4 ms·
Homes should not be an investment. And Homes are also generally a bad investment even though there is a whole lobby of people that try to convince you that you
by goalonetwo 2y ago
Homes should not be an investment.
And Homes are also generally a bad investment even though there is a whole lobby of people that try to convince you that you need to buy at any price.
The only reason why homes have been a good "investment" for most people is that it is a forced saving through your mortgage, which most people would have spent stupidly otherwise.
But we should normalize renting and investing in actual investments like the SP500. Everyone would be better off and you would end up with more assets.
- jkaplowitz 2y ago> Homes should not be an investment. […] > But we should normalize renting Isn’t it investors who would normally own rented homes, and own them specifically as an investment, whether each investor only owns one home or several/many? I’m guessing you meant that an owner-occupied primary residence shouldn’t be an investment, which is usually good advice.
- unyttigfjelltol 2y agoIt's been a good investment for many people for obvious macro reasons but also because: 1. You can live in it (thus realizing value directly). 2. Since you live there you can't easily panic and sell in a downturn. 3. Leverage (U.S. gov't FHA provides almost 30:1 leverage) 4. Lenders can't liquidate you simply on account of decline in value (no margin calls)
- goalonetwo 2y agoEven with all those points, you would in most cases end up with more assets renting something equivalent and dumping your down payment and mortgage in the SP500. Again, the main advantage of a mortgage is that it forces you to save. If you are disciplined enough to save and invest in the SP500, you are way better off doing that.