3 ms·

Calling them fond memories is not a way I would have characterized them. Regardless, the same strategy regarding home ownership worked for me. Of course to you

Calling them fond memories is not a way I would have characterized them. Regardless, the same strategy regarding home ownership worked for me. Of course to your point there's no telling if I had been renting and putting every extra dollar into the stock market if I might not have come out ahead. But realistically how many people "invest" in that manner with their income? I can tell you my blue-collar background had not raised me to be investment savvy. (I would have no idea what capital gains were until I was probably in my forties.) I suspect that for most people with similar upbringing an investment in their home is their only significant investment in their lifetime — or it was once that way. (Who knew they were killing this country.) I guess that one's out the window now as well then if they can't even afford that. Unexpected repair and upkeep cost — you're suggesting the landlords just eat that? (In my case I have learned to do repairs myself. That has been very liberating, FWIW.) If I am following, your alternative is that we all become renters for life — using any extra money we have to invest in the stock market?

Ericson2314 1y ago
> If I am following, your alternative is that we all become renters for life — using any extra money we have to invest in the stock market? So yes, given the current situation, that is the mathematically best option for many, many people, far more than people think. I'm sympathetic though to the idea that asking everyone to be "savvy" is not workable. (Of course, meeting the societal expectation that "unsavvy" home buying also yields nice returns also has major costs.) I think the right answer is probably that the government should think about making sure people have very simple retirement savings vehicles. For example, allowing you to buy more into social security and then get more back.

Ericson2314 1y ago

> If I am following, your alternative is that we all become renters for life — using any extra money we have to invest in the stock market? So yes, given the current situation, that is the mathematically best option for many, many people, far more than people think. I'm sympathetic though to the idea that asking everyone to be "savvy" is not workable. (Of course, meeting the societal expectation that "unsavvy" home buying also yields nice returns also has major costs.) I think the right answer is probably that the government should think about making sure people have very simple retirement savings vehicles. For example, allowing you to buy more into social security and then get more back.