Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

David Lynch LA House

wallpaper.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 142 posts

Re: David Lynch LA House

#71

Post by steveBK123 »

rectang wrote: post #64
ode wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not a wealthy man by Hollywood standards

It’s funny, but as someone who’s worked in music production, when you say that what comes to my mind is that the vast majority of people in the entertainment industry are nowhere near as wealthy as David Lynch. “Hollywood standards” to me is several struggling actors sharing a flat.

It's like the Bill Murray quote though - I always want to say to people who want to be rich and famous: 'try being rich first'. See if that doesn't cover most of it.

The entertainment industry is filled with a lot of more-famous-than-rich people. By these numbers David Lynch (at 78) was probably as wealthy as 1000s of random (and anonymous) successful Mag7 SWEs are at retirement.

Re: David Lynch LA House

#72

Post by bombcar »

boriskourt wrote: post #46

Jennifer Lynch is very active on Reddit and explained why it’s selling for anyone interested. [0] [0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/davidlynch/comments/1nhb6q9/comment...

Hopefully something like the Getty can scrounge up $15m from the couch cushions. Would be a nice museum of some sort.

Re: David Lynch LA House

#77

Post by softwreoutthere »

bombcar wrote: post #70
tasuki wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that definition, most people are poor. $15 million is much more than most people have. Even split among the four children, it's fine.

It’s not terribly hard to get into that position, if you spend 40 years of your time and treasure on something with resale value instead of on food and experiences. You can do something similar if you buy a house and keep buying any neighboring house that comes up for sale (and renting them out, perhaps).

> It’s not terribly hard

Uhm, it must be, or more people would do it

Re: David Lynch LA House

#78

Post by nabla9 »

gyomu wrote: post #59
randycupertino wrote: post #13

Love this compound and all the hiking paths up around in the surrounding hills. Truly an peaceful property to immerse yourself in work and entertaining! Property taxes are gonna spike for the new buyer though due to prop 13 so make sure to factor that into your offer vs the $15k a year in the listing... Hopefully whoever buys this gem doesn't tear it down to build some modern boxy McMansion.

> Truly a peaceful property What you don’t realize if you’ve never spent time around those ridiculous properties is the amount of upkeep everything takes if you don’t want the indoors to become gross and dusty and the outdoors a wild jungle. When you have that kind of surface area, you’re not taking care of all the cleaning and maintenance yourself in a few hours once a week. There are countless gardeners/cleaners/re…

That's why you have multiple properties and household manager.

Most of the maintenance is done when the owners is not in residence”.

Re: David Lynch LA House

#79

Post by nabla9 »

skrebbel wrote: post #42
jppope wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its pretty easy to understand actually, and all of metropolitan California is the same way- A normal, dual income, middle class working family has an income of ~$250K-$500K (Doctor + teacher, Lawyer and a Doctor, Business exec and Accountant, etc) and they're going to spend upwards of ~40% of their income on their house. thats going to have them spending $6K-$11K. Now they can handle a $1M home no problem. 3 bed 2 ba…

Nitpick, but > A normal, dual income, middle class working family > (Doctor + teacher, Lawyer and a Doctor, Business exec and Accountant, etc) That’s not the middle class.

That's the traditional middle class. "American Middle Class" is a clever political trick. It was created to remove "working class" from the vocabulary so that people could no longer identify as such.

If we use only lifestyle indicators, such as making enough money to save and retire comfortably, having enough money to go on vacations and to restaurants frequently, and being able to buy a house, the middle class is shrinking.

Re: David Lynch LA House

#80

Post by tikhonj »

tasuki wrote: post #56
boriskourt wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was not a poor man, he was not a wealthy man. This project did take 40 years. Which is a great deal of his career and income, there is another nice comment from Jen about it here: https://www.reddit.com/r/davidlynch/comments/1nhcgej/comment...

By that definition, most people are poor. $15 million is much more than most people have. Even split among the four children, it's fine.

Sure, but there's a gap between being poor and being wealthy. $15 million is a lot more than most people have and it's certainly enough to be comfortable and not have to worry about money, but it's still categorically different from having the sort of money that gives you institutional power.
Post reply on HN