Im bowing out

[SAJ-99]

Another WSJ that isn't bad (they get a new head Editor or something?). But the article title does irritate me a little. It was standard in my 20's to have a roommate. Are Gen Z expectations too high?

"In North Charleston, S.C., 27-year-old bartender Bailey Byrum said her younger sister moved in with her at her two-bedroom rental house. Ms. Byrum said her sister had trouble finding her own place and had recently been living with her parents.

“She has a good job… but places by yourself are like $500 to $600 out of her budget,” Ms. Byrum said."

Surging Rents Push More Americans to Live With Roommates or Parents

Rents have risen 25% over the past two years, and inflation is eating into how much people have left to spend on housing.

www.wsj.com

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Great article

The Homeownership Society Was a Mistake

Real estate should be treated as consumption, not investment.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[BigHornRam]

Great article

The Homeownership Society Was a Mistake

Real estate should be treated as consumption, not investment.

www.theatlantic.com

I'm not subscribing to read the whole thing, but the part I could read looked like typical Atlantic drivel.

Homeownership has been a great investment for me. Especially since I build them. Ever hear the old builder saying, "build 3, the 4th is free" ?

 

[BrentD]

Great article

The Homeownership Society Was a Mistake

Real estate should be treated as consumption, not investment.

www.theatlantic.com

I just skimmed through it, and I would not say it is a great article. It makes some good points worth reading, but it also makes a lot of assumptions and evaluations that are pretty limiting. It would not be hard to look at the flip side and see a ton of downsides to renting.

The part that irks me the most about these types of articles which are currently quite fashionable in my opinion, is that they consider finances almost exclusively (and not very fairly). There is a lot to home owning that doesn't compute to just dollars. Owning a home is a lifestyle and a level of freedom that renting can never match. It is hard to put $$s on that. And there are also $$ issues that they did not discuss at all.

YMMV, but articles like this one overstate one side of the equation without giving equal dilligence to the alternative position - that's because the alternative (the "American Dream/home") is so widely discussed and acknowledged as to not be a viable publication to make an author a buck, esp in a glossy like The Atlantic. Gotta buck the trend to sell a story, and this, I think, is one of those, though far from the most egregious example.

I cannot imagine renting again. Nor do I envy anyone's lifestyle that is renting.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

I just skimmed through it, and I would not say it is a great article. It makes some good points worth reading, but it also makes a lot of assumptions and evaluations that are pretty limiting. It would not be hard to look at the flip side and see a ton of downsides to renting.

The part that irks me the most about these types of articles which are currently quite fashionable in my opinion, is that they consider finances almost exclusively (and not very fairly). There is a lot to home owning that doesn't compute to just dollars. Owning a home is a lifestyle and a level of freedom that renting can never match. It is hard to put $$s on that. And there are also $$ issues that they did not discuss at all.

YMMV, but articles like this one overstate one side of the equation without giving equal dilligence to the alternative position - that's because the alternative (the "American Dream/home") is so widely discussed and acknowledged as to not be a viable publication to make an author a buck, esp in a glossy like The Atlantic. Gotta buck the trend to sell a story, and this, I think, is one of those, though far from the most egregious example.

I cannot imagine renting again. Nor do I envy anyone's lifestyle that is renting.

No offense, your comment shows you didn’t read the article.

It’s worth the time to read, it honestly has zero to do with renting versus buying.

The article is about how making homes the single source of savings for many Americans is problematic, and essentially creates a generation pyramid scheme that undermines the middle class.

 

[BrentD]

No offense, your comment shows you didn’t read the article.

It’s worth the time to read, it honestly has zero to do with renting versus buying.

The article is about how making homes the single source of savings for many Americans is problematic, and essentially creates a generation pyramid scheme that undermines the middle class.

Actually, I did read the article and it is really about renting vs buying. Yes, they go on about how the house is not an investment, but they do that implicitly arguing that you should rent at the alternative. And again, they totally miss point that house are far more than just investments. So, to the extent you are going to have one, your opportunities for alternative investments are limiting.

Anyway, it's a very myoptic look at home owning as a strategy for life (vs a strategy for retirement savings).

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Actually, I did read the article and it is really about renting vs buying. Yes, they go on about how the house is not an investment, but they do that implicitly arguing that you should rent at the alternative. And again, they totally miss point that house are far more than just investments. So, to the extent you are going to have one, your opportunities for alternative investments are limiting.

Anyway, it's a very myoptic look at home owning as a strategy for life (vs a strategy for retirement savings).

It literally doesn’t discus renting or profess it’s better…

It’s about using a home as middle income families sole asset and investment vehicle versus a diversified portfolio, and the artificial scarcity of housing we have created to shore up values.

 

[Nick87]

Investment or not I never rented anything in my life until 2 years ago for about 30 months. While we were in between houses. Not for never again.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

“Policy makers should completely abandon trying to preserve or improve property values and instead make their focus a housing market abundant with cheap and diverse housing types able to satisfy the needs of people at every income level and stage of life. As such, people would move between homes as their circumstances necessitate. Housing would stop being scarce and thus its attractiveness as an investment would diminish greatly, for both homeowners and larger entities. The government should encourage and aid low-wealth households to save through diversified index funds as it eliminates the tax benefits that pull people into homeownership regardless of the consequences.”

 

[BigHornRam]

This is the kind of policy government should focus on to make self owned housing more attainable for everyone.

Montana Adds 500+ Apprentices in First Half of 2022

HELENA, Mont. – Governor Greg Gianforte today announced Montana’s Registered Apprenticeship program has added 515 new apprentices and 41 new employer sponsors in the first half of 2022.

news.mt.gov

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Investment or not I never rented anything in my life until 2 years ago for about 30 months. While we were in between houses. Not for never again.

I‘ve never leased a vehicle. Vehicles are a depreciating asset, doesn’t matter if you lease or buy.

I think you would agree it would be problematic if we decided to make vehicles an investment scheme and automakers dramatically scaled down production so that scarcity caused your car or truck to go up in value every year.

Vehicles are apples to oranges with regards to housing but, that’s what the author is trying to convey.

It’s about scarcity, affordability, and people saving for retirement.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

This is the kind of policy government should focus on to make self owned housing more attainable for everyone.

Montana Adds 500+ Apprentices in First Half of 2022

HELENA, Mont. – Governor Greg Gianforte today announced Montana’s Registered Apprenticeship program has added 515 new apprentices and 41 new employer sponsors in the first half of 2022.

news.mt.gov

Totally agree, I think anyone who looks at that policy and says “oh no, more houses, that’s going to drive down the value of my house” is deeply problematic.

 

[BigHornRam]

Totally agree, I think anyone who looks at that policy and says “oh no, more houses, that’s going to drive down the value of my house” is deeply problematic.

You also need more skilled tradesmen to work on existing housing, especially if power tools isn't your thing.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

You also need more skilled tradesmen to work on existing housing, especially if power tools isn't your thing.

Tradesmen, lawn care companies… all of it

 

[Letthemgrow]

It’s about using a home as middle income families sole asset and investment vehicle versus a diversified portfolio

So, you're saying that someone actually gets paid to to tell people that?

 

[Nick87]

I‘ve never leased a vehicle. Vehicles are a depreciating asset, doesn’t matter if you lease or buy.

I think you would agree it would be problematic if we decide to make vehicles and investment scheme and automakers dramatically scaled down production so that scarcity caused your car or truck to go up in value every year.

Vehicles are apples to oranges with regards to housing but, that’s what the author is trying to convey.

It’s about scarcity, affordability, and people saving for retirement.

I get what your saying my pointbwas even if I cane out ahead financially renting its not for me, cant handle it.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

I get what you’re saying my pointbwas even if I cane out ahead financially renting its not for me, cant handle it.

Yeah in this context it’s not renting is better it’s instead of putting 20% down instead put down 15% and take that 5% difference and put it into a 401k, or instead of a 15 year go 30 and put the difference into a retirement account.

Buying is definitely the best bet, it just shouldn’t be thought of as your “retirement savings”.

 

[Treeshark]

Good article, wllm- thank you for posting. I found this graph particularly interesting:

 

[Pucky Freak]

Great article

The Homeownership Society Was a Mistake

Real estate should be treated as consumption, not investment.

www.theatlantic.com

There are a few good points, but I heartily disagree with well over 50% of the article content.

On one hand there are government messages and government programs promoting homeownership, and on the other hand is the potential homeowner making their own homeownership decisions.

In regards to the latter, there is a very strong case for homeownership being the preferred option in terms of overall financial benefit if you can swing it.

There are many things I CAN do, but choose not to: dip into home equity, buy more house than I can afford, keep a mortgage for decades, overspend on furnishing, buy in a poor location, etc. It is no one's responsibility but my own to make wise decisions in this regard. Just because some homebuyers do the opposite and cannot stay in their homes does not mean there is a problem with the goal of homeownership. It means there are persons making poor decisions. The author of the article seems to infer that just because the messaging is problematic, or that sketchy homeownership programs exist, we are beholden to them.

 

[AlaskaHunter]

There are a few good points, but I heartily disagree with well over 50% of the article content.

On one hand there are government messages and government programs promoting homeownership, and on the other hand is the potential homeowner making their own homeownership decisions.

In regards to the latter, there is a very strong case for homeownership being the preferred option in terms of overall financial benefit if you can swing it.

There are many things I CAN do, but choose not to: dip into home equity, buy more house than I can afford, keep a mortgage for decades, overspend on furnishing, buy in a poor location, etc. It is no one's responsibility but my own to make wise decisions in this regard. Just because some homebuyers do the opposite and cannot stay in their homes does not mean there is a problem with the goal of homeownership. It means there are persons making poor decisions. The author of the article seems to infer that just because the messaging is problematic, or that sketchy homeownership programs exist, we are beholden to them.

The article does not talk about taxes. There is zero capital gains tax on $500,000 of a home. And historic low interest rates (3% until recently). Also there are so many other lifestyle benefits that come with owning a home that would be difficult renting: animals, gardening, woodworking, home projects, etc.