Oh first, dh did call Chase and they moved the payment to the correct card, date an all. Not that it mattered, but nice to know for future reference... Phew.

Yes, today has gone a tad better.

But was reading this article:

More of Americans' income going to housing

http://www.mercurynews.com/realestatenews/ci_6869425

Interesting portion:

"It's not an accident that the states that are leading in foreclosures - including California, Nevada and Florida - are also on top of the list for the proportion of mortgage borrowers paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing," Fellowes said. "Take away the four top states, and there's actually a decrease in foreclosures."

In California, where the median home price rose to $535,750 (compared with a national median of $185,200), more than half of both homeowners and renters lived in housing not considered affordable.

In Santa Clara County, the median household income was about $80,000 in 2006, according to census data released last month. The county's median resale home price in July was $805,500, according to DataQuick Information Systems.

The California Building Industry Association, in a report released last month, said despite the housing slump, California houses remained the most unaffordable in the nation. Twenty-two percent of California homeowners and 27 percent of renters spent more than half their income on housing last year, the census data shows.

These consumers are extremely vulnerable to any change in their income or expenses, including increases in their adjustable mortgage rates, said Eric Belsky, executive director of the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. The states with the highest shares of mortgage-holders paying at least 30 percent of their incomes for housing - California (51.8 percent), Nevada (46 percent), Hawaii (46 percent), New Jersey (45 percent) and Florida (45 percent) - all are among the leaders in housing foreclosures."

Which probably sums up a few things from my perspective:

1 - $300k for a really nice house was an awesome deal for us. We might be bumping up around 30% total expenses for our house but we have no other debt, and this is only on one income. When we both work it is more like 20%. Unheard of for the area as a whole. So I know to many across the country sounds high, but to us is a great deal.

2 - Why I don't get the whole renting is cheaper/better thing. The renters for the most part aren't really better off here. Which is a unique phenomenen.

3 - We left the Bay when the median home price was in the $500k range. That $800k is just insanity. I have no idea how that is being sustained. $500k was insanity, but sustainable. $800k is due to a lot of creative financing.

4 - I am curious how the percent of income thing has fluctuated through the years. My parents did it - their loan was at 17% or something god awful; over 50% of their income. Prices may be high, but interest rates are low. Just interesting how not much has really changed in decades for that pareticular area. Anyway, with the 1000% return it paid off for them. Too much risk for me. We may inherit a lot of real estate on our part. (Nothing fancy, but a good mil easy. On the flip side our parents have a lot of assets to see them through nursing homes and medical care and all that. They took the risk early on and have so many options now. IT's nice for us on one hand. On the other hand they are likely to move to live a cheaper lifestyle. ).

Oh well, mostly some interesting statistics.

P.S. Why on earth are so many people paying SO much to live in Nevada????????