TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Public vs Private Unis
Pages (5): « 1 2 3 4 [5]

all that money you "save" in your post you can get back when you sell and even make a profit.

think beyond the now...stop being silly.

even if it doesn't increase in value you get SOMETHING in the end.

you give more money to the landlord then you do for repairs and taxes.

quote:

Originally posted by Sushipunk I was only basing my argument on what you'd said, ie. that the costs of renting vs. owning were similar. If they're not similar, then we're not talking about the same thing any more. That said though, saving 20k a year by renting doesn't necessarily mean shit. A home owner still has an asset, which is worth money. If you pick your real estate well, it should be increasing in value anyway.

I shouldn't have been so broad in that it will be in every situation, but yes it can be a waste to buy and it can also be a waste to rent. There are a lot of factors that change this.

Jay: I know about the thought of equity, and that part of my argument I really should have left out. But my argument still stands that, depending on the situation, buying is not necessarily the right thing to do unless the equity gained is significant in the time that you will be there.

you will be poor a long time thinking like this.

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak you will be poor a long time thinking like this.

Nah dude. If you spend 100k to acquire the asset, it gains 50k in equity by the time you sell it, but you spent 50k in taxes, maintenance, etc. you have gained nothing. You have broken even.

In the IT field they call that TCO, Total Cost of Ownership.

and how have you broken even renting?

this should be good.

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak and how have you broken even renting? this should be good.

Go use one of those rent v buy calculators. They spell it out right there. ffs I don't live in BFE where a house is 200k. I live in southern california where a house is 800k. A mortgage payment is 3800 and a fucking rent payment for an apartment is 1500. Factor in taxes, total investment, etc, and you are more than easily saving a ton of money renting. And this is short AND long term.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Go use one of those rent v buy calculators. They spell it out right there. ffs I don't live in BFE where a house is 200k. I live in southern california where a house is 800k. A mortgage payment is 3800 and a fucking rent payment for an apartment is 1500. Factor in taxes, total investment, etc, and you are more than easily saving a ton of money renting. And this is short AND long term.

Does your 800k increase in value?

so lets say it costs more to live in a house for 10 years...after you sell and at worst break even. If you break even it cost you nothing to live in the long run.

you spend 20k a year on rent for 10 years = 200 000$...you have no option to break even or make a dime.

i don't need a calculator to tell you that it cost you 200 000$ more in the long run then living in a house.

Public school all the way for me. Spent 4 years of college.

Edited it for people being mean and all to me lol.

quote:

Originally posted by wesleysnipez Public school all the way for me. Spent 4 years of college here. http://www.umt.edu/ Degree in Geosciences

if you went to college, i am warren buffet.

Alright guys you win I lose. I give up.

quote:

Originally posted by wesleysnipez Public school all the way for me. Spent 4 years of college here. http://www.umt.edu/ Degree in Geosciences with minor in Pre-Engineering

How did you go to school and still speak English like you are from China?

quote:

Originally posted by wesleysnipez Public school all the way for me. Spent 4 years of college here. http://www.umt.edu/ Degree in Geosciences with minor in Pre-Engineering

Fuck off, you can't even write a coherent sentence

lol he just added a degree to his original post.

i doubt he could pass clown college.

the delay was probably to google for a website and decide what course he would say he took.

lolfag.

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak lol he just added a degree to his original post. i doubt he could pass clown college. the delay was probably to google for a website and decide what course he would say he took. lolfag.

What can I say you went to school here lol.

http://www.sankeyrodeo.com/html/clownsch.html

and here

http://tobysclowns.tripod.com/Clown%20college.htm

and member of this lol

http://www.worldclown.com/

and

http://www.shrineclowns.com/Home.html

Here is picture I found there of you.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel I know about the net worth thing, but there are many contributing factors that can make your primary residence smarter to own or rent. Sushi: 4k to own a house per month or 1500 to rent an apartment, 2k for a town home, or even 2-3k for a home depending on where. So assume the worst at 3k for a house (a friend is renting one at 3200 and it is a brand new house) you save 1k/month on rent, property taxes (which 1% on a 900k house is 9k per year for us Californians), you are saving 20k right there. In 1 year. Not including any maintenance that has to be done on the house. As an investment property, yes it is good, but there are lots of ways that owning a house as a primary residence can be more a crock of shit than people fucking realize. edit//although the situation above that I explained would warrant owning.

Don't forget the tax breaks for paying mortgage interest, in the US anyway. The savings can be significant, especially in the early years of a mortgage where almost all of your payment is interest.

exactly.

you might not be able to afford the slamming car (which we all know that as an investment alone it is never a good one)in a house as opposed to renting, but your life in the long run will be better as a homeowner. You are looking at how much you save paycheck to paycheck and not looking at how much you save in the long term. It is significant. People would not buy homes if there was no advantage to it.

I didn't consider the tax breaks. You win.

you also did not consider that you would probably not live alone aka have 2 salaries to pay the mortgage.

I DON'T WIN UNTIL I SAY I WIN

quote:

Originally posted by elFreak you also did not consider that you would probably not live alone aka have 2 salaries to pay the mortgage. I DON'T WIN UNTIL I SAY I WIN

LOL

I did also not think about that. You win..>TWICE!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel LOL I did also not think about that. You win..>TWICE!!!!!! :p

Eh, not really.

It depends on the market. An associate of mine rents a house in alexandria, va for about $3,700/mo; buying an equivalent house in the same general area would cost approximately $1.5 million on the low end.

So, at a 5.75% interest rate for a 30 year mortgage, you're paying $8,750/mo to own. 0.5% per year is probably a fair estimate of upkeep, and the tax rate there is 0.845% -- so call it another 1.345% of the home value in extra costs per year, or about $1,700/mo; add the mortgage and you get to real cost of about $10,450 per month or $6,750 more than renting. That $6,750 can be invested in assets that produce a higher rate of return than residential real estate...

I'll use the inflation adjusted return rates here for the comparison. I would argue that there are several reasons why the real rate of return on residential real estate is probably going to be even lower over the next 50 years, but that would be a distraction here.

Anyway, by these numbers after you pay off your 30 year mortgage with a real return of 1.36%, you'll have a home worth 1,500,000*1.0136^30, which is roughly $2,250,000 in today's dollars.

On the other hand, putting $6,750 per month for 30 years in stocks at a 6.59% real return will leave you with over $7,500,000 in today's dollars. Granted, that's before you pay capital gains taxes on it, and there are other tax benefits to ownership.

There are other limitations to this cursory analysis. A big one is: what are the chances your rent will remain constant for 30 years? Yeah, I'd say that falls somewhere between zero and none.

That said, even considering the additional tax benefits of ownership and likely rent increases (which you could calculate within a reasonable approximation if you were so inclined), I seriously doubt the margin between the two can be made up.

Moreover, there are advantages to renting not obvious under these calculations. Suppose, as does happen to regular people, circumstances in your life change after 15 years, and you have to move to another city.

The homeowner has been paying mostly interest in his mortgage payments, rather than principal, so he is severely disadvantaged in this situation. The renter's assets aren't affected and, if he wants, he may already have enough assets to buy a comparable house at his destination without even borrowing...

This really only scratches the surface, but anyone who thinks owning is the best way to accumulate wealth in all real estate markets is kidding themselves. On the other hand, some markets are highly buyer friendly because the ratio of rent:purchase price can be very different (rent in the Houston area is only slightly less, for example, but buying the home would cost about 1/3 as much... or even less) In such markets, I obviously recommend ownership, at least in the vast majority of circumstances.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Eh, not really. It depends on the market. An associate of mine rents a house in alexandria, va for about $3,700/mo; buying an equivalent house in the same general area would cost approximately $1.5 million on the low end. So, at a 5.75% interest rate for a 30 year mortgage, you're paying $8,750/mo to own. 0.5% per year is probably a fair estimate of upkeep, and the tax rate there is 0.845% -- so call it another 1.345% of the home value in extra costs per year, or about $1,700/mo; add the mortgage and you get to real cost of about $10,450 per month or $6,750 more than renting. That $6,750 can be invested in assets that produce a higher rate of return than residential real estate... I'll use the inflation adjusted return rates here for the comparison. I would argue that there are several reasons why the real rate of return on residential real estate is probably going to be even lower over the next 50 years, but that would be a distraction here. Anyway, by these numbers after you pay off your 30 year mortgage with a real return of 1.36%, you'll have a home worth 1,500,000*1.0136^30, which is roughly $2,250,000 in today's dollars. On the other hand, putting $6,750 per month for 30 years in stocks at a 6.59% real return will leave you with over $7,500,000 in today's dollars. Granted, that's before you pay capital gains taxes on it, and there are other tax benefits to ownership. There are other limitations to this cursory analysis. A big one is: what are the chances your rent will remain constant for 30 years? Yeah, I'd say that falls somewhere between zero and none. That said, even considering the additional tax benefits of ownership and likely rent increases (which you could calculate within a reasonable approximation if you were so inclined), I seriously doubt the margin between the two can be made up. Moreover, there are advantages to renting not obvious under these calculations. Suppose, as does happen to regular people, circumstances in your life change after 15 years, and you have to move to another city. The homeowner has been paying mostly interest in his mortgage payments, rather than principal, so he is severely disadvantaged in this situation. The renter's assets aren't affected and, if he wants, he may already have enough assets to buy a comparable house at his destination without even borrowing... This really only scratches the surface, but anyone who thinks owning is the best way to accumulate wealth in all real estate markets is kidding themselves. On the other hand, some markets are highly buyer friendly because the ratio of renturchase price can be very different (rent in the Houston area is only slightly less, for example, but buying the home would cost about 1/3 as much... or even less) In such markets, I obviously recommend ownership, at least in the vast majority of circumstances.

You must have a giant brain, and a tiny penis.

quote:

Originally posted by nchs09 You must have a giant brain, and a tiny penis.

In the interest of improving the verisimilitude of your fantasies, I can assure you that my phallic quotient clocks in at a respectable thirteen inches... measured from my spleen.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter In the interest of improving the verisimilitude of your fantasies, I can assure you that my phallic quotient clocks in at a respectable thirteen inches... measured from my spleen.

As big as your brain....



Jennypie would prob fuck you.....

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.