Why People Hate The Google Bus

Rendon said:
Sorry, this is completely false. You're just coming up with numbers out of your ass that do not reflect reality. In a period of strong increase of real estate value, you'll make money owning a house. In a period of weak/no increase of real estate value (like the last few years), you'd be better off taking the difference between the mortgage and the rent and putting it into the stock market. If you buy a house for $1m and sell it it 5, 10, 30 years later for $1m, then you would have been much better off renting and investing the difference.
Click to expand...
You also have to compare equal things if you're getting into this, you can't say "oh buy a $1M house or live in an apartment" that my friend would make you equally guilty of pulling numbers out of your ass.

Assuming you do have equal values, there's no way rent on a $1M house = 30 years of mortgage payments. And what difference are we investing? Most people don't pay off a house in full, they're paying it off as the paychecks roll in, and statistically speaking... people SUCK at saving money, so even if rent was less than mortgage chances are they're going to see that as disposable income a just buy useless stuff that won't have any value in 30 years, sure you might be the exception, but reality trumps smart people it seems ;)

Now if the value of the house drops, like you bought at the peak of the bubble and it popped now your house is worth 1/3 what it was, then that's a different story, and it's why so many people are simply choosing to default on their mortgage and take the hit to their credit.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Afraid this is completely false.

Let us eliminate inflation for a moment to keep this simple and easy to follow. Using your example, you bought a house in 1970 for 30k. What you forgot to include was the 30 year mortgage where it was paid off in 2000. So as of 2000 you have effectively 30k in the bank, in 2013 you still have 30k in the bank even if the house and property never increase in value one penny. The difference is a Renter who has been in an apartment for that 40 years has been outputting the same amount of money and they don't own a thing. All they get is Pay next months rent or you are on the street. Where the homeowner owns a house and land that hold value.

Let's make this more complex to drive the point home even further.
Bought house for 100k.
Paid off during 30 year mortgage at 3.5% interest.
Now without getting into a huge spreadsheet on how interest works. Lets just assume the $3500 per year interest is going to flatly add another $105k to the price paid. You still are paid off in 30 years as this is all calculated in. Obviously it wouldn't be $3500 per year as if you are paying more than just your interest that value will decrease with the amount of the loan.
so 30 years or 360 months comes out to a monthly output of $569/mo.

So the home owner pays $570/mo for 30 years and owns a home worth 100k with zero inflation or increase in value. The home owner has a loss of $105,000 due to interest.

Now the Renter.
Lives in Various apartments, townhomes, condos etc for the same 30 years.
Assuming a similar rent (unlikely unless you like living in a shithole).
$570/mo for 30 years.
Renter has paid $205,000 and has Absolutely nothing to show for it. A total loss of $205,000.

That isn't even getting into inflation and the very real chance that your property will be worth more at face value after 30 years than not. That is assuming the typical worst case of zero increase in value over the life of the loan. No matter how you try and spin it, the renter is never going to come out ahead.
Click to expand...

Mmm, don't forget the new roof you had to put on two or three times, the water heater that had to be replaced, the sewer line that got clogged or the pipe that broke and required breaking asphalt in the driveway, the additional utilities that the apartment complex pays that you take out of hide, the insurance on your loan, the taxes on your property, the insurance for your home, the gas for your lawnmower or the cost of landscapers, the tree you had to remove before it fell on your neighbor's car, the snowblower you bought, the air conditioner you installed, and the kitchen you remodeled. Oh let's not forget having to replace all those windows and repaint the outside as well as replace rotting timbers and hire multiple exterminators to deal with termites. Nevermind the the loss you might take shortselling to move somewhere else or the money lost in being unable to easily relocate to accept a higher paying job.

All of those and a whole host of other major expenses add up over the course of our forty years and are not costs endured by a person renting an apartment which are other cost factors. Taking the money required to feed those things alone and investing it in a crappy retirement plan will net a person several million before by the time they retire that a home owner with the same income can't save because it's tied up as investments in a home that's worth nothing after inflation over the purchase cost.

It's okay to buy a house, but its a missed point to call it an investment. Investments gain interest and they don't usually incurr additional costs to do so as does a home. There are ways to make property work profitably, but its far from a catch-all way to mint money.

Also, it has nothing to do with owning a car or not.
 
Class envy at work. After all, it's easier to just complain about someone else having more than to work harder and try to do better yourself. Guess what? You're still broke in the end, and they still have more money than you. Losers need to get a life.
 
Rendon said:
Sorry, this is completely false. You're just coming up with numbers out of your ass that do not reflect reality. In a period of strong increase of real estate value, you'll make money owning a house. In a period of weak/no increase of real estate value (like the last few years), you'd be better off taking the difference between the mortgage and the rent and putting it into the stock market. If you buy a house for $1m and sell it it 5, 10, 30 years later for $1m, then you would have been much better off renting and investing the difference.
Click to expand...

This is similar to the argument over buying or leasing a car.
Your lease payments might be less than loan payments on the same car, but after the lease is over, you have nothing.
If you buy, you'll likely be more initially, but you can keep the car and drive it for years. I'm finally looking to replace my 11 year old car that was paid off 8 years ago.

Bought my house over 15 years ago, and it's now worth over 2.5x what I paid. My payment hasn't gone up
(actually it's gone down due to refinancing at a lower rate, but that's another story). Meanwhile rents have gone up by about 2x.

I agree that buying is not for everyone. If you are only going to live in a place for a few years, you should rent. But buying a place you can afford, paying it off and living in a it for 30+ years is cheap financial security. Refinancing it every few years to take money out for vacations like many of the people who lost their homes is just stupid.
 
If those people were allowed on the google busses, then the google busses would look like ass in no time too.

Its like the ghetto trash that are mad other neighborhoods are nicer, but once several move in the property value goes to shit and its another ghetto.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Mmm, don't forget the new roof you had to put on two or three times, the water heater that had to be replaced, the sewer line that got clogged or the pipe that broke and required breaking asphalt in the driveway, the additional utilities that the apartment complex pays that you take out of hide, the insurance on your loan, the taxes on your property, the insurance for your home, the gas for your lawnmower or the cost of landscapers, the tree you had to remove before it fell on your neighbor's car, the snowblower you bought, the air conditioner you installed, and the kitchen you remodeled. Oh let's not forget having to replace all those windows and repaint the outside as well as replace rotting timbers and hire multiple exterminators to deal with termites. Nevermind the the loss you might take shortselling to move somewhere else or the money lost in being unable to easily relocate to accept a higher paying job.

All of those and a whole host of other major expenses add up over the course of our forty years and are not costs endured by a person renting an apartment which are other cost factors.
Click to expand...

If you are renting you are already paying for all the above through your rent.

You are also over estimating expenses.
Insurance on your loan? Don't have it because I put 20% down.
Gas for your lawnmower or the cost of landscapers? Rechargeable plug lawnmower and do my own yard work.
Water heater that had to be replaced? Did it myself. for < $400
New roof you had to put on two or three times. Roof can last 30-40 years, so unless you buy a house that already needs a new roof, you'll likely only need to replace it once.
Kitchen you remodeled? Did that, and I have a great kitchen that works great (even after 13 years) instead of a poorly designed dump.

Plus my kids have a nice yard to play in, we can grow a garden, and I can remodel or change things the way I want instead of what some landlord wants.

As for moving for a job, I don't need to, as there are plenty of opportunities within driving distance in Southern California. Plus both extended families live within driving distance, so we wouldn't want to move anywhere else.

When I retire, I might consider downsizing and moving to a lower cost state. By then my house will likely be worth well over a million (it's currently worth $750K, or 3x what I paid) and it will be paid off. That will leave me plenty of money to buy a smaller place and some nice vacations :)

Meanwhile you will be trying figure out how to afford the $4,000 rent on that one bedroom apartment.
 
nutzo said:
If you are renting you are already paying for all the above through your rent.

You are also over estimating expenses.
Insurance on your loan? Don't have it because I put 20% down.
Gas for your lawnmower or the cost of landscapers? Rechargeable plug lawnmower and do my own yard work.
Water heater that had to be replaced? Did it myself. for < $400
New roof you had to put on two or three times. Roof can last 30-40 years, so unless you buy a house that already needs a new roof, you'll likely only need to replace it once.
Kitchen you remodeled? Did that, and I have a great kitchen that works great (even after 13 years) instead of a poorly designed dump.

Plus my kids have a nice yard to play in, we can grow a garden, and I can remodel or change things the way I want instead of what some landlord wants.

As for moving for a job, I don't need to, as there are plenty of opportunities within driving distance in Southern California. Plus both extended families live within driving distance, so we wouldn't want to move anywhere else.

When I retire, I might consider downsizing and moving to a lower cost state. By then my house will likely be worth well over a million (it's currently worth $750K, or 3x what I paid) and it will be paid off. That will leave me plenty of money to buy a smaller place and some nice vacations :)

Meanwhile you will be trying figure out how to afford the $4,000 rent on that one bedroom apartment.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is saying that no one should own a house but we already tried to force home ownership higher than its current levels and we caused the current financial collapse because of that ... at least 30% of Americans can't or shouldn't own homes ... just the reality of how things work ;)

Back on topic, most of the Silicon Valley companies are the elite companies of our country ... they offer world class benefits to their employees (as they should) and the bus is just one of the benefits ... they also employ the best and finest this country has to offer so their people actually deserve those benefits more than the others ... that's how meritocracies are supposed to work :cool:
 
Smashing Young Man said:
I think it's envy of their exceptionally gainful employment, not so much the bus itself. The bus is just a convienent symbol
Click to expand...

Is people earning more money than other people "news"?
It's like children having a tantrum but don't know what they want.

What do people want? I thought America hated communism and socialism. (Not that a lot of American's know what either are, at least from the loud mouths of the internet)
 
Actually, sorry, I say Americans yet many Australians are ignorant too. Fighting the Vietnam war in 2013.
 
I'm all for the (add mega company name here) buses. If they fit 30 workers into every bus and do that with, say, 10 more buses, then that's potentially 300 fewer cars on the road. That equals less pollution, fuel consumption, less traffic, less road rage, etc.

I drive because it's only six miles and there is no public transport service within walking distance from home. I don't own a home cause property taxes in NJ are more than mortgage payments per month. In my area, the avg mortgage is $800 a month. Taxes are about $1000 a month. But when I retire and move southward, I will most definitely purchase a home. I've been saving up for it since 1989. And I won't have to borrow anything. Straight up cold hard cash. That and a new Mustang GT convertible or maybe a Camaro. Three more years, baby.
 
Company shuttles is a great idea anyone who hates it is stupid. Really it's a bus it gets cars off the road clears up congestion and employees who rather not deal with traffic or late nights when they are too sleepy to drive are happy as well. The only thing the op-ed talks about is people have a general dislike to big corporations which has shit to do with company shuttles.
 
PhaseNoise said:
I remember a time when if you saw something you desired or wanted, you would assume it was on you to bust your ass to work harder and attain it.

Now, we whine it isn't given to us. Stick a fork in America, we're done.
Click to expand...

It won't be much longer until the producers are overtaken. Where do they think the handouts will come from then?
 
Someone call the Whambulance!

Whambulance.jpg


Seriously. STFU, put down the 5 dollar latte & work smarter not harder.
 
Really?
Really?

You business decides to treat you well and has transport to and from your job, which you do well for your employer and pay taxes.

Other people don't like it you have a job, with benefits, that pays you well, and YOU EARNED because you have SKILL(S).

what the fuck is the deal?

now get off my lawn.:mad:
 
Even when I know the bus is full of workers from Google/Apple, I still just think it's a bunch of holiday goers (technically some of them are on a working holiday).
 
Dekoth-E- said:
So the home owner pays $570/mo for 30 years and owns a home worth 100k with zero inflation or increase in value. The home owner has a loss of $105,000 due to interest.

Now the Renter.
Lives in Various apartments, townhomes, condos etc for the same 30 years.
Assuming a similar rent (unlikely unless you like living in a shithole).
$570/mo for 30 years.
Renter has paid $205,000 and has Absolutely nothing to show for it. A total loss of $205,000.
Click to expand...

Still no where near enough variable included to make an opinion. My experience is that it depends on the area.

1) Ownership has other costs. Insurance, paint, repairs, re-roofing, cooling heating equipment. Taxes. Real estate transaction costs(agent mortgage fees etc) This assumes zero upgrades which most consumers like to do. (I would assume painted 2-3 times, 10-12k roof 1-2 times, 2-3 water heaters, 2 heat cooling replacements, 2 sets of appliances, taxes per area)

2) Renting has possibly renters insurance. Leaving out moving expense because it could happen to both. Normally easier to move close to work. A savvy renter is always looking for potential upgrades.

Each market is always different.

In some areas renting is less than a mortgage at times(for housing of same value). These are normally the areas most hammered by the "bubble." I sold my home when I thought values were too high, then rent for a bit. I saved hundreds monthly.(assuming price home sold for and a rates at the time) The place I moved into was larger and equal condition for less per month. Simply because people were willing to basically take a slight loss as otherwise the place would be empty. People had over-investing in homes and were just trying to offset the mortgage as much as possible. In the end I think everyone should occasionally compare rent to mortgage value. Look at other economic factors to gauge the value of the home etc.

In the end it really depends on the market and how good you are at self repair and maintenance which is better. You have to makes guesses at how wages will go, how the market is going. How interest rates are going, how property values will go etc. then decide for themselves what they think is best.
 
kbrickley said:
It may be throwing your money away but there is a reason that home ownership tends to stay in the high sixty percent range ... there is a large portion of the population that doesn't qualify for home ownership (bad credit, low income, etc) ... when the government tried to force that percentage higher by encouraging more home ownership they just ended up granting lots of bad loans that caused the real estate collapse ...

also, in captive real estate markets like New York it might not be financially feasible for even people with good credit to own a home ... in Japan at one point the real estate prices got so high that they were granting 80 year mortgages that crossed generations ... it is great if someone has the credit or is in the financial situation to buy rather than rent but it shouldn't be a badge of shame to rent either :cool:
Click to expand...

Actually the problem was that companies purposely made bad loans. There's a middle ground. And FYI, rent is currently higher than most mortgages.
 
whiz187 said:
Sounds like a bunch of whining Commies with penis envy. It's Goggle's bus and they can do what ever they want with it. If they choose to carpool their employees via the bus, a van or urban assault vehicle it's a great perk, more power to them. But then I also use Startpage not Google as a default for a search engine, along with Do Not Track Me and Block Google Tracking in the add ons. Remember that song with the lyrics, "Paranoia strikes me, into your heart it will creep."
Click to expand...

Fuck it, first tech company that does that I'll do whatever it takes to work there :p:D
 
kbrickley said:
there is no reason why city buses couldn't have more amenities for the people who use them ...:(
Click to expand...
Sure there is. Money. The bus is the last ditch transportation for someone who lives more than reasonable walking distance from their job, so the bus company/city that runs them will always make them the cheapest way they can to turn as much profit as possible, and remember, some places they HAVE to run bus lines that are unprofitable by regulation. Bus riders are a stuck with whatever they are offered, and the bus 'providers' know it. Private companies that provide better quality bus rides are doing a real nice thing.
 
nightfly said:
Sure there is. Money. The bus is the last ditch transportation for someone who lives more than reasonable walking distance from their job, so the bus company/city that runs them will always make them the cheapest way they can to turn as much profit as possible, and remember, some places they HAVE to run bus lines that are unprofitable by regulation. Bus riders are a stuck with whatever they are offered, and the bus 'providers' know it. Private companies that provide better quality bus rides are doing a real nice thing.
Click to expand...

Google is busing tech workers. By picking them up and driving them to work they get employees working to/from work. There's no downside for Google.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top