Chase Bank

Over 15 years your rent creeps up.

With a house, your payment remains stable.

Also, are you saying you don't pay renter's insurance? If you don't, I strongly advise you to get some.

Besides your parents who has done this?

And depending on location " the average person cannot. Maybe if you live in the backwoods of Mississippi you could or perhaps even 50 years ago like possibly your parents when houses costs $24k, not over $300k now for an average house (not a luxury home).

Equity is the difference between mortgage and value and for the average home owner isn’t used to borrow against, but when retiring and becoming empty nesters, they downsize and use the difference in earnings for retirement.

I think I fully understand the costs involved with a home. When I first bought my place my taxes and insurance were included in with my mortgage bill, my rent previously was $25 more than this combined amount. Now, as a result I currently have over $40k in equity " even in this down size by using the 2010 new tax assessed value (which is typically a conservative value). So if I continued renting assuming that rents would go up/taxes would go up and $25 difference used for maintenance - costs would have been pretty close either way. So net gain after 10 years of $40k. So in this case was renting better?

15 years of savings isn’t ridiculous and I would never say so " but having your own home and gaining $40k in 10 years isn’t bad either.

Yes and like prior when the housing market went down - it went up again.

You ignore half of what I say and just highlight pieces - I do not intend to repeat it.

I am guessing you are prepping to be a politician.

But how much have you spent in upkeep on the place? How much have you spent in interest on your mortgage that entire time?

My point is that the alternative to what you are proposing is a much better deal then you are making it out to be. And you have full mobility, earn interest on your money instead of pay interest on it, and never have to worry about the value of the place you are living going up or down.

Quote:

But how much have you spent in upkeep on the place? How much have you spent in interest on your mortgage that entire time?

My point is that the alternative to what you are proposing is a much better deal then you are making it out to be. And you have full mobility, earn interest on your money instead of pay interest on it, and never have to worry about the value of the place you are living going up or down.

Depends on what is important to you - you plan to stay in once place. I mentioned $25 a month for what I had paid for the upkeep. Pretty much didn't need to do anything to it when I moved in so years of saving the $25 paid for anything. As I stated before in regard to interest - all of this was less than what I paid in rent. Of course your mortgage bill includes interest.

The interest and taxes are deductible from your annual federal and state taxes. I did not worry about the value going up or down, I'd only sell if it was advantegous to me. A home is a long term purchase so no worries. Not much different than other investments. No different than having another investment when the market plumeted. What do you do then? Same thing, a smart person sits on it until the value (investment or home) goes up.

I work day to day in the financial market and have various investments as part of portfolio - I have an inkinkling (although I can't spell) of what is involved.

The data you are presenting is not predictive of our current problem at all.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The data you are presenting is not predictive of our current problem at all.

But the general lesson holds true, none-the-less.

Some markets do better. Some markets do worse.

If the drawbacks of owning are too great for you, it doesn't mean that the drawbacks of owning are too great for everyone.

Didn't we just have this same discussion about iPads? Your situation is unique to you; you cannot apply your situation to say what is best for everyone.

And the idea that one 'has to' buy into the system is wrong.

I only stated that it's perfectly possible to live a great life, enjoying the modern amenities that our society has become used to, without using a credit card or credit at all. And the idea that one 'has to' buy into the system is wrong.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I only stated that it's perfectly possible to live a great life, enjoying the modern amenities that our society has become used to, without using a credit card or credit at all. And the idea that one 'has to' buy into the system is wrong.

Alrighty, then.

I would suggest that totally ignoring the system, and having no credit history whatsoever, is a mistake, though.