your automobiles, they don't count those as "assets" because they don't earn money. Right, Iz?
Right. That’s “collateral” for the loan.
Do you know what a balance sheet is?Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?
Now you know the difference between an asset and collateral for a loan. I hope.Your answer to the above question was yes. So you don't call "collateral for a loan"
an "asset?" Once again, your knowledge runs so deep about everything. I am amazed!
You poor thing. You speak about economics here, while not knowing that your home (if you own it), which does not "bring in profit on an ongoing basis," is an asset. Did you also know that a house you may own is not only an "asset," (a simple fact which you seem not to understand), but is also an "asset" that can be used as collateral for a loan?Now you know the difference between an asset and collateral for a loan. I hope.
Do you know what a balance sheet is?
Yes. If you own a home outright and it does not cash flow. It is not an asset. You continue to pay insurance, property tax, mello roos/HOA fees (if applicable), electricity, water/sewage, maintenance, etc. which makes your home a liability because money comes out of your pocket to maintain ownership and longevity of your home. Of course you can use your home as collateral for a loan (i.e. home equity LOC) but when you do so you add to the aforementioned expenses that come out of your pocket, a liability, as opposed to going in to your pocket which makes it an asset. Now since you're so sure that homes are an asset I will say that they are most definitely an asset for your bank if you still owe them money. Therefore, the house that you live in cannot be an asset for both you and the bank unless your house is also being rented out to room mates that pay all or some of the aforementioned expenses.You poor thing. You speak about economics here, while not knowing that your home (if you own it), which does not "bring in profit on an ongoing basis," is an asset. Did you also know that a house you may own is not only an "asset," (a simple fact which you seem not to understand), but is also an "asset" that can be used as collateral for a loan?
Pop quiz: can you name a type of collateral which is not an asset?
I had hoped.Now you know the difference between an asset and collateral for a loan. I hope.
Yes. If you own a home outright and it does not cash flow. It is not an asset. You continue to pay insurance, property tax, mello roos/HOA fees (if applicable), electricity, water/sewage, maintenance, etc. which makes your home a liability because money comes out of your pocket to maintain ownership and longevity of your home. Of course you can use your home as collateral for a loan (i.e. home equity LOC) but when you do so you add to the aforementioned expenses that come out of your pocket, a liability, as opposed to going in to your pocket which makes it an asset. Now since you're so sure that homes are an asset I will say that they are most definitely an asset for your bank if you still owe them money. Therefore, the house that you live in cannot be an asset for both you and the bank unless your house is also being rented out to room mates that pay all or some of the aforementioned expenses.
You poor thing. You speak about economics here, while not knowing that your home (if you own it), which does not "bring in profit on an ongoing basis," is an asset. Did you also know that a house you may own is not only an "asset," (a simple fact which you seem not to understand), but is also an "asset" that can be used as collateral for a loan?
Pop quiz: can you name a type of collateral which is not an asset?
OK, I will go slow here. The value of your house as an asset, whether you owe money on it or not, is the equity value less the costs (e.g. mortgage, maintenance, etc.)...although most wouldn't consider costs such as electricity and water, etc., to reduce the asset value.
The fact that you have expenses to maintain the asset may reduce the asset's value, but does not make it a "liability," it remains an "asset."
So let's say you bought a house for $1m and, due to CA real estate being what it is, it is now worth $3m on the market.
Let's say you have a loan of $800K on the house. The bank has an "asset" which is a secured loan of $800K against the collateral which is now worth $3m. But you, the "owner" of the house, has an asset worth $2.2m, i.e. the $3m value less the $800K you owe on it. Only you can sell the house, not the bank (unless the bank forecloses on you).
So contrary to what you say above, the house you live in is definitely an asset to you and the loan on it is an asset to the bank.
This is the MOST BASIC stuff about economics and budgets and value...indicating perfectly what I have been saying about you and economics...you know absolutely nothing.
OK, I will go slow here. The value of your house as an asset, whether you owe money on it or not, is the equity value less the costs (e.g. mortgage, maintenance, etc.)...although most wouldn't consider costs such as electricity and water, etc., to reduce the asset value.
The fact that you have expenses to maintain the asset may reduce the asset's value, but does not make it a "liability," it remains an "asset."
So let's say you bought a house for $1m and, due to CA real estate being what it is, it is now worth $3m on the market.
Let's say you have a loan of $800K on the house. The bank has an "asset" which is a secured loan of $800K against the collateral which is now worth $3m. But you, the "owner" of the house, has an asset worth $2.2m, i.e. the $3m value less the $800K you owe on it. Only you can sell the house, not the bank (unless the bank forecloses on you).
So contrary to what you say above, the house you live in is definitely an asset to you and the loan on it is an asset to the bank.
This is the MOST BASIC stuff about economics and budgets and value...indicating perfectly what I have been saying about you and economics...you know absolutely nothing.
I always run in to these convoluted explanations when people forget which way the money flows monthly.Please come in out of the rain......you're going to drown in foolishness.