Whether one has a down-payment when they are ready to buy a house has nothing to do with entitlement. You can make an economic case for less than 10% down under some conditions.
Sometimes, the economic conditions and your stage in life dictate whether you have a downpayment or not.
Consider this…
In 1996, after a decade of college and graduate school, you land a pretty decent government job. Prices in San Diego are at a once-per decade low by any measure. You make enough with one income to support purchasing the median priced house. Your spouse also works. You have good credit.
Should you buy ? with 5% down and pay PMI ? (which seems like it will come back in style)
If Josh ruled the world, you would have to save 20% down. But you know that prices are cheap. Everybody hates real estate, and it’s nearly the same monthly outlay as renting at that point in the cycle. I say that person should buy.
What if someone enters the workforce at the bottom of the cycle. Are they not an idiot for waiting.
What about Johnny P. Frugal. Who determined that housing was too expensive in 2002 for him to buy in ? He decides to save enough for a downpayment. After 5 years, Johnny has done very well. He has socked away 150K. And on March 12, 2007 he hits the point where he has 20% down and will qualify for a 30-year fixed on 20% of his income for a 750K house. Should he buy today ?
Probably not.
My point is that down-payment savings is not the only metric by which to measure whether a person should or should not buy a home. There are plenty of conditions and examples of people who should buy a house based on economic and personal conditions that are independent of whether they have 20% down.
I would not use that single measure to label some as having a sense of entitlement.
