Live data from Hacker News

It Is Not About the Money, Silly, It Is All About the Time

jacquesmattheij.com

121–123 of 123 posts

Re: It Is Not About the Money, Silly, It Is All About the Time

#121
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is that somehow "smart debt"? Really? What's so smart about it? Regarding a mortgage and 2 car loans, I'd like to offer a defense of why it's smart / good debt. The primary reason that your mortgage is considered "good debt" is because the asset you purchase with that debt (your house) will typically appreciate faster than the interest you pay. I'm not including black swan events like the 2008 crisis. When you even…

"The primary reason that your mortgage is considered "good debt" is because the asset you purchase with that debt (your house) will typically appreciate faster than the interest you pay." Any money manager will tell you that what you just said is false. Excepting a few cities, when you look at the data and adjust for inflation, owning a house is not a particularly good investment ( http://files.foreclosureradar.com/i…

It is fair to count maintenance as a cost but it is also fair to count rent you don't have to pay as a savings.

Compare (+equity -mortgage -maintenance -taxes) to (-rent)

Re: It Is Not About the Money, Silly, It Is All About the Time

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget about credit cards and buying on credit. That's not necessarily 'small fry' and neither are student loans.

The average US household has $15k in credit card debt. A mortgage can be a sound investment, but paying over 10% APR on credit card debt is almost always a bad decision. http://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/credit-card-data/average-cred...

It's still terrifying, but according to your link $15k is the average indebted household credit card debt. The average credit card debt is about half that because only half of households have any credit card debt.

Re: It Is Not About the Money, Silly, It Is All About the Time

#123
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. For my recent move I made a spreadsheet to calculate the financial impact of rent vs. buy. I had to guess at a lot of factors , but in the end it was a no brainer. Do the calculation! Cost to Buy: estimated lost investment returns on down payment (after taxes), estimated lost returns on monthly payment (cumulative), financing costs after tax deduction, real-estate taxes after deduction, insurance, HOA fees, ut…

The utilities will be on both sides of that example so you don't need to factor them in until you start improving a property that you've bought with insulation and such.

>The utilities will be on both sides of that example

In a "perfectly efficient" economic world it would seem almost all of those categories like taxes, insurance, mortgage interest, and maintenance are really on both side of the equation. The landlord will still have to pay taxes, etc., and pass them along to his renters. In essence, buying a house seems like it would be a getting rid of the middle man situation in the cases where you don't need the special advantages of short term usage that renting presents. Buying a house would just be a special situation of becoming a landlord and renting to yourself.

So I'm wondering what specific instances there are where renting makes more long term sense than buying. I can think of a couple:

- The unsophisticated landlord. A little old widow or someone who has inherited a rental property, and isn't charging the market rate. Is there a good way to identify these people, and get a cut of the increase in rent that they could be getting? Maybe they don't know how to advertise or evaluate market comparables? Or is there a way to identify them and get a commission for sending savy renters their way (saving the renters money)?

- Rent Control. I'm not sure how this works in practice (or in theory for that matter). I'd think that this would reduce the availability of rental units, driving up the cost eventually. If you were renting at the onset of rent control, you got lucky, but for someone newly looking for a place, you maybe don't get the benefit?

- Property tax ploys. In some jurisdictions, I'm under the impression that property taxes aren't adjusted to the current market prices (or there is a large time lag). Therefore those property owners have a tax advantage not available to new entrants to the market, so they can afford to compete on rents. The business opportunity here would seem to be identifying people in this situation, and convincing them to move to lower cost location and renting out their current homes.

What other market inefficiencies are there which would tip the scales toward renting? Is there a business opportunity in allowing people to rent houses that private parties want to sell? What I mean is a service, where a renter goes out and finds any house for sale on the market they'd like to rent, then I'd step in and arrange the financing, the property management, etc.. They'd pay monthly rent and wouldn't have the burden of home ownership, but they would have housing options that wouldn't normally be available. Are there already companies that do this?

Post reply on HN