This person has owned a home for a year. Ve has experience and obviously an authority on this subject.
Seriously though, servers do not appreciate in value. If they did and were scarce it would make a lot more sense to run than cloud out.
There are downsides to home ownership and significant risks, but I think it’s the most tangible path to wealth for the middle class. Not everyone is fit for home ownership as they move or value flexibility, but for those who can plan and own a home in thirty years it zeros out for the costs of maintenance, taxes, etc. It’s not quite like getting a refund check back for thirty years of rent, but it’s similar.
The fact that homes appreciate and value is a bug in our system. If we allowed homes to be built freely and with less regulation, then old homes that actually decline in value compared to new homes.
Perhaps, but homes are built on land. We’re not making more land and it will always appreciate.
Also building materials and labor increase in price with inflation so homes will increase in absolute price even with proper regulation (which no country has ever succeeded in accomplishing).
I agreed with your article and other comments here, but this is a bad take. There's no need for senseless tearing down and rebuilding, old homes are perfectly fine and often better-built than modern ones. Take a look at the mid-rise apartment building, I'm sure you have several wherever you live: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-02-13/why-ameri...
Comments
This person has owned a home for a year. Ve has experience and obviously an authority on this subject.
Seriously though, servers do not appreciate in value. If they did and were scarce it would make a lot more sense to run than cloud out.
There are downsides to home ownership and significant risks, but I think it’s the most tangible path to wealth for the middle class. Not everyone is fit for home ownership as they move or value flexibility, but for those who can plan and own a home in thirty years it zeros out for the costs of maintenance, taxes, etc. It’s not quite like getting a refund check back for thirty years of rent, but it’s similar.
I agree with your post but wanted to add an important caveat:
Houses do NOT appreciate - the property (land) does.
There are rare exceptions for historical reasons (e.g. a Frank Lloyd Wright house), but otherwise this is fairly fundamental.
Houses technically depreciate because they require maintenance just like cars do (although with a much friendlier slope).
The fact that homes appreciate and value is a bug in our system. If we allowed homes to be built freely and with less regulation, then old homes that actually decline in value compared to new homes.
Perhaps, but homes are built on land. We’re not making more land and it will always appreciate.
Also building materials and labor increase in price with inflation so homes will increase in absolute price even with proper regulation (which no country has ever succeeded in accomplishing).
I agreed with your article and other comments here, but this is a bad take. There's no need for senseless tearing down and rebuilding, old homes are perfectly fine and often better-built than modern ones. Take a look at the mid-rise apartment building, I'm sure you have several wherever you live: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-02-13/why-ameri...
Good point, I didn't think this comment through as well as I should have.
Not all homes appreciate over inflation. In fact, I would assume that on a long enough time horizon, everything matches inflation.