Need objectivity re: our move

[dragons in the flower bed]

Normally I'd avoid asking for financial advice in a public forum, but all of my friends and family members have a stake in my decision, so I can't get objective advice from them. (And I don't want to torture them by giving them false hope.)

 

Because of the nature of the junk business, we had a big boon, income wise, just as everyone else was starting to need to tighten their belts. That was when we put down money on our land. We know from experience that when the economy is bad for everyone else it's good for us, so we knew we'd have money to work with. However, our business had never been subject to this long of a recession before, and it turns out that at some point even folks who deal in junk get hit by it. (It's the gas that's getting us. In every other way business is booming.) So it looks like we will need to adjust the plan.

 

The plan was:

 

put all of our surplus income into building our cordwood house, and move down there next year

 

The options now are:

 

1. The Community Option. Give up the land, getting back about half of what we put into it. Stay here where we have family and a good network of permaculture enthusiasts, and buy a vacant lot or two in our poor city neighborhood to "farm"/romp on.

 

2. The Green Acres Option. Sell the house we're in, use the money to get a 24 foot insulated yurt so we can camp on the land, and build our cordwood passive solar forever home slowly over the course of five years. This means having to fetch water from a well, cooking on a woodstove, and sharing a bedroom with all of my kids, until we can afford to upgrade.

 

3. The Current Default Option. Continue living here, making payments on land too far away to be of any joy or use, until we have enough money to go forward with our original plan. This means a bunch of uncertainty for a good long time, and no progress towards our goals at all.

 

If you read all of this, I thank you. If you have any suggestions for me, fire away!

[gandpsmommy]

Option 1 would be my first choice. Family and a social network count for a lot, in my opinion. And being able to move forward now would seem enticing to me.

 

Option 2 would be my second choice because you are working toward a goal, even if it will take awhile to get to where you want to be. I would have a hard time with the camping out so long, but if that sort of living doesn't bother you, I would go for it.

 

I don't think I would want to just stay put and not do anything, continuing to pay for land you can't use. I hope my thoughts helped in some way. Good luck with your decision.

[WTMCassandra]

What kind of lifestyle really brings you joy? I think #3 is out--no joy to be had there.

 

What is more important to you? Community or solitude? How much do you like to rough it? How about your children? Your little ones are too small to help much--are you physically able to help husband with the building projects if you do #2?

 

#2 has some compelling aspects, I must admit, but I think it is best suited to certain personalities rather than others. I also think it might work better if your children were a bit older and could apprentice with their Dad to learn how to build stuff.

 

#1 is good if you are really relishing your community and because your children are small.

 

I hope these musing help at least a little to narrow down your choices. I'd like to hear what you decide.

[Peso]

... reading this blog:

 

http://littlehomeblessings.blogspot.com/

 

make sure to check the "our little home (?)" category.

 

Melody and her family are Waldorf homeschoolers, but also have just built a home in a situation much like your #2 listed above...

 

HTH -

 

Penny

[Jenny in Atl]

If all in the family were healthy I would pick #2. If roughing it is too much then #2. I agree #3 just sounds harder in an odd way.

[Kathleen in VA]

I'm probably being romantic here, but I think option 2 has a lot of potential. Besides all the adventure (aka huge challenges) it offers, you will have the makings of a great book when it's all said and done. Could you have a large water tank installed instead of having to get water from a well?

[Marie in Oh]

I don't see anything wrong with option #3. It seems the most fiscally sound of the three. If you can afford the payments on the land, owning it outright before you build on it is not necessarily bad. Alot of people here by lots in the country and don't build on them for 10 years. #1 is a no go in my mind. #2 might work depending on your family dynamics. I am not sure I have it in me to do it, but I know people who have. I wish you the best.

[Stacy in NJ]

Regarding option #1, can you sell the land rather than "give it up"?

[newbie]

I don't see anything wrong with option #3. It seems the most fiscally sound of the three. If you can afford the payments on the land, owning it outright before you build on it is not necessarily bad. Alot of people here by lots in the country and don't build on them for 10 years. #1 is a no go in my mind. #2 might work depending on your family dynamics. I am not sure I have it in me to do it, but I know people who have. I wish you the best.

:iagree:Maybe because I am in that boat and just praying for an economic upturn, or win the lotto.

 

We are trying to hold on to land as long as we can, because our dream is to settle there.

 

It definitely is not sensible or practical. I havent even seen the land in four yrs. But the elk enjoy it.

 

Jet

[Emmy]

Rose - I could totally see you doing #2 even though it would be tough in many ways. It wouldn't just be you and the kids right? Your partner would be moving as well? I think being the only adult in a situation like that would be too hard. I think #3 is out, #2 has some merit depending on the people involved.

[Alyce]

We bought land when we first moved into this house. Our financial situation worsened and at the time we thought the best thing to do was sell the land and stay put. Now 25 years later I look back on that situation and wish we had handled it better. If I had your choices I'd do #3 but that's because of the situation I find myself in now. Although in the short term you might not be able to use your land and it might seem worthless you also need to look at things in the long run. If we had kept that land we would have more choices now and the land would be ours free and clear. You don't know what the future will bring but you have to look towards the future. In 10 years your situation may be quite different and then look at what you could do. If you wait until your situation is better the land you want will be gone or it will sell for a much higher price and where would you be. I vote hang on to what you have and go slowly but still head towards your ultimate goal.

[kalanamak]

because I'd choose number three. Remember, I'm the one who bought property in the same area you did, too. We know we won't be able to move for 18 more months, but that part of NY is just too beautiful to give up. Plus, your kids are so young, so if I was you, I'd hang on to it as long as possible.

nt

[Sharon in SC]

because I'd choose number three. Remember, I'm the one who bought property in the same area you did, too. We know we won't be able to move for 18 more months, but that part of NY is just too beautiful to give up. Plus, your kids are so young, so if I was you, I'd hang on to it as long as possible.

 

It looks like the "oddball" group is growing in size. :-) Provided you don't *need* the financial resources you put into the land, I feel it would be more valuable to you in the long run to hang onto your vision and ride this current wave of economic recession.

 

To go with #1 means you're "settling" for something else that, likely, would not mean the same to you anyway in terms of enjoyment. I say leave your investment where you wanted it to be in the first place which is where it's likely to grow in value (rather than taking it out now and getting about only 1/2 back of what you put into it). Just look at it as a longterm investment for now if that helps you feel better about it.

 

To go with #2 means you'll be "camping" (and not car camping at that) for a fairly extended period of time. If this *really* appeals to you, then maybe this is a viable second choice. We are campers but I gotta tell you - the thought of roughing it to that degree with children the ages of yours does NOT appeal to *me*. :tongue_smilie: Again, though, I understand everyone is different and if you really like the sound of this option, you could go for it!

 

To reiterate - unless #2 just sounds *wonderful* to you, I strongly vote for #3! I think you'd get the better return for your $ *and* be able to, ultimately, walk out your original vision.

[Sharon in SC]

We bought land when we first moved into this house. Our financial situation worsened and at the time we thought the best thing to do was sell the land and stay put. Now 25 years later I look back on that situation and wish we had handled it better. If I had your choices I'd do #3 but that's because of the situation I find myself in now. Although in the short term you might not be able to use your land and it might seem worthless you also need to look at things in the long run. If we had kept that land we would have more choices now and the land would be ours free and clear. You don't know what the future will bring but you have to look towards the future. In 10 years your situation may be quite different and then look at what you could do. If you wait until your situation is better the land you want will be gone or it will sell for a much higher price and where would you be. I vote hang on to what you have and go slowly but still head towards your ultimate goal.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[dragons in the flower bed]

I'm probably being romantic here, but I think option 2 has a lot of potential. Besides all the adventure (aka huge challenges) it offers, you will have the makings of a great book when it's all said and done. Could you have a large water tank installed instead of having to get water from a well?

 

 

:D Ah, Kathleen, you must know how much I love to jabber on in print about the boring details of my life.

 

I'm looking into options for a tank of some sort. Even if I just buy a big black tank and rig up an elevated structure and a garden hose into the yurt, it'd be better! But that would take money out of our moving budget. I'll have to crunch the numbers some more and see if we can afford that off the bat.

[dragons in the flower bed]

What is more important to you? Community or solitude? How much do you like to rough it? How about your children? Your little ones are too small to help much--are you physically able to help husband with the building projects if you do #2?

 

You did help me narrow it down, and I can't rep you more, but I do appreciate it. I really think you've hit upon the core of my problem: I don't know whether community or solitude is more important to me. I feel I need both.

 

My dad and his roommate Bob live down near the land and are also slowly building on it. Dad's been in construction all of his life, and Bob's on disability and home all of the time. So I'd have help, with kids and with building.

 

How do I figure out if solitude or community is more important?

[dragons in the flower bed]

Regarding option #1, can you sell the land rather than "give it up"?

 

Probably not. We can get our money back out of it, though, in giving it up, because of a clause in our contract.

[dragons in the flower bed]

We are trying to hold on to land as long as we can, because our dream is to settle there.

 

Aw, (((Jet))) you are so kind to think of the elk. :D

 

I'm not planning on having any more kids, and I want to get out there before my youngest is a teenager. I want them to grow up in the woods.

 

Actually, maybe that's the heart of the problem for me. I've been thinking of it as solitude vs. community, and feeling guilty for taking the kids away from their godparents and grown sibling.

 

But really it's about the kids, and getting them to some place healthy to grow up. They witnessed a drive by shooting outside our living room window once. That day, my instinct was to run for the hills.

 

And they'll still have Granddad, and each other, once we move. I'm sure we'll find new friends . . . yes . . . when I way woods against community here, the woods win.

 

But when I weigh hot running water against woods . . . not so sure.

[dragons in the flower bed]

We bought land when we first moved into this house. Our financial situation worsened and at the time we thought the best thing to do was sell the land and stay put. Now 25 years later I look back on that situation and wish we had handled it better. If I had your choices I'd do #3 but that's because of the situation I find myself in now.

 

ACK! Alyce, I typed Dot's name into the comment box when I gave you rep, but I assure you, I meant to thank you! (And I was grateful to Dot, too, but she already got her rep.)

[dragons in the flower bed]

To go with #1 means you're "settling" for something else that, likely, would not mean the same to you anyway in terms of enjoyment. I say leave your investment where you wanted it to be in the first place which is where it's likely to grow in value (rather than taking it out now and getting about only 1/2 back of what you put into it). Just look at it as a longterm investment for now if that helps you feel better about it.

 

 

Sharon, the way you phrase this makes a great deal of sense to me. Number three is starting to look more like a viable option for me.

[TraceyS/FL]

OH good, because #3 is what i'd would try to do...

 

Because, no high speed internet would do me in :P

 

:grouphug: You will do what is right for you guys (and your guys). I hope you can hold onto to it to move when you can!