# Go West



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Wouldn't it be nice if we still could? 

And by west I mean like the early settlers pushing over the Appalachian mountains and then to the Mississippi and then to the Rockies and finally to the west coast.

The opportunity to have a real part and say in how the new territory is run. A place where the government doesn't intrude into just about every darn decision you make. A place where you build your house without needing a permit. A place where if you want chickens, sheep, and cows, you can - without having to check and see if it is OK.

I'm a little too old to handle the types of hardships they handled, but I would certainly take on a little hardship for limited government control.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

" A place where the government doesn't intrude into just about every darn decision you make. A place where you build your house without needing a permit. A place where if you want chickens, sheep, and cows, you can - without having to check and see if it is OK."

Other than a septic requirement, that describes what we can do here.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Reduce the population back to what it was in the pioneering days and you can have those pioneering freedoms and hardships and lack of government again. You can have lawless anarchy to your heart's content. The natives might kill you for your invasion though.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

I guess the American spirit is. American.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

How about opening up some of that BLM and National Forest land for homesteading again?


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

MoonRiver:

You are in Virginia. I lived in Virginia for about 8 years over two stints. I really liked it.

But, when it came time to decide where to settle and buy land for our retirement years, my wife and I both realized Virginia was too settled, too populated, and too regulated for our tastes.

So while I can absolutely see why you are lamenting the loss of these things, the loss is not quite universal! There are still livable places in the U.S. (even within 30 miles of a Wal-Mart!) where you can have quite a few of the freedoms folks had 150 years ago...without most of the dangers/negatives!

Aside from the obvious population density question, we looked for a place with a very low tax base. To us, low tax base means little government.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

greg273 said:


> How about opening up some of that BLM and National Forest land for homesteading again?


That land was open for homesteading for a great many years.... and homesteaders homesteaded any of it that would support farming. What they didnt want was pretty much being destroyed by tourists until BLM took over its management. Its really difficult to farm in rocks with no water.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MoonRiver said:


> Wouldn't it be nice if we still could?
> 
> And by west I mean like the early settlers pushing over the Appalachian mountains and then to the Mississippi and then to the Rockies and finally to the west coast.
> 
> ...


There is just such a place... an entire continent that is pretty much wide open spaces with nobody looking over your shoulder telling you what to do or how to live..... go south until every direction you look is north!


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

The unfortunate reality, is, that all of those places were really nice - until people showed up.

People ruin things, not the Government.

Lived in Beautiful Colorado, for 10 years, i saw things go from bad to worse, just by the influx of people.

I always loved the Pius "Colorado Native" bumper stickers, even though it was very likely, their Parents, came from some other state.


----------



## BlackFeather (Jun 17, 2014)

Nicaragua is supposed to be a good place to go, the government is too poor to be a bother to people. They got all that revolution out of their system and it's quite peaceful now. Of course it's not west but south.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

BlackFeather said:


> Nicaragua is supposed to be a good place to go, the government is too poor to be a bother to people. They got all that revolution out of their system and it's quite peaceful now. Of course it's not west but south.


Why aren't the current wave of illegals going there instead of here?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

BlackFeather said:


> Nicaragua is supposed to be a good place to go, the government is too poor to be a bother to people. They got all that revolution out of their system and it's quite peaceful now. Of course it's not west but south.


Have you noticed Belize is never mentioned when talking about the influx of illegal immigrants from central America?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

greg273 said:


> How about opening up some of that BLM and National Forest land for homesteading again?


How about a government of the people, by the people and for the people?
We have a "ruler" who hates most of the people in this country, and it's filtering into all aspects of our government.
Corruption is spreading like a cancer in this country, and we need to stop it while we still can.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

In my OP, I was being a bit metaphorical.

In the 50's and 60's, it seemed like we (non African Americans) had unlimited opportunity. By the end of the 60's, even African Americans should have felt that they had many opportunities available to them.

Most Americans still believed that if you worked hard and were responsible, success was possible and even likely. You would have a better life than your parents and your children would have a better life than you.

IMO, the government in partnership with big business has created an environment that limits opportunities for success. 

The hurdles to starting a small business today are tremendous, and that's the way big business wants it. OSHA, IRS, EPA, EEOC, ADA, etc are an alphabet soup of agencies just waiting to pounce when you make a mistake. Are they there to advise and help you? That certainly was not my experience. My company was audited by the state tax commission simply because we were recognized as one of the fastest growing businesses in the area. The auditor selected us because he figured we had the money to pay any fines and penalties he came up with. His words!

The creative part of me would love to start a new business, but I just can't stand the idea of the government being a constant pain in the rear. The time and expense spent of government compliance is just too much for me.

How many of you that started a business 20 years ago think you could successfully start that business today? And even if you think you could, would you want to?


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Paumon said:


> Reduce the population back to what it was in the pioneering days and you can have those pioneering freedoms and hardships and lack of government again. You can have lawless anarchy to your heart's content. The natives might kill you for your invasion though.


You say reduce the population as if it's an legitimate option...how would you go about doing it?


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

where I want to said:


> Why aren't the current wave of illegals going there instead of here?


Most are from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. Nicaragua won't let them in.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

where I want to said:


> Why aren't the current wave of illegals going there instead of here?


Why would people leave a poor, violent country, to go to a poor, peaceful country?

Just curious.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Get as far out as you can get, live among like-minded neighbors, and keep a low profile. Take a look at Montello, NV area. It's 100 miles from the nearest Home Depot, but you can find land for $100/acre and be left alone.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Get as far out as you can get, live among like-minded neighbors, and keep a low profile. Take a look at Montello, NV area. It's 100 miles from the nearest Home Depot, but you can find land for $100/acre and be left alone.


Yeppers, you will be left alone for sure.... not even the rattlesnakes will bother you..... they left the area long ago looking for water.  Average rainfall there during the normal growing season amounts to less than 1 1/2 inches. (june .65", july .35", and august .34")


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Thinking about the current Toledo Oh drinking water problems, and frankly with rampant illegal immigration and less American resources to spend, the US is going to have to make a serious mental adjustment as to what liberty means. When you are cheek to jowl with your neighbor, everything you do can spill over to them. 
When I first came to the place I live now, I could walk on the beaches without seeing another person. Now it's pretty hard to find a parking space. And we have nowhere near the density of the southern part of the state. I don't know how you easterners do it. It gets harder and harder to get away from people.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

where I want to said:


> I don't know how you easterners do it. It gets harder and harder to get away from people.


 I just put up a good woven wire fence with a strand of barbed wire on top, and stay on my side of it. Not really that big of an issue.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yeppers, you will be left alone for sure.... not even the rattlesnakes will bother you..... they left the area long ago looking for water.  Average rainfall there during the normal growing season amounts to less than 1 1/2 inches. (june .65", july .35", and august .34")


You'd think so by the raw rainfall data, but it's in the great basin. Being in a basin, any rain that falls there stays there. They have a terrific water table at around 150 feet.

Pilot Peak also offers natural spring water, which was used in the 1800s by wagon trains that just crossed the salt flats.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I just put up a good woven wire fence with a strand of barbed wire on top, and stay on my side of it. Not really that big of an issue.


People rarely find themselves irritating themselves.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> You'd think so by the raw rainfall data, but it's in the great basin. Being in a basin, any rain that falls there stays there. They have a terrific water table at around 150 feet.
> 
> Pilot Peak also offers natural spring water, which was used in the 1800s by wagon trains that just crossed the salt flats.


It makes one wonder why nobody has ever farmed that country before.... sounds perfect.... lots of water, cheap land, why is it still covered up in sage brush and cheat grass? Maybe its all that salt, since the water never runs out of that particular state. It just deposits everything out there in those flats as it filters down or evaporates. Count on it Nevada.... if this were good farm land, it wouldnt be cheap, and the many previous generations of greedy people would have been exploiting its assets years ago. Just like they have anyplace else where the land is fit to use.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

where I want to said:


> People rarely find themselves irritating themselves.


This is very true.... and yet some of them thoroughly relish the thought of irritating everyone else!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> It makes one wonder why nobody has ever farmed that country before.... sounds perfect.... lots of water, cheap land, why is it still covered up in sage brush and cheat grass? Maybe its all that salt, since the water never runs out of that particular state. It just deposits everything out there in those flats as it filters down or evaporates. Count on it Nevada.... if this were good farm land, it wouldnt be cheap, and the many previous generations of greedy people would have been exploiting its assets years ago. Just like they have anyplace else where the land is fit to use.


It's remote. It takes a special kind of person to live there. Most of the property is off grid, drilling for water is expensive (maybe $10K for a well), and it's a long way to get supplies & building materials.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> It's remote. It takes a special kind of person to live there. Most of the property is off grid, drilling for water is expensive (maybe $10K for a well), and it's a long way to get supplies & building materials.


Its no different than anyplace else..... everywhere was "remote" before people came along and settled it. The difference here is that this area has no potential to sustain very much life. Much of California for example was also remote pre 1849. So was the Oregon territory (what is now Oregon, Washington and Idaho) but those lands offered some way to make a living.... Nevada? not so much.... rocky soils, lack of usable water to irrigate with, not a lot of gold laying around to be picked up..... People need food, water and shelter in order to live... any one of those ingredients missing and people simply arent going to thrive. Yeah, a few old desert rats may be able to exist.... but I dont see it becoming a homesteading mecca anytime soon.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> This is very true.... and yet some of them thoroughly relish the thought of irritating everyone else!


Which is why distance is so valuable.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

jtbrandt said:


> You say reduce the population as if it's an legitimate option...how would you go about doing it?


I was speaking metaphorically and facetiously. Just making the point that what the OP is pining for is pointless, it's now an impossibility, it can never happen now and there's no place to do it. The only reason there were empty places to go to in the past where people could do whatever they want without interference and laws and governments is because there wasn't enough people for any of those things to exist.

Any civilized society that has numbers of people functioning together also has to have government and a lot of regulations. It has to have that, otherwise it wouldn't be civilized, it would have anarchy, lawlessness, turmoil and war instead.

I know it rubs some people the wrong way to have to acknowledge it but the majority of humanity where there are large populations is not capable of maintaining a society where each person peacefully governs only themself. It's in the nature of humans without government to wage war against each other.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Paumon said:


> It's in the nature of humans without government to wage war against each other.


Thank you for explaining what you meant. I mostly agree. But your last sentence really struck me as odd...it may be true, but it's also true that it's in the nature of humans WITH government to wage war against each other. Sometimes I think governments make us more bold to wage war because on our own we are weak, but banded together we are very powerful.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Get as far out as you can get, live among like-minded neighbors, and keep a low profile. Take a look at Montello, NV area. It's 100 miles from the nearest Home Depot, but you can find land for $100/acre and be left alone.


I've been thinking about moving to that area after I unload my ranch, but I'm just not sure if I'm prepared for the challenge of desert living. I live in an arid climate now, but I've explored quite a bit around Elko and it's almost like a different world from what I'm used to. I did come across a few people who are not only surviving, but thriving there. The land obviously couldn't support millions a people, but it's far from a complete wasteland. I need to visit there again to see if I can handle it.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

jtbrandt said:


> Thank you for explaining what you meant. I mostly agree. But your last sentence really struck me as odd...it may be true, but it's also true that it's in the nature of humans WITH government to wage war against each other. Sometimes I think governments make us more bold to wage war because on our own we are weak, but banded together we are very powerful.


It's in the nature of humans with governance to compete and wage war against other humans with governance in other places. Any place where there is an increase in people there is also the desire to expand and acquire more of everything, to take away everything that others have elsewhere and keep it for themself. The concept of sharing peacefully, co-operatively, is an alien concept to humans.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

where I want to said:


> Thinking about the current Toledo Oh drinking water problems, and frankly with rampant illegal immigration and less American resources to spend, the US is going to have to make a serious mental adjustment as to what liberty means. When you are cheek to jowl with your neighbor, everything you do can spill over to them.
> When I first came to the place I live now, I could walk on the beaches without seeing another person. Now it's pretty hard to find a parking space. And we have nowhere near the density of the southern part of the state. I don't know how you easterners do it. It gets harder and harder to get away from people.


That's the usual problem.

Everybody wants to get away from everybody else and when they do succeed, they are again all together.

You understandably love a beach and apparently so do many others.

Around here someone puts up a house in the middle of the country, not thinking that the wise farmer, also sold the other two surrounding parcels, so someone who wants to do the same. again there are neighbors, good or bad.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Its no different than anyplace else..... everywhere was "remote" before people came along and settled it. The difference here is that this area has no potential to sustain very much life. Much of California for example was also remote pre 1849. So was the Oregon territory (what is now Oregon, Washington and Idaho) but those lands offered some way to make a living.... Nevada? not so much.... rocky soils, lack of usable water to irrigate with, not a lot of gold laying around to be picked up..... People need food, water and shelter in order to live... any one of those ingredients missing and people simply arent going to thrive. Yeah, a few old desert rats may be able to exist.... but I dont see it becoming a homesteading mecca anytime soon.


There's an interesting fact about Elko County, which is that there are more vacant parcels in Elko County than there are residents of the county. But where did all of those parcels come from?

It started during WWII when Bing Crosby bought a 3600 acre ranch just east of Elko. It was a pleasure ranch where some cattle were tended to, which he thought would be a good place to raise his sons. But he only had that ranch for a few years before leaving it for a larger commercial ranch about an hour north of Elko. That land mostly stood empty for the next 30 years. But abandoning that ranch left a lot of land east of town conveniently zoned.

In the early 1960s someone got the idea to buy a section and carve it up into lots. The problem was that there was no local market for small, remote, and unpowered lots. The idea was to sell 1 and 2 acre parcels as retirement "ranchos" by advertising in magazine ads. These were dedicated subdivisions with easements for streets and utilities, although the only development was rough-blading the road alignments. Here's an example ad found in a 1968 magazine.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22059150/mvr.jpg

People responded to the marketing. Before long they sold out. Another section was purchased, and then another. People all over the country owned these ranchos. Larger subdivision lots were carved out 100 miles to the east near Montello, where land was even less expensive. It was a great business to be in.

Of course most buyers never saw their lots. As life goes, spouses became disabled and owners died without ever developing the lots. Heirs inherited the lots, then grew weary of paying taxes. The few who saw them found remote unpowered lots with no development in the vicinity. Most lots eventually reverted to the county for unpaid taxes.

But all the parcels still exist, many thousands of them. In fact I've been told that there are about 50,000 vacant parcels in Elko County. Honestly, I don't know of anything like it anywhere else. Some are close to Elko (some areas became well developed), most are in outlying areas within 15 miles of town, still others are 100 miles away in Montello. They can be purchased very inexpensively.

I made a living buying & selling parcels in Elko County, and I even kept a 2-acre parcel for my homestead. The lot was exceptional for the price. I spent $800. It was close to the freeway exit, a well traveled road ran past my lot, and power was next door. I built my cabin and Alma & I lived there for 4 years.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

I was born in Elko and I'm going back to hunt for deer and elk the first of October.

Elko is all about mining and the biggest buyers of land with mineral rights is China


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

oneraddad said:


> I was born in Elko and I'm going back to hunt for deer and elk the first of October.
> 
> Elko is all about mining and the biggest buyers of land with mineral rights is China


Yes, and that made Elko ride pretty high during the first few years of the recession. Gold prices were up, so the mines were hiring at a time when the rest of the country was downsizing. One neighbor told me that Elko was going to be immune to the recession, but it eventually caught up with them.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Nevada said:


> It's remote. It takes a special kind of person to live there. Most of the property is off grid, drilling for water is expensive (maybe $10K for a well), and it's a long way to get supplies & building materials.


Sounds good to me, I could use some remote


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> There's an interesting fact about Elko County, which is that there are more vacant parcels in Elko County than there are residents of the county. But where did all of those parcels come from?
> 
> It started during WWII when Bing Crosby bought a 3600 acre ranch just east of Elko. It was a pleasure ranch where some cattle were tended to, which he thought would be a good place to raise his sons. But he only had that ranch for a few years before leaving it for a larger commercial ranch about an hour north of Elko. That land mostly stood empty for the next 30 years. But abandoning that ranch left a lot of land east of town conveniently zoned.
> 
> ...


The photo I posted was out of an ad for an 11 acre parcel a couple miles out of Montello. They are only asking 16 grand for what appears to me to be a nice sagebrush covered gravel bar. According to your account of the area even folks who spent their hard earned money didnt want to live there. Tin horn hucksters are nothing new.... they have been preying upon the ignorant for thousands of years promising wealth and dreams.... which generally pan out to years of misery and nightmares. Your "developers" sound like that very breed.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The photo I posted was out of an ad for an 11 acre parcel a couple miles out of Montello. They are only asking 16 grand for what appears to me to be a nice sagebrush covered gravel bar. According to your account of the area even folks who spent their hard earned money didnt want to live there. Tin horn hucksters are nothing new.... they have been preying upon the ignorant for thousands of years promising wealth and dreams.... which generally pan out to years of misery and nightmares. Your "developers" sound like that very breed.


That's way too much for 11 acres in Montello. Unless there's some outstanding feature those parcels go for more like $1000 to $1500.

But even if there's surface water the landscape looks bout the same. This is a lot in MVR#2 (about 8 miles east of Elko) that I sold about 5 years ago that had a creek running through the property. Notice that the vegetation is similar to your photo.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Nevada there is snow in that picture. That means the creek is probably melt water. What about the rest of the year when the snow is all gone?


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

jtbrandt said:


> You say reduce the population as if it's an legitimate option...how would you go about doing it?


Well you know I already answered this question today, but I want to address the reduction of population thing anyway. The answer is that we humans, as a whole, have already set the wheels in motion to do that anyway. We are waging a war against the earth and all of nature on the earth and it's a war that humans can't win. So the consequence of continued war against nature means we're committing mass suicide and genocide. Once the populations have decreased to more manageable numbers such that humanity is no longer in each other's face and no longer having such a negative impact on nature then perhaps humans can start pioneering all over again.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Paumon said:


> Nevada there is snow in that picture. That means the creek is probably melt water. What about the rest of the year when the snow is all gone?


That creek runs year round. But it's not in Montello. It's just outside of Elko. I only showed it to demonstrate that surface water doesn't change the vegetation much.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Paumon said:


> Nevada there is snow in that picture. That means the creek is probably melt water. What about the rest of the year when the snow is all gone?


Those streams are snow melt, from the mountains in the distance which pretty much stay white all year. They are high enough that the snow melts quite slowly. What Nevadas photo demonstrates more than anything is that the soils are so poor... lots of alkali along with rocks that they wont grow very much even with plenty of water. There are some fertile desert land areas if one can get water to them... but Montello aint one of them. Elko isnt much better. Actually there is very little land in the entire state of Nevada very well suited to growing crops... its primarily range land where one can raise beef at the rate of one cow and calf per 50 to 100 acres. A bit further north, southern Idaho, in places that arent covered in lava, extreme eastern Oregon has some of the best desert farmland in the world.... but since it is, its already heavily populated and being utilized.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Those streams are snow melt, from the mountains in the distance which pretty much stay white all year. They are high enough that the snow melts quite slowly. What Nevadas photo demonstrates more than anything is that the soils are so poor... lots of alkali along with rocks that they wont grow very much even with plenty of water. There are some fertile desert land areas if one can get water to them... but Montello aint one of them. Elko isnt much better. Actually there is very little land in the entire state of Nevada very well suited to growing crops... its primarily range land where one can raise beef at the rate of one cow and calf per 50 to 100 acres. A bit further north, southern Idaho, in places that arent covered in lava, extreme eastern Oregon has some of the best desert farmland in the world.... but since it is, its already heavily populated and being utilized.


Northern Nevada is known for being ranch country, not farming. Most of the farming is for hay production.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

jtbrandt said:


> Most are from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. Nicaragua won't let them in.


Not to mention our government invited them here first.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Those streams are snow melt, from the mountains in the distance which pretty much stay white all year. They are high enough that the snow melts quite slowly. What Nevadas photo demonstrates more than anything is that the soils are so poor... lots of alkali along with rocks that they wont grow very much even with plenty of water. There are some fertile desert land areas if one can get water to them... but Montello aint one of them. Elko isnt much better. Actually there is very little land in the entire state of Nevada very well suited to growing crops... its primarily range land where one can raise beef at the rate of one cow and calf per 50 to 100 acres. A bit further north, southern Idaho, in places that arent covered in lava, extreme eastern Oregon has some of the best desert farmland in the world.... but since it is, its already heavily populated and being utilized.


Growing crops is not the only way to "go west." When you take a step back from the idea of "farming" and instead focus on living, that marginal land looks better. It's not for everybody but there are people living there and surviving off their land more than most homesteaders are able to.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

jtbrandt said:


> Growing crops is not the only way to "go west." When you take a step back from the idea of "farming" and instead focus on living, that marginal land looks better. It's not for everybody but there are people living there and surviving off their land more than most homesteaders are able to.


I dont know very many people who can live without food.... and if you know how to grow food in alkali and gravel with no realistic source of irrigation water.... knock yerself out. You will not find me standing in your way. There are stock ranchers.... already there who may just give you some problems if you encroach upon their well established water rights and use of grazing lands. There are also a few folks who live there an make it by having incomes with which to buy their food and other essentials.... Look at the photo I posted, that photo was taken 2 miles out of Montello.... do you see ANYONE tending lush gardens? or even so much as a structure in sight? There is a reason for that.... the land will not support people. There is a difference betwixt marginal for farming and unfit for farming.... most of the state of Nevada falls into the latter category.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Northern Nevada is known for being ranch country, not farming. Most of the farming is for hay production.


Yep, and the hay is produced to carry the livestock through the winter, and those stock ranchers are not going to divvy up their precious resources needed for their ranch operations to share with someone wanting to change their way of life. I grew up with cowboys and farmers both.... I understand their ways of doing things and how they approach the world in general. I have yet to meet any of them that think very highly of liberals or city folk who think they know whats best for farmers and cowboys. They just dont work that way.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I dont know very many people who can live without food.... and if you know how to grow food in alkali and gravel with no realistic source of irrigation water.... knock yerself out. You will not find me standing in your way. There are stock ranchers.... already there who may just give you some problems if you encroach upon their well established water rights and use of grazing lands. There are also a few folks who live there an make it by having incomes with which to buy their food and other essentials.... Look at the photo I posted, that photo was taken 2 miles out of Montello.... do you see ANYONE tending lush gardens? or even so much as a structure in sight? There is a reason for that.... the land will not support people. There is a difference betwixt marginal for farming and unfit for farming.... most of the state of Nevada falls into the latter category.


I never looked at my homestead as a way to make a living. It was just an inexpensive place to be. I made my living online, so as long as I had DSL service I had what I needed. It also would have worked for me long-term, since it wouldn't have been a bad place to retire.

I was never much of a farmer anyway. I enjoyed building my own home and I like doing things for myself, but I certainly don't have a green thumb.


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

As to the OP . . ."go west" . . . . . . .yup . .once upon a time . . . 

But now look whats going to happen. Peoples are going to have to move back east where there is water.
Look how badly mankind has managed water out west.........
Every body wants a "piece of the pie" . . .well there just ain't enough water to give to everybody . . . . 
Ma Nature steps in and now look at that "beautiful" west area....drying up.

I feel the need to go get another glass of my fantastic Michigan well water......


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Except for the coastal rainforest regions all of the west has always been dry and arid. It's true the water has been mismanaged but it has been mismanaged everywhere, not only in the west. Just look at what's happening with that toxic bloom happening in the water in Ohio right now - that's a result of poor water management. And the Ogallala aquifer, which _was_ the largest reservoir in the world, has about 10 years worth of water left in it (if even that long) because of poor management and over-use, and when that's gone - then what? The Mississippi and Missouri rivers stink like rot and sewage now, where once they smelled like fresh water. Poor management. Don't count on those Michigan aquifers and ground water springs to always be there, they are running dry now too and the prognosis is not good. Poor water management again.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Paumon said:


> Except for the coastal rainforest regions all of the west has always been dry and arid. It's true the water has been mismanaged but it has been mismanaged everywhere, not only in the west. Just look at what's happening with that toxic bloom happening in the water in Ohio right now - that's a result of poor water management. And the Ogallala aquifer, which _was_ the largest reservoir in the world, has about 10 years worth of water left in it (if even that long) because of poor management and over-use, and when that's gone - then what? The Mississippi and Missouri rivers stink like rot and sewage now, where once they smelled like fresh water. Poor management. Don't count on those Michigan aquifers and ground water springs to always be there, they are running dry now too and the prognosis is not good. Poor water management again.


Just so you know, I don't really belong in the desert. I always imagined I would retire someplace with a beach, where attractive waitresses would bring me drinks with little umbrellas in them. Honestly, I don't know what went wrong...


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Nevada said:


> Just so you know, I don't really belong in the desert. I always imagined I would retire someplace with a beach, where attractive waitresses would bring me drinks with little umbrellas in them. Honestly, I don't know what went wrong...


Oh well, most beaches are no longer clean and healthy either so it's six of one or half a dozen of the other and you're probably just as well off where are now as you would be any other place. There's no where else to go.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I dont know very many people who can live without food.... and if you know how to grow food in alkali and gravel with no realistic source of irrigation water.... knock yerself out. You will not find me standing in your way. There are stock ranchers.... already there who may just give you some problems if you encroach upon their well established water rights and use of grazing lands. There are also a few folks who live there an make it by having incomes with which to buy their food and other essentials.... Look at the photo I posted, that photo was taken 2 miles out of Montello.... do you see ANYONE tending lush gardens? or even so much as a structure in sight? There is a reason for that.... the land will not support people. There is a difference betwixt marginal for farming and unfit for farming.... most of the state of Nevada falls into the latter category.


Like I said, it's not for everybody, but that land certainly can support people. No, I don't see any lush gardens in your photo, but that's just one photo and lush gardens are not the only way to grow food. I've met people near there who grow more of their own food than most of the members of HT. Farming is another story, but who says we all have to be farmers? That's the beauty of commerce.

I personally don't intend to grow most of my food when I retire, but it can be done almost anywhere...it just takes more land and more work in some places. Where I live in Montana it isn't nearly as easy as it was where I grew up in Michigan, but I've managed to grow enough for my family and plenty to sell for about 30 years. Others have done it much longer. To each his own.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Just so you know, I don't really belong in the desert. I always imagined I would retire someplace with a beach, where attractive waitresses would bring me drinks with little umbrellas in them. Honestly, I don't know what went wrong...


You can still do that if you're willing to leave the United States...from what I know about your house and pension, I think you're really quite wealthy. Speak any Spanish?



Paumon said:


> Oh well, most beaches are no longer clean and healthy either so it's six of one or half a dozen of the other and you're probably just as well off where are now as you would be any other place. There's no where else to go.


Well that's a downer....


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Jim-mi said:


> As to the OP . . ."go west" . . . . . . .yup . .once upon a time . . .
> 
> But now look whats going to happen. Peoples are going to have to move back east where there is water.
> Look how badly mankind has managed water out west.........
> ...


Like my grand parents said after the 1906 earthquake- "At least we didn't have to move to Oakland," which is as far east as they thought was livable. Me- I'd rather stay and make do though a dought here than, well, move back to Michigan. I not only love it but have generations behind me who couldn't wait to come home if they had the misfortune of having to go elsewhere.
Different places have different problems. I, for instance, have almost no mosquitos, no ice storms, no industrial pollution (sky actually- gasp- looks blue), no agricultural run off, no tornados, no poinsonous snakes,, etc. I do have periodic drought, earthquakes, landslides (you have mountains, there are possible slides), etc. I was going to say no flooding but that's only because I personally live on a hill. Which in Michigan would be called a mountain.

But the point is it suits me perfectly. I would not dream of gloating about what I have when others are suffering without. I offer my true sympathy to those who deal with violent weather. It is scary.

But I also would not feel bad if a lot of others feel that they would prefer different difficulties and move out east somewhere. Everyone to their own. And it would certainly be easier if large amounts did move. But, hard as the drought is for farmers, especially in the central valley and south, California still produces more farm products than any other region. Even in our bust years. So I doubt there will be much outward migration. Hopefully some.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Look what I harvested this morning in the Nevada desert at 6200' and no water in sight.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)




----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

You have an oasis in the sage brush. Nice.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

You can always head North if you can afford Alaska or to Canada if you are able to qualify for entry. And with climate change these areas will start to fill up. The differences and changes are already very visible in just 15 years. With up to 24 hours of daylight, more rain and warmer temperatures starting earlier and lasting longer gardening is a joy and farming is increasing.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

oneraddad said:


> Look what I harvested this morning in the Nevada desert at 6200' and no water in sight.


Congrats! You are the first person I ever heard of that can grow veggies with no water.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

emdeengee said:


> You can always head North if you can afford Alaska or to Canada if you are able to qualify for entry. And with climate change these areas will start to fill up. The differences and changes are already very visible in just 15 years. With up to 24 hours of daylight, more rain and warmer temperatures starting earlier and lasting longer gardening is a joy and farming is increasing.


Bite your tongue! :shocked:

:huh:

We already have enough people and enough problems with the environment getting messed up.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Deep down inside, we're all that selfish! We'd love to go to a beautiful beach and have it all to ourselves, and not have other people's trash, dog poop, whatever to watch out for. Not have our moment of serenity listening to the waves interrupted by squealing kids. We'd love to hike a forest trail but not see/hear any other hikers. We'd love to cruise on a beautiful lake and not have to watch out for jet ski's zipping around, or go wading in the shallows without fear of finding someone's discarded fish hook the hard way. Many of the good rivers for canoeing in the Ozarks are so crowded on weekends now, it's "bumper boats". 

If you want to enjoy the great outdoors all by yourself, you have to be an early riser. Be out there when the sun comes up and you'll have some peace before the rest of humanity arrives.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Jim-mi said:


> As to the OP . . ."go west" . . . . . . .yup . .once upon a time . . .
> 
> But now look whats going to happen. Peoples are going to have to move back east where there is water.
> Look how badly mankind has managed water out west.........
> ...


If I didn't own my home outright here in Las Vegas I'd be considering Michigan. I've long believed that the financial devastation left by the auto industry has created a buying opportunity for others.

The only reason for low real estate prices in the Detroit-Flint corridor is lack of work. But some people don't need work. Retired people need affordable housing yet don't need work. Sounds like a good match. Detroit has deteriorated beyond what I would be comfortable with, but I would look in some parts of Flint.

I suspect that retiring baby boomers will eventually discover that area. If they can buy a home for $5,000 and live mortgage free, it will help a lot of people retire.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Congrats! You are the first person I ever heard of that can grow veggies with no water.




I hope the rest of your 18,000 posts were more insightful than this one.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> If I didn't own my home outright here in Las Vegas I'd be considering Michigan. I've long believed that the financial devastation left by the auto industry has created a buying opportunity for others.
> 
> *The only reason for low real estate prices in the Detroit-Flint corridor is lack of work. But some people don't need work.* Retired people need affordable housing yet don't need work. Sounds like a good match. Detroit has deteriorated beyond what I would be comfortable with, but I would look in some parts of Flint.
> 
> I suspect that retiring baby boomers will eventually discover that area. If they can buy a home for $5,000 and live mortgage free, it will help a lot of people retire.


I am thinking you are wrong about lack of work being the ONLY reason for low real estate values in that area. That may well have been what caused a low demand for housing in the beginning, but today you will be dealing with a lot of those "dont need to work" types. Nope, they dont need to work, they can draw enough welfare, free medical care, get government to pay their rent, and deal enough drugs to cover the cost of their booze and smokes. Them that dont want to deal drugs will just rob you outright. There is no longer enough tax base to support municipal services like fire depts, police depts, water and street maintenance. The area has become another East St. Louis. There lies the property value issue.... nobody in their right mind would want to move there.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

oneraddad said:


> I hope the rest of your 18,000 posts were more insightful than this one.


Naw, I think that one was actually one of my better efforts. 
I am curious though.... as to how you managed to grow those nice veggies with no water? Or were you just spoofing us that there was no water to be found?


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Congrats! You are the first person I ever heard of that can grow veggies with no water.





Yvonne's hubby said:


> Naw, I think that one was actually one of my better efforts.
> I am curious though.... as to how you managed to grow those nice veggies with no water? Or were you just spoofing us that there was no water to be found?



I have a well


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

oneraddad said:


> Look what I harvested this morning in the Nevada desert at 6200' and no water in sight.





oneraddad said:


> I have a well


 Ok, thanks for clearing that up for us. There are lots of places where irrigation turns otherwise useless land into highly productive land. I grew up on just such a farm my grampa took out of brush and also happen to own another one in central Oregon. Pretty sure I had already mentioned that.


----------



## harvestmoon1964 (Apr 24, 2014)

greg273 said:


> How about opening up some of that BLM and National Forest land for homesteading again?


I worked my backside off to earn my place in the west. Worked two jobs and paid off my land before I could build. Why should the government give away the public land I (and thousands of others) use to hunt and put meat on our tables just so a bunch of easterners can come and take it for a pittance?

If you want a piece of the west, how bout you earn it like I did?


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> If I didn't own my home outright here in Las Vegas I'd be considering Michigan. I've long believed that the financial devastation left by the auto industry has created a buying opportunity for others.
> 
> The only reason for low real estate prices in the Detroit-Flint corridor is lack of work. But some people don't need work. Retired people need affordable housing yet don't need work. Sounds like a good match. Detroit has deteriorated beyond what I would be comfortable with, but I would look in some parts of Flint.
> 
> I suspect that retiring baby boomers will eventually discover that area. If they can buy a home for $5,000 and live mortgage free, it will help a lot of people retire.


Lack of work isn't the only reason for low real estate prices...high crime, high taxes, bankrupt governments, etc. also contribute...those problems are all related in some ways, though. And Flint is worse than Detroit in terms of crime, blight, and everything else that can make life miserable. Both have areas that are livable, but Detroit actually has some revitalization happening in some parts, while Flint is still in almost complete death spiral.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> Lack of work isn't the only reason for low real estate prices...high crime, high taxes, bankrupt governments, etc. also contribute...those problems are all related in some ways, though. And Flint is worse than Detroit in terms of crime, blight, and everything else that can make life miserable. Both have areas that are livable, but Detroit actually has some revitalization happening in some parts, while Flint is still in almost complete death spiral.


You could wait for Flint to be discovered and for the culture to turn around, but your house will cost ten times as much.

Where else are you going to find a 3-bedroom two story home for $5,000?


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> You could wait for Flint to be discovered and for the culture to turn around, but your house will cost ten times as much.
> 
> Where else are you going to find a 3-bedroom two story home for $5,000?


Complete with armed "security" on every corner...oh wait, those are drug dealers. Nothing wrong with that if you can handle it. I don't know a lot of old folks who are tough enough, though. I don't think I am. 

But you're right that to get great deals you have to get ahead of the wave. I don't think Flint will ever recover, but in Detroit some people are making and will make lots of money buying properties at rock bottom prices and holding them until gentrification comes along. It is probably almost too late to get in on that, since so many people have placed their bets it's getting hard to find deals in areas that are likely to become desirable in the next decade or two.

ETA: To answer your question...Detroit...you can find mansions in livable condition for under $5,000 occasionally, though you have to look hard to find them these days...and they're obviously not in the nice neighborhoods.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> Complete with armed "security" on every corner...oh wait, those are drug dealers. Nothing wrong with that if you can handle it. I don't know a lot of old folks who are tough enough, though. I don't think I am.
> 
> But you're right that to get great deals you have to get ahead of the wave. I don't think Flint will ever recover, but in Detroit some people are making and will make lots of money buying properties at rock bottom prices and holding them until gentrification comes along. It is probably almost too late to get in on that, since so many people have placed their bets it's getting hard to find deals in areas that are likely to become desirable in the next decade or two.


We had a similar thread when I found my home in Las Vegas for $30,000 back in 2009. A few here told me I was a fool to buy in a depressed area like Las Vegas. Real Estate values have more than doubled since then.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> We had a similar thread when I found my home in Las Vegas for $30,000 back in 2009. A few here told me I was a fool to buy in a depressed area like Las Vegas. Real Estate values have more than doubled since then.


I'm not familiar with Vegas apart from the tourist parts. Is there high crime in the residential areas there?

Flint may double too, but then your $5,000 house is still only worth $10,000...not too impressive....


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> I'm not familiar with Vegas apart from the tourist parts. Is there high crime in the residential areas there?


It's a city of 1.5 million. There are good and bad areas.

I don't live far from the resort areas.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> We had a similar thread when I found my home in Las Vegas for $30,000 back in 2009. A few here told me I was a fool to buy in a depressed area like Las Vegas. *Real Estate values have more than doubled since then.*


Which translated means that you could now sell your home, and buy another one just like it for twice as much as it would have cost you before prices went back up. It also means your taxes will be doubled. The only person who really gains when market prices go up is the tax man.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> It's a city of 1.5 million. There are good and bad areas.
> 
> I don't live far from the resort areas.


Ok, is that a good or bad area? As I understand it there is quite of bit of gambling, drinking, illegal drug use, and late night partying going on in the resort areas, along with some organized criminal activity.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, is that a good or bad area? As I understand it there is quite of bit of gambling, drinking, illegal drug use, and late night partying going on in the resort areas, along with some organized criminal activity.


You have to pay extra to be close to all that. LOL

But seriously, my house is in a residential area with no businesses or apartments nearby. It's an old neighborhood that's not affluent by any stretch of the imagination, but not a lot goes on around here.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Which translated means that you could now sell your home, and buy another one just like it for twice as much as it would have cost you before prices went back up. It also means your taxes will be doubled. The only person who really gains when market prices go up is the tax man.


My taxes haven't gone up, and are embarrassingly inexpensive. State law controls how fast property taxes can rise. I just got my tax bill for the year. It's about $350 this coming year. I'll make four payments of $88 each. I would expect taxes on a 3 bedroom tract home to be more like $2,000/year in most cities.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> My taxes haven't gone up, and are embarrassingly inexpensive. State law controls how fast property taxes can rise. I just got my tax bill for the year. It's about $350 this coming year. I'll make four payments of $88 each. I would expect taxes on a 3 bedroom tract home to be more like $2,000/year in most cities.


wow! I own a pretty decent 3bedroom house in town here.... taxes on it are a bit less than 200 a year. Our tax rates are tied to property values, the tax rates are pretty stable, with only slight variations from year to year, but when property values go up, that rate while remaining the same will run the actual tax bill up. For example that 30k house you own would be taxed at about 7 bucks per thousand of value.... 210 dollars... if its value went up to say 40k your tax bill would automatically go up to 280. Same rate... higher tax bill.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> wow! I own a pretty decent 3bedroom house in town here.... taxes on it are a bit less than 200 a year. Our tax rates are tied to property values, the tax rates are pretty stable, with only slight variations from year to year, but when property values go up, that rate while remaining the same will run the actual tax bill up. For example that 30k house you own would be taxed at about 7 bucks per thousand of value.... 210 dollars... if its value went up to say 40k your tax bill would automatically go up to 280. Same rate... higher tax bill.


I'm comparing it to what taxes are in California for people I know, and what my sisters in Florida pay. Maybe that's not a fair comparison.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> I'm comparing it to what taxes are in California for people I know, and what my sisters in Florida pay. Maybe that's not a fair comparison.


I am pretty sure there are some high property tax rates in the north east too, but that wasnt my point. I was attempting to explain that increasing property values increase taxes and really does nothing for a homeowner. When you sell that home, in many instances you will also have to pay capital gains tax, as well as higher taxes while you live there. The imaginary gain because you sold for double what you paid gets eaten up as soon as you buy that next place...... because those prices are also inflated. Say you sell your place for 60k, and walk away with a tidy 30k "profit" today and tomorrow you shop around for a new place to lay your head at night... its going to cost you 60 to replace what you just sold..... wheres the profit? Increased property values normally only benefits the tax collectors.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I am pretty sure there are some high property tax rates in the north east too, but that wasnt my point. I was attempting to explain that increasing property values increase taxes and really does nothing for a homeowner. When you sell that home, in many instances you will also have to pay capital gains tax, as well as higher taxes while you live there. The imaginary gain because you sold for double what you paid gets eaten up as soon as you buy that next place...... because those prices are also inflated. Say you sell your place for 60k, and walk away with a tidy 30k "profit" today and tomorrow you shop around for a new place to lay your head at night... its going to cost you 60 to replace what you just sold..... wheres the profit? Increased property values normally only benefits the tax collectors.


More like $67K. That may not sound like much, but going from $30K to $67K in a deep recession like this is remarkable. When you compare it to the $178K that was paid for this same house back in 2006, it's nothing short if amazing.

But I'm looking forward to a reverse mortgage some day. That will allow me to draw about half the value of the house.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> More like $67K. That may not sound like much, but going from $30K to $67K in a deep recession like this is remarkable. When you compare it to the $178K that was paid for this same house back in 2006, it's nothing short if amazing.
> 
> But I'm looking forward to a reverse mortgage some day. That will allow me to draw about half the value of the house.


You dont seem to be getting it.... 30k up to 67k.... but that only counts when you actually sell the place.... and then pay your capital gains... (15% x 37k = 5.5k) and replacement cost is still going to be 67k... for a net loss of 5.5k right up front, and of course higher property tax each year thereafter on the new place. 

Reverse mortgage is pretty much meaningless since its merely robbing peter, (your estate) to pay paul (you). Whats worse is that you end up losing the property entirely, not just that small portion you "sold".


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Reverse mortgage is pretty much meaningless since its merely robbing peter, (your estate) to pay paul (you). Whats worse is that you end up losing the property entirely, not just that small portion you "sold".


It's not always that way. A reverse mortgage only gives you about half the value of the home because interest will be charged, and they want to keep some equity available for interest. That assumes that the house doesn't go up in value and that you live to be very old. But usually there's still some equity left in the home when the reverse mortgage is resolved, which goes back into your estate.

But it's a big decision, and there's no right or wrong answer. Do I want to draw equity out of my home to reboot my life (say to make home repairs, buy a car, or get a burial policy), or do I want to leave all the equity in my home for my heirs? But in either case I'll wait for the home to be worth a lot more before considering it.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> It's not always that way. A reverse mortgage only gives you about half the value of the home because interest will be charged, and they want to keep some equity available for interest. That assumes that the house doesn't go up in value and that you live to be very old. But usually there's still some equity left in the home when the reverse mortgage is resolved, which goes back into your estate.
> 
> But it's a big decision, and there's no right or wrong answer. Do I want to draw equity out of my home to reboot my life (say to make home repairs, buy a car, or get a burial policy), or do I want to leave all the equity in my home for my heirs? But in either case I'll wait for the home to be worth a lot more before considering it.


One would think by this time in your life you would not need to "reboot" your life by essentially "selling" your home for half its value. But then one would think our country should not be in over its head by 37 trillion bucks either.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> One would think by this time in your life you would not need to "reboot" your life by essentially "selling" your home for half its value. But then one would think our country should not be in over its head by 37 trillion bucks either.


Evidently I can't predict the future as well as you. I leave open the possibility that I may need a new roof, furnace, or sewer line (or some combination) that I can't afford.

This reminds me of a friend I know who seems to have dedicated his life to adopting a simple code to follow. He reduces everything to right-wrong, good-bad, safe-unsafe, smart-dumb, and so on. He avoids analyzing individual situations. It seems that you've done that with the concept of reverse mortgages.

Incidentally, reverse mortgages are part of Reagan's legacy.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Evidently I can't predict the future as well as you. I leave open the possibility that I may need a new roof, furnace, or sewer line (or some combination) that I can't afford.
> 
> This reminds me of a friend I know who seems to have dedicated his life to adopting a simple code to follow. He reduces everything to right-wrong, good-bad, safe-unsafe, smart-dumb, and so on. He avoids analyzing individual situations. It seems that you've done that with the concept of reverse mortgages.
> 
> Incidentally, reverse mortgages are part of Reagan's legacy.


Who said anything about predicting the future? I was simply referring to the fact that folks our age should have set some money aside by this time in their lives. At least enough that a new roof or furnace shouldnt be a big deal, and certainly not send us off to the poorhouse. It makes little difference who came up with the concept of reverse mortgages..... they are still a suckers bet.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> It makes little difference who came up with the concept of reverse mortgages..... they are still a suckers bet.


It can be a smart move in the right situation. I wouldn't do a reverse mortgage to take a trip to Europe, but it makes sense for other things. Reverse mortgage annuities have pulled a lot of people out of poverty. That's a good thing.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Reverse mortgage annuities have pulled a lot of people out of poverty. That's a good thing.


I cant believe you just said that. 

But I really shouldnt be surprised.... after all, according to your economic theory, inflation is a good thing too.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I cant believe you just said that.
> 
> But I really shouldnt be surprised.... after all, according to your economic theory, inflation is a good thing too.


OK fine. Why are reverse mortgages a sucker's bet? For that matter, why is a reverse mortgage a bet at all?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> OK fine. Why are reverse mortgages a sucker's bet? For that matter, why is a reverse mortgage a bet at all?


Because you are essentially selling your property at a severely discounted rate. Yeah, you "think" you are doing really great, plenty of extra cash on hand today.... Yippee! lets go shopping!.... but you are simply spending your hard earned wealth and only getting a fraction on the dollar for it. How quick would you be to run down to the bank and pull out your savings if you knew you could get less than half of it?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Because you are essentially selling your property at a severely discounted rate. Yeah, you "think" you are doing really great, plenty of extra cash on hand today.... Yippee! lets go shopping!.... but you are simply spending your hard earned wealth and only getting a fraction on the dollar for it. How quick would you be to run down to the bank and pull out your savings if you knew you could get less than half of it?


No, you're just borrowing money at the prevailing rate. Let me explain.

Assume your home is appraised at $100,000 and you take a $50,000 line of credit using a reverse mortgage. You have $50,000 to spend on anything you wish, and you don't have to make any payments on interest or principle for the rest of your life. You also get to live in your home for the rest of your life. However, the lender will place a mortgage lien on your home.

When you and your spouse are both gone the house is sold. Let's say that at the time you died your house sold for $120,000, and your loan had accumulated $30,000 in interest. The lender would get the principle ($50,000) and the interest ($30,000) for a total of $80,000. That would leave $40,000 ($120K - $80K) for your estate.

So you see that you got $50,000 up front that you didn't have to make payments on, you got to live in your home for the rest of your life, and also got $40,000 for your estate. But if you sold your house outright you would have had to pay for another place to live, either in rent or buying another home.

It's true that you could have saved $30,000 in interest if you didn't take out the reverse mortgage, but for some people it's the only way to accomplish what the reverse mortgage sets out to do.

The reason I said that it pulls some people out of poverty is that instead of taking the $50,000 as a lump sum you can opt to take it in monthly payments, raising your monthly income. That's helpful for people who lost pensions and don't get a lot from Social Security.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> The reason I said that it pulls some people out of poverty is that instead of taking the $50,000 as a lump sum you can opt to take it in monthly payments, raising your monthly income. That's helpful for people who lost pensions and don't get a lot from Social Security.


I wouldn't say it takes them out of poverty, since they have the asset all along. It just takes some of their wealth from the house and converts it into cash flow. That also takes some potential money from the heirs' inheritance, but I don't see a problem with that...after all, it's your money, not your kids'...you might as well live comfortably on what you worked for.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> I wouldn't say it takes them out of poverty, since they have the asset all along. It just takes some of their wealth from the house and converts it into cash flow. That also takes some potential money from the heirs' inheritance, but I don't see a problem with that...after all, it's your money, not your kids'...you might as well live comfortably on what you worked for.


Yes, that's a fair way to put it.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

jtbrandt said:


> I wouldn't say it takes them out of poverty, since they have the asset all along. It just takes some of their wealth from the house and converts it into cash flow. That also takes some potential money from the heirs' inheritance, but I don't see a problem with that...after all, it's your money, not your kids'...you might as well live comfortably on what you worked for.


Yep, and the cycle of poverty continues instead of building wealth with each new generation adding to it, we simply wizz it all down the drain as we watch all the pretty unicorns chasing butterflies. Of course those generations will grow up with the same attitudes we see around us today... "those evil rich guys are living fat off all of our hard work". I am sure we have all heard that line before, or some variation of it.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yep, and the cycle of poverty continues instead of building wealth with each new generation adding to it, we simply wizz it all down the drain as we watch all the pretty unicorns chasing butterflies. Of course those generations will grow up with the same attitudes we see around us today... "those evil rich guys are living fat off all of our hard work". I am sure we have all heard that line before, or some variation of it.


Inheritance is a sore subject to me right now. My father's estate was stolen, but I'll survive.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Inheritance is a sore subject to me right now. My father's estate was stolen, but I'll survive.


Hmmm I have to wonder if it was stolen, or if its just being protected from your economic theories for its own good. Perhaps the courts will have more information about what transpired. Either way, sorry for your loss, its tough losing a parent... lost my dad a few weeks ago.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Hmmm I have to wonder if it was stolen, or if its just being protected from your economic theories for its own good. Perhaps the courts will have more information about what transpired. Either way, sorry for your loss, its tough losing a parent... lost my dad a few weeks ago.


No, a step brother who wasn't a legal heir opened a probate action. They passed themselves off as my father's children and took the inheritance. It's all out in the open now. Two are lawyers and have ethics charges against them for lying to the court. Restitution may never be recovered because we have statute of limitations problems.

This is a very serious matter. The charges against them are so serious that one has developed health problems and is now institutionalized. It's become as sad as it is serious.


----------



## rambotex (May 5, 2014)

Go west


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> No, a step brother who wasn't a legal heir opened a probate action. They passed themselves off as my father's children and took the inheritance. It's all out in the open now. Two are lawyers and have ethics charges against them for lying to the court. Restitution may never be recovered because we have statute of limitations problems.
> 
> This is a very serious matter. The charges against them are so serious that one has developed health problems and is now institutionalized. It's become as sad as it is serious.


I see, fraud, theft, and all sorts of other criminal charges could be awaiting your brothers. One of my fathers care givers ripped him off a few years back... she is now serving 16 years (at the rate of two days per week, so she will never live long enough to enjoy another weekend outing) She is also repaying the funds to dads estate so she will also spend most of her life being reminded of her crimes as she writes those checks to the court every month. Twas such a shame too, sweet lil gal, did a good job and had a bright future. If she had just asked daddy would have given her anything she needed but nope, had to get greedy and steal from him. Not wishing your brothers any ill will but I am pretty sure there is a special place reserved for those kind.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

rambotex said:


> Go west


Thanks! I knew there was a subject for this thread.... just couldnt remember what it was! 
I agree... go west to central Oregon... hang a right at Bend and go a few miles north to Madras.... I have a dandy homestead there I would be tickled to death to put you on. Eighty acres, cute little log cabin, excellent farmland, plenty of water rights.... its the perfect place for someone, just not me.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I see, fraud, theft, and all sorts of other criminal charges could be awaiting your brothers. One of my fathers care givers ripped him off a few years back... she is now serving 16 years (at the rate of two days per week, so she will never live long enough to enjoy another weekend outing) She is also repaying the funds to dads estate so she will also spend most of her life being reminded of her crimes as she writes those checks to the court every month. Twas such a shame too, sweet lil gal, did a good job and had a bright future. If she had just asked daddy would have given her anything she needed but nope, had to get greedy and steal from him. Not wishing your brothers any ill will but I am pretty sure there is a special place reserved for those kind.


We have a civil case pending. We'll see where it goes.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Paumon said:


> Bite your tongue! :shocked:
> 
> :huh:
> 
> We already have enough people and enough problems with the environment getting messed up.


Settlement and expansion is going to happen anyways so it would be preferable to have a choice as to who, when and where.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yep, and the cycle of poverty continues instead of building wealth with each new generation adding to it, we simply wizz it all down the drain as we watch all the pretty unicorns chasing butterflies. Of course those generations will grow up with the same attitudes we see around us today... "those evil rich guys are living fat off all of our hard work". I am sure we have all heard that line before, or some variation of it.


I wouldn't consider very many homeowners in America to be in a cycle of poverty. But there's nothing wrong with wizzing it down the drain if that's what they want to do with what they earned...I can think of a lot of better things to do with wealth, but it's not mine so that's not my call to make. There's no obligation to pass your money to your kids if you don't think they deserve it. I'll leave a little something to each of my descendants, but my kids have more money than I do already and my grandkids are well on their way, so it won't change their lives.

Anyway, sorry for your loss of your father, YH. Same to Nevada, and sorry for the troubles that came from the step-family. It's always sad when that kind of thing happens. Good luck getting some kind of resolution.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Thanks! I knew there was a subject for this thread.... just couldnt remember what it was!
> I agree... go west to central Oregon... hang a right at Bend and go a few miles north to Madras.... I have a dandy homestead there I would be tickled to death to put you on. Eighty acres, cute little log cabin, excellent farmland, plenty of water rights.... its the perfect place for someone, just not me.


How much?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

jtbrandt said:


> How much?


I would have to get together with my brothers on that... they are co owners with me. At this point we are all in agreement to sell, but havent come up with a definite price. I am going to say that 500k would catch it, but it could happen for quite a bit less. Just depends on how greedy my brothers get. Similar type places in the area have been bringing anywhere from 4 to 10 k per acre.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

emdeengee said:


> Settlement and expansion is going to happen anyways so it would be preferable to have a choice as to who, when and where.


I think Americans would be comfortable enough relocating to Alaska, it is after all an American state with all-American ideals, policies and politics that Americans can relate to. And it's certainly very big. 

But with regard to Canada I think you're forgetting something. Canada already does have the choice as to who, when and where with regards to new immigrants that qualify and its waiting list is many years long now. Nobody from any country gets favouritism or fast-tracking and Canada sets very high criteria and has very high expectations and demands of all immigrants no matter where they come from. By the way, farmers and homesteaders don't qualify for immigration to Canada. I think the vast majority of Americans (probably 98%), whether they qualified or not, would not be comfortable with or able to accomodate themselves to Canada's monarchy, ideals, gun laws, politics, religions, cultures, laws and regulations, environmental and resource protections, high taxes and much higher expenses for absolutely EVERYTHING and the very high expectations that Canada has of new immigrants. New immigrants from all other countries are demonstrably much more ready and willing to fulfill the expectations that Canada requires of them and they come to Canada with the understanding that if they're going to fit in and be accepted they must think in terms of "what can I do to be of service and benefit and opportunity to this country and its people", not "what can this country and its people do to be of service and benefit and opportunity to me".

You go look on any immigrations or expat forum or immigrations advisory website and you'll see that most Americans just can't wrap their minds around let alone accept the many differences between Canada and America and the people and the first thing they want to do is express disatisfaction and start making suggestions about how to change it to be more like what they're accustomed to or change it to what they want it to be. At which point other people say to them "then why consider moving when you already have that or can do that where you are?"

You only need to go back to the first few posts in this topic and the reason it was started - it was started because of disatisfaction and desire of individualism. This is not Canada and Canada is not about individualism, never has been and never will be: 



> The opportunity to have a real part and say in how the new territory is run. A place where the government doesn't intrude into just about every darn decision you make. A place where you build your house without needing a permit. A place where if you want chickens, sheep, and cows, you can - without having to check and see if it is OK.


----------

