Quick Question: Who here is in a lot of debt b/c of F355 or house or whatever?

"You may find over time that having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
Spock- AMOK TIME

 

The problem with today's (21st century)woman is that they won't take direction from the man like previous generations have. It's also rare to find one that will make sacrifices to ensure that there is always money available to take care of the necessities and unexpected expenses of life. So many of them want to spend like they're rich, but don't wanna work to enough to cover their spending habits AND contribute to the living expenses? They're just terrible at math involving cost-of-living. And yes, I respect that a woman taking care of the household is a unique duty. But how many women do that anymore w/o maids and nanny's? How did our Mom's do it???... and why does today's woman expect their obligations and privileges to be so different?

 

the "artwork" wasn't done by his daughter! LOL.

 

Money compounds itself and once you get past a certain point most everything is cheap. Would I go into debt for a Ferrari, hell no if I had to work to pay it off. If the payment was coming from investments the debt wouldn't be a problem for me. Used properly debt is a very valuable tool.

I would eaisly go into debt if I were going to buy say American express or exxon stock and sell covered calls on it every month to pay back the debt load. I would not go into debt for a Ferrari I had to pay the debt back through working a 9 to 5. My time is way more valuable and I wouldn't spend my time making money to pay for a Ferrari.

 

Agreed 100%. At the time of my divorce, I just had my 12th anniversary, had two daughters ages 3 and 11 at the time, and had just purchased my current machine shop a year earlier and just built a new house 2 years earlier. My ex worked a decent paying job, and since I had just bought the shop, I was really careful with the money to see how things would go the first year. Typical woman, she was always b!tching about me having money in my business account and not putting much into our home account. She didn't understand that when a person paid me, a large percentage went towards the parts for the job, all she saw were dollar signs. All she could understand was we owned a business and we should be able to buy whatever we wanted. As a couple, we paid all of our bills but never had much left over, except for a well deserved vacation once a year. Well, after the divorce, I'm still living in the same house, had to take on 2/3 of her credit card bills, and still have my Suburban, old Monte Carlo, and recently bought a newer Jaguar STR. All on one paycheck instead of two! I always tell everyone that it just shows she was blowing her paycheck and part of mine.
Every woman I've ever known didn't know the theory of opportunity cost. They want it all NOW, can't wait.
I'll never get married again...too big of an expense liability.
I'm in no way rich now, but live within my means, and hopefully within the next year or so, I can find an F355 that is perfect for me- i.e.- one that needs some engine work and is priced accordingly.
PS- The ex is living with her dead-beat lover, filed bankruptcy, working a part time job and living off the system, even though I pay a healthy amount of child support. And she sold the low mile, extra clean Porsche she took from the divorce and is driving a POS Mitsubishi 4 door.
I don't mean to sound bitter, but I have no tolerance for women that don't spend within their means.

 

Totally dude...and the "system" is designed to f*** those of us that do live prudently. I feel for you as I am going through a divorce with the (ironic) primary cause being her misuse of money and abuse of my efforts.

 

Just watch one episode of 'The Real Housewives of Orange County' on cable and it will confirm you should never, ever get married.

 

No truer words can be spoken on the matter. I waited half a lifetime to buy my first Ferrari. I knew it would have to be a cash deal, was worth the wait. These are not times to be delving into debts that do not bare fruit.

--Mike

 

i'm going to have to agree with gary here. i cant for the life of me imagine why someone who has been married and divorced would ever get married again. makes absolutely no sense. my grandmother was killed in a car accident when i was 5. her husband, my grandfather, died 25 years later. he never considered remarriage. it always seemed strange to me as a kid, but now as a man, i completely understand.

 

When I met my ex-wife she was a struggling (student) single mum and I had just opened my printing business and had my head down and arse up working like mad to make a go of it.

Over the next 14 years I proceeded to work, buy cars, houses, holidays, put her son through private college etc, etc and support her while she was studying 2 days a week.

At the end of that she had a degree, just starting a good paying career, her son was about to leave home... and I was pretty much a wreck, so that was when she decided to pull the pin... took half the cash, the paid off house (I got the one with the mortgage) new car, furniture etc...

At one stage during a mediation she said well what do you think is a "fair" settlement, naturally I said "I supported you for 14 years now you support me for 14 years... that would be ...fair..."

The mediator then piped up and said..." this has nothing to do with fair... it is to do with the legal system". I had shown an ability to earn more than my ex over the last 14 years therefore the split was 60-40 in her favour.

No.... do not get married unless she has more money/assets than you have it is no fun getting half way through life and having to start again...

 

This kind of advice is what got us into the entire economic clusterf@ck we're in right now.

Almost everyone in California had enough equity in their house to buy a Ferrari, too many of them borrowed too much to buy depreciating toys they didn't need. Now we're seeing the result of borrowing against paper profits instead of actually earning money.

And those F430 "investments" that owners were going to flip at a profit...

Great post and reality check.

I saw that episode. In my case, the 328 has actually been better than I expected -- I'm much more comfortable with the car than I ever thought I would be in a Ferrari, and if something bad happens I have a car cash reserve to put it right.

 

I'm pretty sure that it's a combination of mortgage-backed securities and sub-prime, variable interest rate lending that got us into the current economic situation. Regardless of what you think, the DTI is the most commonly used metric to see if someone is overextended.

Or, alternatively, you can take advice from someone who uses the word "clusterf@ck." Your call.

 

I am so much debt (not really but don't tell anyone, it could ruin my master plan!) that I am creating a task force to gain some of that Federal money... I plan on driving to DC in my Ferrari (should cause as much of a flap as arriving in a private jet) sit in front of Congress and share with them that we as Ferrari owners deserve access to either TARP or general stimulus monies. We create or protect jobs with all the parts or service professionals we keep in business. If we as a group make a great case I figure we could all be out of debt and billionaires by say Friday..... Any one else in for a road trip to DC? Oh can I ride share (Could help with the Democrats that want us to limit fuel waste) until my parts order comes in (See created or protected another job), my car is up on blocks waiting for parts to be road worthy.

 

lolololl !

 

If we had a large group drive to DC in F-cars...asking for a piece of the stimulus...it would probably make a great point to congress (and lots of news coverage) as to how silly it is to keep adding handouts to the package!

 

If you want to drive a 348/355 Ferrari, just make sure you got $10,000-$15,000 to blow. I recommend driving a Ferrari for 1 year only. Why do you want to keep it for that long? There are more cars out there to play with.

Basically if you buy a 348/355, you're expected to loose $10,000-$15,000 in 1 year(about $1k per month). not bad, which only comes up to $33 per day(its less then a some cars at Hertz).

Ok how do you come up with $12k per year, simple, here's the break down
1) Sales tax/Insurance/registration = $5,000
2) Depreciation + Maintenance(assuming you drove it under 5k miles per year) = $7,000-$10,000


Dont' worry about the $50-$70k upfront to get it, worry about the $10-$15k that you're not gonna get back..

So if you have about $12K saved up for 1 year of Ferrrari fun, then go head and buy it.

Bassicaly you're banging your head over $12k, its no big deal. you can easily make it back, its not like you're loosing 100ks.


I forgot, there is also the Opportunity Cost to have $50k-$70K held up for 1 year, which can be use for other purpose, example, pay debts, earn interetes, business ventures, etc.. which can run up in the thousands. so there you go.. sorry if this is too much, but its the reality for owning a Ferrari.

 

I owe 5 credit card companies over $80,000.

I owe $230,000 on my mortgage.

I owe $129,000 on my second mortgage.

I owe over $30,000 on my wife's mercedes.

I owe $1400 for a waterbed I bought.

I owe $17,000 for a timeshare.


But my 348 is in the clear! Now is everyone happy?










j/k. this is a spoof.

 

Man I hope so.

I have a lot of debt but all of it is on assets that make me cash flow every month and even then the debt is less than the value of the asset in every case and LLc-ed too.

 

When people borrow against a depreciating asset (say, their home) to buy a depreciating asset that will incur regular, significant upkeep costs (say, a used Ferrari) and predicate their ability to repay that loan on a deflationary number such as their salary in the current economy, it is naive to assume that a snapshot ratio like DTI is a good gauge of whether it is wise to borrow to buy an old Ferrari.

I know how lenders calculate how much they are willing to lend you, and my conclusion is that their advice has been bankrupt (as are their employers, of late).

 

Do they ban women from this site? Cause if there were any ladies on this site I think they would have posted long ago.

Hasn’t anyone married a rich chick? I though that was the goal, so she could buy you a Ferrari. You get all the car with none of the debt.

 

Don't you know how a chick gets 1 million dollars?
She starts out with 2 million she swindled out of her first husband!

 

On the matter of debts, I really found this post interesting (thanks Wallace) - with a particular fondness for the text indicated by bold script:

However, if using equity in your home to finance further purchases, it seems you're gambling on the house price not dropping (quite a common practice until recently). Presuming you can indefinitely afford the repayments then there doesn't seem to be a problem, but if you ever wanted to move home or struggled with repayments (income reduction?) then you'd be in quite a serious spot of trouble. On the whole though, it seems providing you have the debt fully elucidated and sensibly controlled, then it is not an entity to fear.




On other matters (the thread starter taking his own discussion off topic here - so I'll follow. lol):

I think perhaps you're defining too extreme a spectrum there utilising two extreme stereotypes of women ("Miss Independent"/"Woman of the System" verses "Harmonious Religious Woman") - neither of which I can completely relate to any of the women I have known: partners, friends, or otherwise.

I would go on to debate that your advice towards finding harmony is somewhat misguided, even if well-intentioned. I've been dating my partner for 7.5 years and I can tell you that the secret to a harmonious relationship is not "avoiding independent women" or "seeking the religious woman", but rather viewing her as your equal and thus be attentive towards your partner's thoughts, feelings, aspirations, and dreams. Atheism not mean a couple are consigned to live without harmony, respect and trust - and to suggest it is so would be a hypothesis based wholly and entirely in the realms of religious fiction.

Frankly, the idea of seeking either a "Miss Dependent" or the "Religious Woman" that only with whom you will be able to obtain harmonious co-existence seems either archaic or juvenile. My partner is my equal, with a mind of her own, and both our lives are infinitely enriched by it - it'd be awfully dull if everyone (especially your partner) agreed with you all of the time.

Furthermore, I think everyone at one point in timer or another needs to be told by their partner when they're being a fool - after all, who else could you trust more to be completely honest with you and offer critique without bashfulness, timidness, or political correctness?

All the best,
Andrew.

 

It's so funny all these comments. It's like someone who keeps messing with a bees nest you know. Leave the bees alone and let them make you honey, unless you just have to have a hornet that produces nothing but pain. If everyone told the hornets to go f--k themselves they would find a way to bring you honey after a while.