Why do peole say buying is cheaper than renting

if people lived for infinite years this would be true, asymptotically you're correct, but a house is not an asset while you're living in it, and you'll waste much more money on taxes and maintenance and mortgage interest than if you simply rented.

try this nytimes.com/interactive/2014/upshot/buy-rent-calculator.html?_r=0

Phew, good thing I don't rent. I live at home with my momma :3

An asset is anything on the top-end of your balance sheet. That includes a house, living in it or not.

I am 31 and I haven't lived more than two years in a row without moving to a different country for twelve years now; why would I buy an anchor?

>you'll waste much more money on taxes and maintenance and mortgage interest than if you simply rented

you pay for all of those things too, when you hand over your rent, except you're paying it to maintain the landlord's asset rather than your own

You won't be paying for a mortgage interest if they own the property. You're also free to move when your contract is up, if you own a house it's a mess.

But a house is a liability, you're paying maintenance and property taxes monthly with no return. and if you don't understand the market well, your houses value can become less than what you owe on your mortgage.

Here we fucking go yet again with this thread. It's amazing how many times we have this, either needs to be in the sticky or should make a sub board for it already, because:
>nytimes
Gee cause the prices they're going to throw out there sure are going to line up for the rest of the USA. yep a starter home is $250k just like everywhere else sooooo renting is better. Or you know, you could drive 20 minutes out of the city and get 3 times the house for 1/5th of that price. city renters seriously 100% think the world ends on the borders of their city. Have you heard of this thing called an automobile?

Next shitty fallacy coming up from city renters: "I don't know what an inspection or homeowner's insurance is so I only buy houses where 100% of everything in them is broken so houses suck". You actually can negotiate for the seller to make repairs and if not it's grounds to make a lower offer.

Don't remember the website but there was this shitty "infographic" quoting a kitchen remodel and they said it was $100K. Yeah I'm sure if you're a celebrity overspending on purpose just to show off. Where do angry renters get these fucking numbers?

>lol no dude I KNOW a guy, muh 100K cabinets
preliminary "fuck off"

gee i don't know i guess you're right, why would anyone ever buy their own property, clearly rich people rent that's how they become millionaire landed gentry i bet all the rich people uber carpool everywhere too sharing economy

You know you can change the numbers on the nytimes chart?

Show me your circumstance that it's cheaper to buy

Do you know what assets vs liabilities are in the financial world? Clearly not.

An asset is anything that can be converted to cash. You can sell a house and convert it to cash. You cannot sell a liability and get cash(asset) for it. A house cannot be a liability and have negative value. Your mortgage is a liability, maybe that's what you're thinking of.

An asset gives you returns
A liability takes away your money

a home is a liability unless it's a rental property

As always this depends 100% on where you live.

>150K pop city
>$75K house
>5 bed 3 bath 2900 sq ft livable
>total cost per month is $800 includes utils, mortgage, 1% property tax, insurance

>cheapest apartment is $500

Now I can rent out 4 rooms at $300 - 400 each, live for free and make $600+ month

you're renting out 4 rooms of your house, obviously most people are talking about a house for their family to live in.

>mortgage interest

that is literally a non issue to anyone with even halfway decent credit who has any income to write off, it's not something renters understand but mortgage interest rates basically pay for themselves or at least are no worse than inflation

>You're also free to move when your contract is up, if you own a house it's a mess.

maybe i'm just not experienced to the nomadic nu-male sharecropper lifestyle but to me renting is hell on earth (i assume) and being a property owner is literally a precondition to being a man and not ending my own life out of the shame of failure but hey like i said different strokes for different folks

Oh, Kiyosaki? No wonder you don't know what you're talking about. His definition of asset does not align with the real world. Nevermind

>not living in the same place for years makes you a nomadic nu-male sharecropper

i just googled it to give you an infographic

owning a house sucks your money, debate your semantics however you want, unless you actually understand the market buying a house is gambling.

Why does the shit nytimes tool auto put "rent growth rate" lower than "home growth rate" and also puts investment return rate at 4

shit tool, fake news, fuck off angry rent shits

this is what I call the "future" fallacy.

>Oh see but in just a year the property rate will be 1000% higher you can't PROVE it won't let me cite this one year 50+ years ago when this happened so it will happen again every year after this one... trust me... also the other 49 years didn't happen

Hey guys, there's this county out in the middle of bumfuck nowhere that adds an additional 5% to the cost of the house for their own income tax so we have to take this into account as angry rent shits and say that it will apply for everyone else too so obviously by my shitty hippie dropout math renting is better because of this made up number. Don't ask the name or location of the county, if you do it just means you're trying to hard to disprove me which proves you are a homeowner

fuck off rent shits

reminder: if you have a mortgage you don't own your home

I don't think you understand how wrong it is.

Here's another scenario:
You have $10k cash sitting in a bank account that bears no interest. Considering inflation, this money is losing value every year.

Are you going to call this cash a liability?

Owning a home does increase your expenses, yes. That does not make it a liability.

As a shitty obese american I continue the societal idea that I shouldn't give a shit about anyone or anything, just like how I don't put oil in any car I use and just drive it til it dies, I don't do any house maintenance either. Therefore by my logic, all cars and houses are shit because hey they keep blowing up or burning down for me within 2-3 years, you can't tell me to care and do proper maintenance because that isn't cool and I am an american. Therefore I lease and rent all vehicles and homes because hey you don't know they won't blow up or burn down tomorrow because I won't put oil in and I keep leaving the gas on... it just shows how cool I am cause I don't give a fuck. Owning cars, houses, or anything is just a "risk" because doing basic maintenance is physically impossible so is getting any form of insurance. I can also just say where I come from insurance is illegal so hey how can you disprove that.

fuck off rent shits

If you had to pay a fee to keep your bank account, yes. You're not actually "losing money" to interest though, it's just devaluing. Your analogy is closer to if you own a home and the market is getting worse, you're losing value. But you're paying property tax and maintenance fees for something that gives you no returns at all.

Because math.

Fees are expenses and have no impact on whether something is categorized as an asset or liability. The definitions are pretty cut and dry, and Kiyosaki's is wrong.

It's very simple: If you were to take everything you owned, and all your debts and list them, as they are valued right this second, do each of those items contribute to your equity/net worth or subtract from it?

Those terms are found on a balance sheet, which is a snapshot of your financial situation. Whether they went up or down since the last snapshot has nothing to do with how they're categorized.

>>not living in the same place for years makes you a nomadic nu-male sharecropper

meanwhile while you bitch and cry into your hip 2/1 $1400 per month studio apartment you share with four roommates your landlord is sinking the rent you pay him into this "liability"

like being a creditor vs a debtor, being a landowner vs a rent slave is just as much a psychological issue as a financial one, you're going to win at life or you're going to suck. everyone can win if they want but hey some people would rather "not worry about it" and be "free"

>into this "liability"

if an asset costs you tons of money and gives you zero return then that's a shitty "asset"

If you actually own the land it's different, most "owners" are just literal debt slaves to their mortgage. When you rent, you don't owe anyone anything. And you seem to think leasing houses isn't a thing, for some reason.

>having 4 poor people in your house

I'm sure that will all just be fine and dandy

Yes, it does make it a shitty asset, I'll definitely agree on that, but it's still an asset. Home ownership, where you live in it, is generally considered an opportunity cost. You pay a premium for quasi-tangible freedoms such as being able to modify your living environment to your liking, whereas that's almost impossible if you were renting. All these things are expenses, though. The _existence_ of expenses do not in themselves impact your net worth directly. All they do is limit your growth potential over time.

Which is the whole argument why it's not worth it, depending on your situation. If you actually want to modify your house, and you have a long term career wherever you live, and your kids go to the local schools and stuff, and you have the cash already to buy the house and not become the bank's bitch, and the market is good so you're not buying some overpriced bubble, then it's worth it.

>depending on your situation
bullseye

Like I posted here I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford to own my home, but I looked into buying some rental properties in the area and it's just not worth it. The rental prices are too low, and the home prices and taxes are too high. In a perfect world(no repairs, no vacancies) my models came up with a return of less than 3-4%. I'll stick my money elsewhere, thanks hah

Buying (via a fixed-interest mortgage) is essentially renting for 30 years with the cost locked in.

I.e. your mortgage might be $2000pm and it will be that for 30 years.

However, you might currently pay $2000pm rent, but as that increases each year, even just 1%, in your 29th year you're paying $2650pm. If it were to increase 3% annually, you're ending up paying over $4500 in your final year.

You also factor in tax advantages (in USA) of property tax and interest deductions when owning a home.

It all depends on your life goals and circumstances. I own a home outright, but since I move around a lot I generally rent it out and rent my own house elsewhere. No need to let owning a home anchor you in one place.

I'm 32...

Recently divorced so the divorce agreement has the exwife owning the house but I get half of the equity which is nice because we've at least got it 20% down, off 100k so about 20k right there but the FMMV is at ~140 so I'm waiting to get about 30k in equity money and then I guess I'll just invest those / or use that money to buy a modest home...

In the meantime I've got to rent...

>because you're putting money towards something you'll eventually own?

You can do that with renting, it's called saving.

>Eventually you will not have to worry about paying anything instead of just giving all your money to a landlord every month.

Because giving that money to your bank in the form of interest is any different.

Another good point. A landlord these days likely don't own the property outright. When you pay rent, that is 100% post-tax expense on your part. They take that money, divvy it up into mortgage, insurance, taxes. When they go to file their taxes, they are able to write off everything except for the equity portion of their mortgage payment. This gives them a double advantage. You paid their taxes so they don't have to.

"Renting is superior" but the moment I offer renting, the renters are automatically poor people. And you as a renter are different how?

I knew a hippie like this, did the same mental gymnastics for drugs. It was always drugs this, drugs that, they should be legal, so many benefits, etc, and whenever we would come into contact with someone new who was high or mentioned drugs it was an instant 180 from hippie and suddenly "I don't talk to people who do drugs they're usually scum". It's almost like you know you're a degenerate.

renting your own house is different from renting a room in someone else's

Yep sure is I get to make the lease agreement myself and also don't have to ask anyone's permission.

Anyway guys with the thread over, I have to point out that in these threads the people who own houses always cite what they bought their house for, where, and 3-4 years of local history and if it was a good decision or not. Meanwhile renters keep using this hippie shit circular logic and keep bringing up "this certain situation in the market" or "this one time where renting was better for me"... never get a numerical value, never get a year, never get any information about this "market", never get any information about this portfolio or investments, so we can't make a comparison - which is the entire reason why you're doing this, to de-quantify yourself and just wait for a homeowner to say his number so you can say yours is cheaper. Some videos I just saw cite a 4% "guarantee" by way of bank CD. Again will never say which bank or where is offering this 4% because this is all bullshit statistics. According to bankrate.com (which you are just going to fucking disregard anyway) the last time the CD was 4% was 10 years ago in 2007. But of course you're just going to repeat this pattern of "oh I have this bank somewhere that gives me 4% guarantee" or cite some made up portfolio or investment that you won't show and insist it gives a bigger return.

Entire rent cunt psuedo argument is summed up like this:
>I paid $X for my house
>Oh hehe renting is much cheaper
>Really how much do you pay?
>Hmm dunno but it's less

The only poster in this thread that mentioned his personal situation in this thread said that it's a better market to rent in for him

Yup. Better market for renters. I still own. Costs me a shit ton, but I have my reasons and I can afford it. Landlords are getting the shaft right now. If I can't make it work on a spreadsheet there's no way these guys are making shit.

Again, can only speak for my region(CT). Go 75+ miles out and it may be a totally different story. I'm not interested in long distance landlording.

I bought a house at 24. I'm 27 now. The house was 189k, with a monthly payment of 1200. The last apartment I rented before buying was 1300. I have 30k of equity in the house right now and have put in some improvements that I believe have increased the value of the home. I'm hoping to pull out an additional 20k on top of that 30k.

I have a yard for my dogs. I don't have to listen to people fuck in the next apartment. Or their fucking TVs. Or their fucking drum sets. My girlfriend pays half my mortgage. I'm not paying someone else's mortgage. Seriously, fuck renting.

Houses have historically held value really well. If you have the means to buy one, do it. Don't buy a new car, save that money for a down payment on a house. Cars just lose value. I drive a 15 year old Jeep and a motorcycle for fuel efficiency.

I'll be moving soon and I plan on buying another house.

I wouldn't count on home equity staying, but that's besides the point. All the points you are describing are considered a part of opportunity cost, and there is nothing wrong with that if you can afford it. Buying a home as an investment is a meme that expired a decade ago. If you're buying it not for that reason, but for all the reasons you mentioned, then there is nothing wrong with that. I was in a similar situation. Good on you.

You can lease houses, not apartments only, you know. There's a housing bubble where I live. It'd be stupid to buy a house and pay a mortgage when the house can be worth less than the mortgage in a year. I plan to buy property eventually, when I have enough to pay with cash. I have the means to "buy" a house and get a mortgage now, but it would be very dumb.

Yeah, this is where it becomes situational. If you think you're in a housing bubble, like my state is, rent. Your landlord hedges the entire risk and you still pay a flat fee before they figure it out.

Why not count on it? I'd wager a grand that this house will sell for more than I bought it for. Your market sucks, that's fine, but you're just posting repetitive FUD and discouraging people from a good decision. Look at historical housing prices. Hold that shit for 10 years.

Can you go into details why your market is fucked up with numbers? Equivalent rent. Your mortgage. Your costs. Why you can't make it make sense in a spreadsheet?

I came.

Don't be butthurt. I've been on this thread a longer time than you have. Go back and read my posts. I'm not your enemy. You're getting angry by lack of context.

I live in CT. Anything other than something run down with lead paint and not in a nigger infested area goes for 250k+. The taxes on houses in a cheap town are about 7k, in an expensive town they can be upwards of 15-20k. Average is about 9-10k. Coupled with deducted interest payments, insurance, the fees going into buying a home (everyone loves to ignore these on these) and the time spent on maintenance and repairs, buying definitely costs more in the long run than renting. The whole, "muh equity" thing is just putting marginal monthly payments into an asset in which you live. If you're banking on the value going up faster than taxes and insurance, you're living a pipe dream.

That being said I don't want to live next to other losers who rent their whole lives, not be master of my domain, and overall have more space than be connected to loud annoying neighbors. I'd much rather buy for the luxury of it than some quasi investment scheme. If it was truly a wise investment, most housing would be owned by private equity and the vast majority would be renters.
Think of it, if it cash flows with rent and intrinsically is a good investment, the average person would not be able to purchase the asset. The fact that joe-six pack can get a house means the investment overall is bullshit.

>CT
muh nigga

I can attest to the shitty buyer's market in CT due to the cost of everything. I rented a 1000 sq ft apartment for 1000/month. It was a steal.

Renting my own apartment where I can live vs sharing common living space with strangers doing the same is vastly different. Those people are probably immature degenerates. Unless one lives in an extremely expensive area to live, having roommates is for college kids and low-grade human waste.

Rentfags still either won't quantify the costs because it won't work out in their favor or they live in some absurdly overpriced city. Still have a great choice to get a "car" and get any house 20 minutes outside the city.

instead we will just see christfag tier logic and repeating "market", "investments", "assets" etc without saying even one example as to what these markets, investments, or assets are.

Reason why we're having this problem is because we're trying to get you to provide a number to compare it to, but every time we reach that point it's the repeated above buzzwords yet again. That's because you know this isn't feasible and the only reason why this is happening is because contrarianism has run rampant and you always have to be different and go against the norm.

Rent for 20 years
> $240,000
> At the end you have nothing to show for it

Buy a house, pay off a mortgage in 20 years
> $250,000 home
> +$100,000 in interest
> +$100,000 maintenance, taxes, HOA fees
> Total spending of $450,000

But in scenario #2 you end up with a $250,000 asset, perhaps even more than that, AND you'll never have to pay rent again, AND you are king of your castle with no one telling you what you can and can't do in your home.

one of my family friends just fled CT to Florida. he's a lifelong democrat so it's really funny, he was like, my values cannot endure these property taxes!

>Think of it, if it cash flows with rent and intrinsically is a good investment, the average person would not be able to purchase the asset. The fact that joe-six pack can get a house means the investment overall is bullshit.

not sure I agree with this point. by this logic joe-six pack shouldn't be able to buy Goldman Sachs shares since they mint money, yet they can. I agree with you though compared to say, stock equity property is a shit investment

keep in mind though that housing, and in particular owning your own home on your own land has many extra-financial benefits. you can have a family there, you can do with it as you please, you don't have to deal with faggots keeping you up all night with music and bullshit, it's worth a lot in terms of mental and physical health, which is related to wealth. how much is a sandwich worth to a starving man - infinite. how much is a nice big house worth to a renting college student, quite a lot

The average annual cost to own a car is around $6000. I live in an apartment a 5 minute walk from the office so I don't have to spend an hour every day sitting in a shitty box of steel.

This is how it is in CT. $1/sqft rental on average. The costs are too high. I appreciate you joining in

preach it. I moved to a nice area. No traffic, yet just outside of my town's lines of commerce. Paid way too much for my house, but it's been worth every penny. OPPORTUNITY COSTS. Learn it

I just read your post again. You're obviously from CT. We have the same mindset. If you can afford separation, get it. There are some things money CAN buy. We decided to get a home the moment we lived in an apartment. We got out of debt(mostly student loans), own everything, saved, and bought a home. No better way to live.

My mortgage is five dollars per fortnight cheaper than what my rent was.

(I rented this flat, then bought it off the owner while I was still living in it)

My dad can't afford his mortgage, how can I get him to hand his house over to me?

I don't mind jewing him over, he's probably going to die soon anyway. I have a lot of memories attached to this house.

And in your example you pay an extra ~$200,000 over 20 years.
If you invested the money in the rent example and made shitty average returns of 5% per year, compounded annually, you end up with $330,659.

In a housing bubble economy this option is far superior. And renting comes with the benefit of being able to move and no risk of going into overdraft/ defaulting on a loan

Next time use your brain before you hit the post button

>not being 'having a lodger' master race

Someone skipped Introductory Finance.

Rent is an expense, as are mortgage payments and taxes.

The mortgage itself is a liability, any owned house is an asset.

Living in a rented house means you both don't have the liability of a mortgage, but also don't have the asset of owning the home.

Renting is advantageous in scenarios in which your rent is dramatically cheaper than the equivalent mortgage payments (unlikely), or (understandable) you don't have the reserve to keep yourself afloat while trying to sell your house when you move.

So as says, if you're old enough to have a good safety net, there is literally no reason to rent unless you're just lazy.

Or that renting is simply cheaper in most situations and gives you more options to relocate
Even in he shows it's 210,000$ cheaper over 20 years to rent, which could almost buy a house in cash. With even small returns investing it, you could easily buy a better house than the one he got after his 20 year mortgage is paid off.

meant for

Get a mortgage on a share of the house. You won't get the whole thing but you can make it look altruistic and he won't be able to screw you over in the will.

That's a good idea.

If you relocate and you have a house you can always lease it out.

The land will accrue value faster than most people's financial market investments will.
Your argument works if you are significantly better at picking stocks than picking a nice neighborhood.

Oh, and looking at it, these numbers are rubbish: $1000 a month will not allow you to rent a $250,000 property.

It greatly depends on which country you live in. In the Netherlands I'd say buying is always smarter on the long run (if you are planning to settle)

>You can do that with renting, it's called saving.

same risk as buying a house. If you are renting and saving you are hoping that house prices fall or stagnate so you can eventually buy into the market.

Chances are, house prices will rise over time. So while you might be saving over 5/10 years, your savings haven't been able to keep up with rising house prices. Meanwhile, the person that bought a house and chose to take on a mortgage can enjoy the capital gains. With some equity in your house, you are free to do whatever you want. That is wealth.

If you decide to rent and save, sure the market might crash and you may be at an advantage. But if that doesn't happen, then I'm afraid you may miss the boat forever, or settle for a fringe suburb.

an asset is something you own, hopefully something that will provide you with economic benefit in the future. Do you own a house? yes, so it is an asset.

You should read about basic accounting principles, because it is essential knowledge for every person. You will be far better equipped to tackle the world if you know these things.

t. flyover

ITT college kids. Buying is great because its cheap 5 to 1 leverage on an asset that rarely drops in value.

>your savings haven't been able to keep up with rising house prices
> the person that bought a house and chose to take on a mortgage can enjoy the capital gains
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA holy shit mortgage cucks are delusional

They didn't skip anything. They read Rich Dad Poor Dad, learned finance wrong and now think they're a financial expert. Kiyosaki is a fuckin idiot.

>Eventually you will not have to worry about paying anything
but that's wrong

>someone didn't read the thread
all i see are a bunch of angry yokels advocating moving out to the west virginian countryside to get a cheap house made of literal garbage

not a single person ITT has given the correct answer as to what is the true superior answer, and that is moving back in with your parents

Keep telling yourself that

>and if you don't understand the market well, your houses value can become less than what you owe on your mortgage.
this shit is rare as fuck

Was 2008 that long ago, young grasshopper?

I just closed on my house on Monday and I turn 24 this July.

Feels good, man.

A...are lodgers sometimes qt but loose women who offer favors for favors, like week pauses in rent?

congrats.

Harder out here in Los Angeles - 1 bd shitbox in a mediocre neighborhood is atleast 800k. Westside you're looking at 1.2m.

my town population in ontario is about 5k and a 1400 sqfoot house is 450-500k. In toronto, the same house would be 2 million dollars. So go ahead and tell me that it's cheaper to own.

If you're going to live somewhere for a long amount of time it's probably worth it.

Take for example, my girlfriends mom has been living in the same apartment for close to 30 years. The average rent there for a 2 bedroom is about $2k a month. She's probably not paying that much since she's been there so long (she's had 3 landlord in that time), so let's estimate it at about $1500/month. So over 30 years, that's $540k, over $100k more than if she just bought a 2 bedroom in the same neighborhood now.

Of course, she doesn't want to have to deal with maintenance, so that very well could be a bargain considering they say the average house costs $1k a month to maintain.

Honestly it might depend on where you live too. In NYC rents have been skyrocketing cause of all the yuppies from California/Wisconsin/bumblefuck wherever, so to have that security of not being kicked out (which is actually very hard, having the rent raised on you, or more likely the landlord cutting the heat or water to make you move out, it might be worth it.

Yeah, Canada's collapse is right around the corner, so Ill wait and then scoop up a nice cheap house when the collapse happens. For now I'm just going to rent

Even regardless of what these guys are saying about the fact you OWN an asset, which is itself pretty great, in most areas monthly rent is always higher than monthly mortgage payments.

On a month-to-month basis, a 750 sqft apartment in my area is anywhere from $900 to $1100 for rent (sometimes more). A condo or townhome of similar size and with similar amenities might cost $800 to $950 a month for a mortgage payment, or even much less if you fork over a down payment bigger than the minimum.

If you DO consider a down payment of 5%, that's probably going to be somewhere between $4k and $6k.

That's about half a year's worth of rent.

So, if someone is going to live here for more than half a year, it's pretty worth it to look in to owning a property. This, of course, changes based on where you live and what the market is like, but it scales fairly close to 1:1. Monthly rent is always going to be higher than the monthly cost of ownership unless the market has imploded or some strange circumstance has occurred.

Another beautiful part about owning property vs renting, as some have mentioned, is that if you own a home, you can always sell it later, which is a luxury not afforded to renters.

basically ignore everything everyone is saying

buying is gambling, some people win, but a lot of people lose

renting is the safe bet

so choose risk and money, or rent