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.
There is truth to what you say, especially the privacy, peace, and quiet.
However, paying someone to mow acreage is not feasible. Neighbors have their own property to care for, and hiring a professional or even semi-professional to drive mowers and equipment out wasn't worth it for me. People just flat aren't dependable enough, and with acreage, too costly.
The only thing I miss is not being able to open the back door and let the dog out into a fenced, safe yard. My apartment complex has a nice-sized, double gated, fenced dog run but I still have to walk my girl there on a leash. Honestly, the dog run is one of the main reasons I stay here.
Fortunately, most people in my complex work and are gone during the day. Those of us who are retired are quiet and mind our own business, yet wave and are friendly when we encounter each other.
Granted, it's not for everyone, and honestly, I never thought it would be for me. Ever. I figured I would die and decompose on the west 40 whilst picking up dog poop. But here I am, living in an 850 sq ft apt in the city, and quite content. Who knew!!!!!????? lol.
You're lucky to find a place that will take animals. I have two dogs and a cat, a landlords nightmare. I think I would have given the acreage over to a local farmer to farm for free in exchange for maintaining the land and cutting the grass. It sounds like heaven. I can see the full moon rising over the corn stalks on a crisp fall night.
Friend I would rent. I think 56 is too old to worry about the long term returns from owning a home. The older you get the harder it can be to PROTECT your home from creditors and credit scams and outrageous overcharging by medical providers,, Sell your home and put all of you cash assets in a safe place that can not be directly linked to you and then rent knowing your nest egg is safe.
I used to own but in retirement rent. They speak of sweat equity but there is sweat maintenance also. I don't miss stoop labor or having a garage full of cutting, trimming, raking, fixing tools.
I really think it does make sense for me ,
but its hard to get comments from people that say renting is throwing away money..
Here's the thing: those who say you are throwing your money away if you rent are not considering what else you can own with $200,000. Enough oil company stock so your share of earnings covers your gasoline bill. Enough utility stock so your share of earnings covers your utility bills. Enough big retail stocks so that your share of earnings covers your food and clothing expense.
If you own the oil company and the utility and the store, you own plenty--some homeowners "rent" the oil company and the utility and the store that you can own. I think those people are throwing their money away by not owning all these other things.
Enough oil company stock so your share of earnings covers your gasoline bill.
Enough utility stock so your share of earnings covers your utility bills.
Enough big retail stocks so that your share of earnings covers your food and clothing expense.
How about enough to cover the rent?
That's the one that actually makes a meaningful comparison.
Not me! Why would I throw my money away on rent when I get tax benefits and know that my "rent" will never go up. I own a condo which is the best choice for me - no yard to worry about (our outside building maintenance) - knowing that soon I'll not only have no rent increase but no rent (mortgage pyt) at all.
56 is not too old - that's exactly how old I am. I plan to work a while and enjoy my home. Get to fix it up just like I like it.
many times yes the landlord does eat it. rents are determined by markets not what landlords want or what their expenses maybe.
while i am a renter at this stage i am also a landlord and have been for more than 25 years holding many many properties here in nyc.
my own rent is about 1k a month less than buying.
My tenants expenses are less than my costs too in one of our rentals.
In fact in most decent areas unless you got a bargain it takes quite a few years before things flip and renting is more. took us 8 years in new york to cross that line not counting depreciation on one of our rentals.
the renter may be the one with the real tax benefit.
in order for a homeowner to get 1 dollar back they have to first clear the standard deduction.
for a couple that means before mr homeowner sees one dollar they have to spend 12,800 in mortgage interest,real estate taxes and deductable expenses..
not having much to deduct mr renter may have 5 or 6k in schedule A items and gets to pocket the rest of that 12,800 deduction.
mr renter has the real advantage pocketing money never spent.
whether rent is cheaper or buying is cheaper is a whole other story than taxes. if you could get rid of your deductions you will have more money ,not less.
IN FACT IT WILL EVENTUALLY BE CASH FLOW THAT COUNTS .
once you retire it is all about cash flow. like i said the renter who goes from a 3 bedroom apartment supporting a family and goes to a one bedroom apartment as a couple has the same improved cash flow and savings as a paid off mortgage , maybe even more if they also move to a lower cost area.
you are making general statements about renting or buying and each persons situation is going to be unique to them. you can't say which will be better.
the one thing that is a given is a tax deduction is not a benefit. all it means is you are getting rebated some expense over and above the price of a house.
rental markets could not care less what your expenses are , the markets determine the rent. the fact you are paying off a mortgage on your rental and the guy across the street has a paid off mortgage on his rental does not mean you will get a penny more for your expenses just because you are paying mortgage interest.
that fact you just spent 10k for a roof does not get you 1 penny more than the guy across the street.
an owner with a 5% mortgage does not get a penny more rental income than a person with a 3 % mortgage . that bigger deduction gets mr 5% squat for his extra money spent.
got where i am going ?
Last edited by mathjak107; 05-28-2013 at 11:39 AM..
Your expenses are just as high but you pay them through your rent. Do you think your landlord eats it?
We're out of the landlord business now but for a long time had 4 rent houses, and yes, we did eat expenses.
Our rental rates were set at market value. When we replaced roofs, A/C units, cook tops, etc., or when we repaired plumbing and foundations, we did not raise rents to absorb those expenditures. Doing so would have priced our properties out of the market.
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.
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.
Rent vs Own
NOT THE TAX BENEFITS AGAIN 
