I am still trying to figure out why one tries to say there is less risk in your method as opposed to mine. I am actually arguing to reduce risk.
For instance if I were to take your sitauation, I would say that if you wnated to take on less risk use the mimimum amount of money for a down payment so that you have a maximum amount of cash available .
Then if you want to reduce the amount of debt that you have take the difference between what you would have put down and the minimum required and divde that into additionally voluntary payments that you make over the next 60 months.
Now in the interem of making those 60 months of additonal payment, if something unforeseen comes up you have cash on hand. therefore you are not guessing as to what the potential interest rate environment will be. Seems like I am an advocate of less risk. That doesn’t always mean less debt.
