Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He makes a point of people buying new cars and living in an apartment. Funny the last apartment i lived in the guy lived there 12+ years paying at least $8-900 a month for a 2 bedroom then an addition $5-600 for the garage out back. He also bought a brand new camaro that he makes payments on. So he basically paid off the owners property and has NOTHING to show for. The landlord can ask them to leave because he decides he wants to sell and his $100k+ he paid for rent over the years goes out with the wind.
Besides not making sense financially there are a million other reasons not to rent like he talks about in the video. I'm right with this guy and hopefully within 2 years i will own a piece of land to build my small house on. Renting is horrible.
It depends on each persons situation. If you plan on moving every 3-5 years you are likely better off renting. If you are not very handy and always need to pay to have someone else to fix even the smallest of problems you might be better off renting.
If you are handy and plan on staying put for 10+ years then yes owning a house beats renting one almost every single time.
Pro-Renters tend to look at the "right now". If you look 20 years down the line the renters rent has likely doubled while the owners mortgage could be paid off. Huge swing at that point. But again to each their own.
He makes a point of people buying new cars and living in an apartment.........
Telling a story on myself: at one point, my son really wanted a fancy new diesel pickup. He did all of his research to get exactly what he wanted.
When he told me how much the truck payment would be, I said,"for that same amount of money, you could be making a house payment." So, he thought about it and bought a house instead of the new truck.
Everyone gets to decide what they spend their money on, but there are a lot of people out there who could make a house payment with the money they are spending on things that don't last.
When I was working, I kept getting asked how come I could afford to buy real estate and the person who was earning a bigger paycheck couldn't. I'd reply, "I don't go out to eat and I don't buy a lot of new clothes, and I don't buy the newest electronics or jewelry, or pay to have my hair done every week."
I'd always get the same answer. In a sort of flat voice, they would say, "oh." and walk away. Not one of those people ever did buy their own house and they still went out to dinner and out clubbing, and were fashionably dressed. Their choice, but not many people have enough income to do both. So you choose: one or the other.
It depends on each persons situation. If you plan on moving every 3-5 years you are likely better off renting. If you are not very handy and always need to pay to have someone else to fix even the smallest of problems you might be better off renting.
If you are handy and plan on staying put for 10+ years then yes owning a house beats renting one almost every single time.
Pro-Renters tend to look at the "right now". If you look 20 years down the line the renters rent has likely doubled while the owners mortgage could be paid off. Huge swing at that point. But again to each their own.
It varies from city to city. In my hometown, for example, you can get a decent house for around $125k but to rent the same house would probably cost $1300, so buying would be better. Where I live now it is not the case - the median new SFH is totally overpriced at nearly $500k but the rent isn't more than double what it was in my hometown. In this case, if you invested the extra money you saved from the early years renting, you'd have more than enough growth on the money over time to make up for the inflating rent, if you were reasonably aggressive with the portfolio. So renting would be better, unless you simply spend the money in the early years like an undisciplined consumerist without self control.
It varies from city to city. In my hometown, for example, you can get a decent house for around $125k but to rent the same house would probably cost $1300, so buying would be better. Where I live now it is not the case - the median new SFH is totally overpriced at nearly $500k but the rent isn't more than double what it was in my hometown. In this case, if you invested the extra money you saved from the early years renting, you'd have more than enough growth on the money over time to make up for the inflating rent, if you were reasonably aggressive with the portfolio. So renting would be better, unless you simply spend the money in the early years like an undisciplined consumerist without self control.
yea, it's the same for me also, here in NYC renting OR buying is very expensive... at least for me. I'd have to move out of state to be able to own. For the amount of rent i've paid in some places like one of the worst neighborhoods in Brooklyn , i could have been paying a mortgage.
It depends on each persons situation. If you plan on moving every 3-5 years you are likely better off renting. If you are not very handy and always need to pay to have someone else to fix even the smallest of problems you might be better off renting.
If you are handy and plan on staying put for 10+ years then yes owning a house beats renting one almost every single time.
Pro-Renters tend to look at the "right now". If you look 20 years down the line the renters rent has likely doubled while the owners mortgage could be paid off. Huge swing at that point. But again to each their own.
Like i said about my previous neighbor he lived there for 12+ years and he still is there. He paid at least $150,000 by living there. The house has 3 apartments in it the one i rented was $950 2 bedroom then there is another on the 3rd floor being rented along with 4 other garages out back the landlord rents out. The owner paid about $80k for the house in the 80s. The owner is making/made nice money and the tenant has nothing in the end.
Telling a story on myself: at one point, my son really wanted a fancy new diesel pickup. He did all of his research to get exactly what he wanted.
When he told me how much the truck payment would be, I said,"for that same amount of money, you could be making a house payment." So, he thought about it and bought a house instead of the new truck.
Everyone gets to decide what they spend their money on, but there are a lot of people out there who could make a house payment with the money they are spending on things that don't last.
When I was working, I kept getting asked how come I could afford to buy real estate and the person who was earning a bigger paycheck couldn't. I'd reply, "I don't go out to eat and I don't buy a lot of new clothes, and I don't buy the newest electronics or jewelry, or pay to have my hair done every week."
I'd always get the same answer. In a sort of flat voice, they would say, "oh." and walk away. Not one of those people ever did buy their own house and they still went out to dinner and out clubbing, and were fashionably dressed. Their choice, but not many people have enough income to do both. So you choose: one or the other.
I was in the same boat also, but now my co-op has been paid off for about a decade and now i go out to eat all the time.
see there is a silver lining after all, I know you get it!
everyones situation is different for renting.
id rather own.
PS: I couldnt give you any more rep points....it wont allow me.
Like i said about my previous neighbor he lived there for 12+ years and he still is there. He paid at least $150,000 by living there. The house has 3 apartments in it the one i rented was $950 2 bedroom then there is another on the 3rd floor being rented along with 4 other garages out back the landlord rents out. The owner paid about $80k for the house in the 80s. The owner is making/made nice money and the tenant has nothing in the end.
Like you said "to each their own"
Actually paying $150,000 over 20 years is better than $80k at the beginning PLUS taxes/ins/maint at any reasonable rate of interest or opportunity cost. The owner needs to sell at a good price at the end to make up for the lack of ability to invest in the stock market.
Many folks measure the cost of renting vs. owning as just the mortgage vs. rent. In fact, owning costs much more than that. Homeowners also have to pay for home insurance, property taxes, HOA fees, maintenance, trash service, oftentimes lawn care, and sometimes other expenses like pool maintenance, burglar alarms, etc. . . So cost comparisons are not as straightforward as one thinks. Here, it's generally cheaper to own than rent, but I still think owning is overrated. Property taxes are ridiculously expensive here, and of course homeowners don't have the ability to easily move. And one cannot underestimate the peace of mind you get knowing that the landlord is responsible for most repairs, not you. One of the most common repairs homeowners here need is foundation repair, and that can easily cost $10,000 or more.
And let's not forget that renting gives you the luxury of flexibility. Within reason and contract constraints, , one can pick up and move anytime they want. No maitenance equals the luxury if more leisure time.
Those are valuable things to some people. Renting versus buying isn't just a financial choice. It's also a lifestyle choice.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.