NYTimes rent/buy article
Started by jsmith9005
over 18 years ago
Posts: 360
Member since: Apr 2007
Discussion about
Looks like the renters are the smart ones after all http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/11/realestate/11leonhardt.html http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/business/2007_BUYRENT_GRAPHIC.html
Well, it *is* just the New York Times. Not all in the Manhattan market read it. I mean, besides 99.999% of those in the market.
Um. Did you read it? Not an NYC story folks...
As someone mentioned on here, rents will surely rise over time; meanwhile, if you lock in a 30 year fixed rate, you know what your 'rent' is going to be & it will be seemingly falling as prices rise all around. In this weakened market I think we need to think of our homes as domiciles not as investments that are going to post double digit increases annually. The recent market was so heated that many of us forgot this.
Renting is better IF you're living in a rent stablized apt, etc. My rent is currently $2300 and I will definitely be buying.
The only issue with the rent/buy paradigm that really isn't discussed:
The 'calculator' tells a renter what their potential gain is, if they judiciously saved EVERY SINGLE PENNY that they would be spending to purchase a place over 10, 20, or 30 year timeline (over and above their rent costs). The big problems are that:
1. NOBODY judiciously saves every penny between the cost of renting and buying - money gets frittered away on clothes, cars, vacations, summer rentals, etc. that should have been saved. So at the end of a 10, 20, or 30 year cycle, it is VASTLY unlikely that the renter has scrupulously saved every penney the calculator assumes they will. Or even anything close to it.
2. In addition to saving every penny between the cost of renting and buying, the calculator ALSO assumes the renter is a fiancial wiz who will return a steady after tax profit of 5%, 6%, 7% or more per cent on their money that they've so carefully saved, year after year for 10, 20, or 30 years.
The MAIN REASON most people buy homes is that their home is part of (not entirely) an ENFORCED SAVINGS PLAN for many people. I think that if we seriously look at a renter over a 30 year period, and track their savings (regarding rent vs. buy) and their invesment return, when all is said and done, the person who bought a well laid out/well designed Manhattan condo/coop in a great location will have MUCH more net worth than a comparable renter after the same 30 year period goes by.