• EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah it’s always wild when we get comments like this. It’s like interviewing a serial killer about the uncontrollable violence people feel over [insert their MO]

  • kemsat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Break even? That’s not even a concern. I just wanna have a place to live where I don’t have neighbors on the other side of the wall.

    • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is legitimately something I fantasize about. All I want is a small standalone structure to myself, nothing too big or fancy. I’m so damn sick of being held hostage by my neighbors ridiculously odd sleep schedule and lack of basic human decency.

      Even though I’m single with a decent job, it’s never gonna happen. But I can dream. Well actually I can’t dream, because my neighbors don’t let me stay asleep long enough to reach a REM state.

  • slurpeesoforion@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What’s that Zillow? Buying real estate isn’t profitable? Does that mean you’re going to diversify? Maybe sell some of your property?

    Didn’t think so.

    • Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Zillow hasn’t bought homes in over a year after over leveraging by a few billion. Focus your attention where it’s due, on all the institutionally funded SFR companies.

    • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Buying it isn’t profitable, holding large masses of it though, it’s literally impossible to lose money, and if you do the government will do things like push employees back into overpriced office buildings to continue to justify the price.

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just holding isn’t that valuable. Most real estate doesn’t outpace inflation. If you get to live there for basically free or collect rent it’s a good deal.

  • iopq@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    If prices are going up, then it’s going to be less than 13.5 years because the value of the house will grow on the meantime and you will own more than you owe

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah the 13.5 accounts for a continued increase in home prices. If it didn’t it would be more than that.

      • iopq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh, that’s surprising, then

        But then again, I would not be surprised if the rates fell in the future, so if your mortgage is a few years locked in rates and then goes floating this may be still fine

        I’m talking more likely 7 years in the future, not like one or two, though

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The question is, will prices continue to go up? Or will rates push prices down? What impact will that have on rents?

      Hopefully all of that is included in this estimate. I expect housing prices to cool as rates go up, which means a longer time for the initial investment to pay back for itself.

    • NewNewAccount@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Buying is oftentimes preferable to renting. Right now is probably not one of those times, depending on where you live.

      • SirToxicAvenger@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        over the long term yeah, and I agree. the problem with a purchase is that you have to have the funds and it’s a lot. no, not renting either - that’s what I do now & of course and it’s not the right answer though it’s the only option for many. there are of course other options - rv/van life/car camping, moving elsewhere (ie: internationally/illegally), or even being a traveler (aka vanlife without a vehicle).

        personally, I’m working on building my own RV. it’s a lot cheaper than buying property, but I’ll be the first to admit that there’s still a sizeable upfront cost

        • thesmokingman@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          All of your alternatives require specific lifestyles, personalities, and paradigms. Car camping (of all varieties) presents a bunch of new risks. Moving elsewhere has the potential for incredible startup costs unless you’re able to start over and move with nothing. Traveling makes a lot of skill sets unusable for primary income.

        • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You don’t need any funds to buy a house. First time homebuyers can buy with 0% down and roll the closing costs into the mortgage. The tricky part is having enough income and a high enough credit score, which is easy on a McDonalds salary in some parts of the US and impossible with a 6 figure salary in other parts. I do think that the vast majority of people overcomplicate the house buying process and needlessly lock themselves into renting when they could be building equity for the same cost.

        • Dkarma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Do the math tho.

          First months last months rent and matching 1month sec dep on a place that’s 4k a month is 12k

          5% down on a 240k house is…12k. Or 10% down on a 120k house.