http://finance.yahoo.com/news/10-reasons-buy-instead-rent-150648664.html
It also mentions on the bottom when renting can be the better option.
Good Article on the buy vs rent discussion
By SubOink Follow Tue, 24 Apr 2012, 8:23pm 10,011 views 108 comments
In Los Angeles CA 90077
Watch (0) Share
Quote
Permalink Like Dislike Viewing Comments 1-40 of 108 Next » Last » See most liked comments
|
SubOink is moderator of this thread. |
Follow
Befriend (23)
55 threads
3,763 comments
Scottsdale, AZ
robertoaribas's website
if that is a "good article" to you, well, bless your soul!
EVERYTHING that article says was just as true in 2006... and following that advice then got you clobbered.
Now, assuming you are smarter than this, and want to read a REALLY good article, written by someone who saw the bubble coming, and made lots of money from it, may I suggest:
"when to buy for the thinkers in the room" It was written in 2008...
http://www.zillow.com/advice-thread/When-to-buy-a-home-for-the-thinkers-in-the-room/46686/
Follow
Befriend (3)
124 comments
Except mortgage rate which is half of 2006.
Follow
Befriend
28 comments
This article is good... for me to poop on!
Follow
Befriend (8)
38 threads
1,996 comments
Pleasanton, CA
Premium
More realtard propaganda. Clicking on the link gets me the article and no less than 5 adds on getting a lower-rate mortgage. Can you see the conflict of interest? Complete BS.
Follow
Befriend (8)
38 threads
1,996 comments
Pleasanton, CA
Premium
robertoaribas says
It was a bad idea to buy in 2008 and it is still a bad idea to buy in 2012. 2016 might turn out to be not so bad an idea. Math doesn't help when prices continue to fall. Perception is reality, and the perception now is that houses suck. I wouldn't take ownership of a lot of the American housing stock if it was given to me free. The taxes and upkeep alone would drive you bankrupt. All the math theories are hinged on a healthy rental market, just wait until that goes sour as well. Then you will have an empty POS to deal with.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
robertoaribas says
Duh! The article was always true. Glad you recognize that. Who cares about someone who predicted the bubble. I PREDICTED the bubble myself. So what, y'all should do what I just did because I predicted the bubble?
It's got some good points about buying vs renting and also mentions some arguments for renting.
RentingForHalfTheCost says
I also get those on westside rentals websites and others...doesn't mean anything.
Follow
Befriend
7 threads
94 comments
That first article was hilarious. Tax deductions, forced savings, remodels, renting out bedrooms, FURNITURE!! People actually use these reasons to justify a home purchase?? It's funny and sad all at the same time.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
Rent4Ever says
So those things are not true? There is no tax deduction? You are not saving by paying your monthly pay? You cannot rent out a room or a guesthouse? ...Hm...Ok. Keep renting...even though you are the best proof that it does work because somebody out there is renting out THEIR house to you :)
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
SubOink says
Yes, but it does not have near the impact that people believe it will, and don't forget you have to spend money to get the deduction in the first place.
SubOink says
Lamest excuse ever for buying a house. Only the horribly financially irresponsible need to be "forced" to save. Yes, the same people that have a higher chance of facing foreclosure.
SubOink says
If you have an extra room in your rental house you can rent it out as well to defray the rent, and how many people are buying homes with the intent of sharing their kitchen and bathroom with a stranger?
The other items on the list are the same lame used house salesperson's tripe.
Robert's article actually had much better method for determining if one should buy.
Follow
Befriend
7 threads
94 comments
SubOink says
I suppose all are true on the surface, but none come close to validating a purchase in the rent vs. buy decision. That is what is so funny.
Follow
Befriend (7)
37 threads
1,523 comments
Mountain View, CA
bmwman91's website
Premium
Again, it is totally regional. Buying in many places will yield positive financial results. Renting in other places will yield a positive financial result. There isn't any one-size-fits-all solution for rent vs buy. It just happens that a lot of people in here are in the SF Bay Area where it makes a lot more sense to rent in most areas, so most of these discussions are going to get flavored that way.
Follow
Befriend
7 threads
94 comments
People who use tax deductions as a reason to buy a house are the same people that come home after spending hundreds of dollars at the mall and explain how they "saved" so much money.
It's a forced savings plan? If you're so incapable of managing your own money that you need a forced savings plan, what the hell are you doing buying a house?
A landlord? No they can't kick you out, but the sheriff can, cuz you lost your job, and didn't make mortgage payments. And that savings plan you had? Yea you just lost it all.
Follow
Befriend (8)
38 threads
1,996 comments
Pleasanton, CA
Premium
Rent4Ever says
Couldn't agree more here. Hopefully you explained it in simple enough terms now we can stop using the tax deduction as the holy grail to house buying. It is a tiny piece of the equation. Not at all close to if the house is appreciating/depreciating.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
Rent4Ever says
We are talking about pro's and con's. The fact that you tax deduct is a pro.
Rent4Ever says
It's a forced savings plan whether you need force or not. And obviously in order to come up with the downpayment, you had to save before buying. Regardless, part of your mortgage payment is saved. Now, if your mortgage payment is the same as your rent payment then 1) you can tax deduct the interest 2) a portion of that = saved. And those are clear PRO's of buying.
Rent4Ever says
If you can't pay then you get kicked out of your house regardless if you rent or buy. What point is that?
In a nutshell, if you are f-ed in life, you are f-ed. There is no way around that. Renting surely won't protect you.
It's like saying...don't put any money in a 401k and invest because if the market crashes, you loose it all.
Follow
Befriend
448 comments
Campbell, CA
*rolls eyes*
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
SubOink says
The point is that buying does not keep you from being kicked out. Unlike the article suggests.
SubOink says
The forced saving is at best a push.
Follow
Befriend (2)
3 threads
546 comments
Madison, WI
Their comes a time when some realize buying is just never going to happen. For a single person who can't afford marriage/kids either, and also who has no contractor friends to fix up all the junk that is for sale, keep renting, it's in your best interests. I'm 43 years old, makes no sense to buy, I can rent cheap 1 bedroom or studio units until I can get into senior citizen housing which is fairly reasonable. Perfect example, I sold my house, it was junk, the woman who bought it could barely walk, bum knee, no problems, her parents and brothers came in and did all the work I could never afford. Roof, concrete driveway, landscaping, who knows what else, it needed plenty.
Follow
Befriend
7 threads
94 comments
SubOink says
The name of the article is "10 Reasons to Buy instead of Rent." That doesn't sound like a pro's and con's list, it instead sounds like a tax deduction is a reason to buy.
SubOink says
Ahh, if it were only that simple. Only when purchasing a home is your failure to produce cash flow to pay a debt result in you losing ALL OF YOUR EQUITY. This includes your downpayment, and all "forced savings" that you put into the house. No investment portfolio is at risk of being lost completely because of a loss of cash flow. Instead, your 401k and other retirement plans are explicitly PROTECTED from debt collections, bankruptcy, and civil lawsuits. If you were renting and lost your job, now you have a bank full of $$ because you haven't made a downpayment. You are only on the hook at MAX for your outsanding lease amount. Even that you could get yourself out of. Your savings is not at risk.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
leoj707 says
Actually buying IS keeping you from being kicked out. It's not paying for it, what could get you kicked out anyways. But as long as you pay, nobody is kicking you out. If you are renting, you can pay every month and still get kicked out. That's what the article means.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
Rent4Ever says
Assuming you saved money while renting. If not, then you are toast.
If you can't pay your mortgage, you put the house on the market and sell it. If you sell the house for the same price you bought it, you'd loose the 6% realtors commission. You retain your downpay and equity (-6%)...not a disaster, I know many people that have gone thru that. Obviously, if you bought at the peak of a bubble and needed to sell at the bottom then you lost a lot. Not everything but a lot. But that's very similar in the stockmarket...you buy stocks...and have to sell them at a bottom in order to pay your rent (because you lost job).
Follow
Befriend (8)
38 threads
1,996 comments
Pleasanton, CA
Premium
SubOink says
If you can't save while renting then buying a home is definitely something you shouldn't do. Period.
Follow
Befriend
7 threads
94 comments
SubOink says
First of all, relying on a house to be liquid is foolish, it's not. Closing costs? What do those average, (2-3%) Any money you put in thie house? Taxes paid? All that is lost. Remember you are leveraged with a house and that works both ways. Selling a house -6% is actually taking a 30% hit on your downpayment, assuming 20% DP. 60% loss if they put 10% down.
And there lies the reason to think real hard before buying in a downmarket. As just a small % loss of house value is a multiplied loss on your $$
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
leoj707 says
Rent4Ever says
RentingForHalfTheCost says
Exactly. And even worse, your "forced" savings account pays negative interest in the form of property taxes, insurance, and maintenance. I'll stick with a regular savings account at my bank...even with the rock-bottom interest rates.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
We'll see in a year or two...will carry on the conversation then. Somebody will be right, somebody will be wrong.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
SubOink says
I'd say it's always "wrong" to throw money away, whether it's on
A) rent, or
B) mortgage interest + property taxes + insurance + maintenance
Since most of us are not wealthy enough to "own" a dwelling place outright, we are forced to choose between throwing money away on either A or B.
I'd say the "right" thing to do is choose whichever option throws away less money per month. In most of the USA, you lose less money per month with B than A (assuming you get a small house and not a McMansion). But in certain areas like Boston, NYC, DC, SF, and LA you might lose less money per month with option A than B.
Remember: having a mortgage is also renting. That's what interest is, by definition: rent paid on borrowed money.
In some cases it's cheaper to borrow the house than borrow money to "buy" the house.
Follow
Befriend
1 threads
31 comments
Shrewsbury, MA
wthrfrk80 says
what would you base this on. I would say the opposite, in most of US, you would throw less money on A (rent).
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
AJ1201 says
2500 in rent or a mortgage of 2500 where 1900 are interest. You do the math who throws out more. On top of it the 1900 are a tax deduction. So are prop taxes. In my case it works out that my tax savings are a bit more than what I pay in prop taxes so I can compare my mortgage to what my rent used to be...way cheaper to buy than to rent if I compare my throw out interest portion of the mortgage and what rent used to be.
Follow
Befriend (23)
55 threads
3,763 comments
Scottsdale, AZ
robertoaribas's website
SubOink says
Not true... they are ONLY a deduction if you itemize, and they only help you to the extent that the exceed your standard deductions.
I'm not arguing your point, but too many people roam around thinking they can straight deduct mortgage interest, and that isn't the case. For me, I get zero benefit from my mortgage interest.
Follow
Befriend
7 threads
94 comments
robertoaribas says
This is a concept that most people do not comprehend. Every married couple just for breathing gets an 11k deduction. Mortgage interest is only relevant over 11k.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
robertoaribas says
In my case it makes a huge difference. I am in the upper 20's.
Follow
Befriend (23)
55 threads
3,763 comments
Scottsdale, AZ
robertoaribas's website
SubOink says
lest see: itemized deductions... upper 20's.... standardized deductions.... 11k.
Assume 28k - 11K = 17K state and federal rate let's assume you pay 40% total on marginal income...
.4*17000/12 = $567 a month... a difference to be sure... but not enough to run out and buy a house that is way too expensive compared to renting...
Follow
Befriend (8)
38 threads
1,996 comments
Pleasanton, CA
Premium
SubOink says
You forgot maintenance, insurance, HOA, Mello-Roos, and all that crap that drains a homeowners pocket. I agree with doing the math, but if you taking a stab at doing a comparison then you need to put it all down. Not just some. Renting has the expense of renting, that is it. All other expenses are the responsibility of the owner. At least every rental in the BA I have had.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
AJ1201 says
I guess I don't really know w/o looking at price/rent ratios for the entire U.S.
How are things in Shrewsbury, MA? I recently lived in adjacent Worcester for 8 months due to a job. There's a great Indian restaurant right on the Boston Turnpike Road near Lake Quinsigamond.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
RentingForHalfTheCost says
Correct. That's why I included the "other stuff" in "option B." I'm not sure why SubOink didn't include the "other stuff."
Follow
Befriend
24 comments
Rent4Ever says
That's true .
But every household have some itemized deduction just for working. Your miles may vary.
IF you make 150K AGI in CA. State income tax and state SDI alone will put you around 12K in standard deduction so your starting point is not 0, it is what is already there plus the MID. In some cases, mortgage interest and property tax are all gravy.
This will obviously not be the case in Texas, FL and AZ, etc.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
robertoaribas says
I love it when people state the obvious.
Did I say - go and buy a house so you can save $600/month in taxes? Why put words in my mouth? Reminder: We were comparing 2500 rent vs 2500 mortgage.
And when we are comparing a 2500 rent vs a 2500 mortgage and according to your calculations there is a tax savings of $567/month then I say...its nonsense to say that renting is throwing less money out. When in fact the 1900 (interest portion)-$567 tax savings = total throwout amount = $1333.- + 600(prop tax) = around 1900.- total throwaway money.
$600/month less than renting. We are talking broad strokes here so please don't come back and nickel and dime the calculation. (I am actually only paying around 2k for a house that would rent for 2700-2900). We are only using the examples to make a rough point. And that is, if you can buy the same house for a similar payment, its not a bad deal figuring in all what's said above.
I don't have an HOA that's why I didn't even mention it.
Important is to know that you don't have those 600 available to you. They get force saved into your house. Once you have enough equity you could grab a HELOC or so if you needed to do something major...put in a pool..etc. So there are ways but Roberto knows all about that.
Follow
Befriend (23)
55 threads
3,763 comments
Scottsdale, AZ
robertoaribas's website
If the price/rent were that close, I'd buy factoring in a $600 tax savings. I merely point out how it works, because I hear Realtors tell buyers about their "tax savings" on $100k homes here in Phoenix... good luck with that tax savings!
Follow
Befriend (8)
38 threads
1,996 comments
Pleasanton, CA
Premium
I used 0% rent and price appreciation, 4% mortgage rate, 20% down, marginal tax of 28%, length of ownership of 7 years, after tax return on investments of 3%. I used 2400/mth rent because that works well with 500K mortgage at 4% which is basically 2400/mth on a mortgage. Here are the results. After 7 years the renter is ahead by over 40K. You are forgetting lots of costs on the owners side, and then the return from the 20% downpayment on the renters side. If you make a claim then you should use all the math.
Follow
Befriend (3)
124 comments
RentingForHalfTheCost says
Rent is better than owning so long price of house didn't appreciate by $40K (+ 6%? + other costs?). As to whether house price would be up or down, to me, is just speculation. If I'm a first-time buyer (owner-occupied), so long I can afford to pay the monthly mortgage, I would buy it.
Follow
Befriend (3)
9 threads
703 comments
Los Angeles, CA
RentingForHalfTheCost says
Since you are so into not forgetting any costs...the above example doesn't include rent increase, the cost of moving as I don't know a lot of people that rent the same house for 7 years. I personally never have, so I would have moved already 3 times...$2k cost to move all our $hit everytime. (so times 3)
It also doesn't include that the landlord keeps security deposit at the end of the lease for those repairs, or a portion of it because your dog peeed on the carpet and your son threw up at the walls :)
You are not on the hook for maintenance as a renter but when you move out the landlord often gets at least some portion of the security deposit and if he is an a-hole...all of it.
But all said and done...even if your example was right - I'd buy the house if the difference is only 40k over 7 years. I would call that the price for living in my own home where I can do what I want.
In reality it doesn't work that way though. If you have to move and don't find another house for 2400 but for 2600 , its already wack. That calculator is SO biased on the renter side and doesn't figure in real life situations.
$35k Maintenance...come on! $600 a month??? You gotta be kidding.
That calculator is totally bogus and useless...nobody knows the future, therefore you can't calculate exactly what the difference is. What if Uncle Harry Dies and leaves me a $100k inheritance? What if grandpa fixes my garage door for free?
Trying to be thorough on something you don't know makes no sense to me.
Again, if your example was right, I'd still buy.