3 ms·
There's no such thing as a "safe bet". If housing was a safe bet then significant amounts on money would feed into the housing money until it stopped being a sa
by ig1 13y ago
There's no such thing as a "safe bet". If housing was a safe bet then significant amounts on money would feed into the housing money until it stopped being a safe bet. That's just basic market efficiency theory.
Most mortgages are typically 30+ years, based on historic data you're almost guaranteed to see a house price crash sometime over a 30 year period.
(Although it's important to remember that the future isn't necessarily going to reflect the past)
- clavalle 13y agoYou are not understanding. I am not saying it is a safe /investment/ I am saying it is a safe(ish) /value store/. There is a big difference. Your comment is the equivalent of saying "Saving accounts are not a safe bet. If it were everyone would be putting money into savings accounts until it stopped being a safe bet." You have to pay so much to have a roof over your head whether it is through rent or through ownership. Even if a house is a loser, investment wise, it can be a winner value-store wise. Now, you can totally mess that up by buying a home at the peak of a bubble and watch it tumble to near worthlessness, no doubt. But that is not the situation 99.999% of potential homeowners face.
- skorgu 13y agoIt's safe-ish /as long as you continue to live there/. If you ever need to move for whatever reason you're back to the mercies of whatever market cycle happens to be in force.
- clavalle 13y agoThat's true. And the real risk in buying a primary residence is in churn costs which are relatively huge and take years to make up.