wkmac
Well-Known Member
A Wall Street Journal article purposes an answer that might surprise you.
Rethinking Part of the American Dream
Rethinking Part of the American Dream
Homeownership or Rent
- Thread starter wkmac
- Start date
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
Excellent article. Suze Orman dedicated her show last night to this topic, Buying vs Renting, and much of what she said echoed the article you referenced.
However, there was one point she touched on that the article didn't and that is the opportunities that exist in the foreclosure market. For a renter who does have the means this is a fantastic time to buy. Homes which first sold in the $300's and $400's are now in the low $200's or even high $100's.
Suze also pointed that out that renters often equate their monthly rent payment to what they can afford for a mortgage payment. She suggested that a potential homebuyer add 30-40% to the mortgage payment to get the true cost of owning the home. Sure, with tax credits you get some of that back, but it is a cost that you have to pay each and every month for the privilege of owning a home.
I rented for several years after my divorce. I knew the landlord well and, quite frankly, grew tired of making his BMW payment so I used my VA eligibility to purchase my condo and, just recently, used the VA Streamline process to refinance the note.
The article said it best--some people should rent.
However, there was one point she touched on that the article didn't and that is the opportunities that exist in the foreclosure market. For a renter who does have the means this is a fantastic time to buy. Homes which first sold in the $300's and $400's are now in the low $200's or even high $100's.
Suze also pointed that out that renters often equate their monthly rent payment to what they can afford for a mortgage payment. She suggested that a potential homebuyer add 30-40% to the mortgage payment to get the true cost of owning the home. Sure, with tax credits you get some of that back, but it is a cost that you have to pay each and every month for the privilege of owning a home.
I rented for several years after my divorce. I knew the landlord well and, quite frankly, grew tired of making his BMW payment so I used my VA eligibility to purchase my condo and, just recently, used the VA Streamline process to refinance the note.
The article said it best--some people should rent.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
More, the repubs were just as bad so stop playing that party politics tripe!
Both parties used the mortgage and real estate market to feather their own nests so there you go.
moreluck
golden ticket member
OK, no politics......there are lazy-ass young people who think the world owes them something and they don't need to work for it, so they were given loans by loan companies and it didn't matter whether these slugs could pay it back or not. How's that for non-partisanship??
cosmictrucker
counting the months
The premium (if any) of home ownership is a price I gladly pay.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
Nor George Bush and the Republicans.
W lauded and pushed home ownership more than any president I know of.
fxdwg
Long Time Member
Aside from the economics, I think there's a psychological plus to owning versus paying for someone else's ownership.
Almost being in a lesser class if pay someone else to use their house (on a daily basis versus short term).
Another fact is that if the place goes to hell and you own it that's ok, but if the "Landlord" isn't on top of everything, we would be pissing and moaning.
I prefer to own and so does everyone that I have ever met.
Almost being in a lesser class if pay someone else to use their house (on a daily basis versus short term).
Another fact is that if the place goes to hell and you own it that's ok, but if the "Landlord" isn't on top of everything, we would be pissing and moaning.
I prefer to own and so does everyone that I have ever met.
ups1990
Well-Known Member
The American greed met the American dream. Together, it formed a disaster. From Banks, to Real Estate agents to buyers, everyone played a crucial role in the housing market bursting. Many people were lead to believe, either by a second party or by their own false ambitions that they could afford a home, they couldn't afford. Buying a home was always something that people always worked hard to attain, but became to easily attainable. Anything really worth having, should not be easy to get.
In this city where I reside, the rent is almost as high as a mortgage. I would currently be renting and continue to wait and see where the housing market goes.
In this city where I reside, the rent is almost as high as a mortgage. I would currently be renting and continue to wait and see where the housing market goes.
klein
Für Meno :)
Well, since I don't have kids.... I don't need to keep my home. So, for retirement, I'm seriously considering selling my home. (Too cold here in the winter anyways), and then really downsize or just rent.
The sale of the home, will give me 30+ years rent, esspecially if you move to a smaller town.
And apartments, heat, water, taxes is all included..... So, that's probably my choice.
No need to fix anything either.
If Landlord is lazy.... np... just move again.
The sale of the home, will give me 30+ years rent, esspecially if you move to a smaller town.
And apartments, heat, water, taxes is all included..... So, that's probably my choice.
No need to fix anything either.
If Landlord is lazy.... np... just move again.
I agree and would add that people were looking at their home as an investment. Not bad in itself, but it was an investment with the underlying belief that the investment would always increase in value. Mama's logic 101 says too good to be true is false. Therefore the housing bust is simply that investment taking a hit, just like every investment has highs and lows.
klein
Für Meno :)
That's due because of very slack government regulations there.
Sorry, up north we don't sell homes to Mac Donalds workers.
Certain qualifications need to be met, and atleast 10% down.
Same like your oil spill. We, and the rest of the world have somewhat tougher regulations.
Just saying all this, to kick those "less governmnent the better" people in their butts.
Your housing bubble proved that, alone.
Are you trying to argue with me? Don't because you're not gonna get to.
I happen to agree with you and nothing I posted rebuts anything you posted. Oh and I'm not part of that bubble. I'm in the midwest where sensibilities held sway and the market didn't have 30-40% swings.
cachsux
Wah
"Your", "Your", "Your". Nice to see the old Klein from the land of "our ****** don`t stink" back to set us straight. Hey bud,coming up on the one year anniversary of you entering the world of slacker loserhood. Any jobs online or are you going to live off the Canadian teet for another 12 up there in "your" country?
klein
Für Meno :)
No, not trying to argue with you at all. Sorry, if it came across that way.
Just wanted to make a point on this thread , (not towards you), why less government oversight and regulations, can go badly wrong.
Look at your illegal problem for instance. Would never happen if regulations were in place, making it almost impossible for illegals to work or go to school.
Gee, in Germany, (while I was still living there, in the 80's), they actually have government inspectors going to contruction sites, even farms making sure you are legally working there. That law also cracks down on "Schwarzarbeit", which means working under the table. It is strictly forbidden there, and in the 80's was a $2500 fine for the worker, 10fold that for the employer.
And, I find it amazing that this under populated, country we have here up north, always needs to help out our neighbors to the south.
Almost every single year, our forest fighters are called south, a lot to California.
Ofcourse helped out with 9/11, Katrina, now the Gulf oil spill.
Might cost us extra money, but because of government involvement, we have enough forest fighters and rescue workers, and the equipment.
Don't you find it amazing, the US could probably destroy the world 10 times over, but has little in place to protect their own citizens at home, for any given disaster ?
moreluck
golden ticket member
In a bid to stem taxpayer losses for bad loans guaranteed by federal housing agencies Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) proposed that borrowers be required to make a 5% down payment in order to qualify.
His proposal was rejected 57-42 on a party-line vote because, as Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn) explained, "Passage of such a requirement would restrict home ownership to only those who can afford it."
I really can't add anything to this other than to say Duh .
His proposal was rejected 57-42 on a party-line vote because, as Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn) explained, "Passage of such a requirement would restrict home ownership to only those who can afford it."
I really can't add anything to this other than to say Duh .
UnconTROLLed
perfection
exactly...he ideally wanted as many homes purchased as possible....one, two, three homes ..as many as a family could afford. It's all Obamas fault though.
Similar threads
