[peterb]

Perhaps if someone had data that goes back far enough, a couple of hundred years, it may indicate that purchasing was cheaper? It makes sense. It’s more risk to drop big capital on something than to rent it. Before govt interventions and homeownership policies influenced housing, I think most mortgages reguired 50% down, if you could get one. Imagine what the prices would be now, with that kind of loan? And you couldnt deduct mortgage interest payments. But there wasnt always income tax, either. Hey, go back far enough and only royalty was allowed to own real estate.

[peterb]

Perhaps if someone had data that goes back far enough, a couple of hundred years, it may indicate that purchasing was cheaper? It makes sense. It’s more risk to drop big capital on something than to rent it. Before govt interventions and homeownership policies influenced housing, I think most mortgages reguired 50% down, if you could get one. Imagine what the prices would be now, with that kind of loan? And you couldnt deduct mortgage interest payments. But there wasnt always income tax, either. Hey, go back far enough and only royalty was allowed to own real estate.

[peterb]

Perhaps if someone had data that goes back far enough, a couple of hundred years, it may indicate that purchasing was cheaper? It makes sense. It’s more risk to drop big capital on something than to rent it. Before govt interventions and homeownership policies influenced housing, I think most mortgages reguired 50% down, if you could get one. Imagine what the prices would be now, with that kind of loan? And you couldnt deduct mortgage interest payments. But there wasnt always income tax, either. Hey, go back far enough and only royalty was allowed to own real estate.

[peterb]

Perhaps if someone had data that goes back far enough, a couple of hundred years, it may indicate that purchasing was cheaper? It makes sense. It’s more risk to drop big capital on something than to rent it. Before govt interventions and homeownership policies influenced housing, I think most mortgages reguired 50% down, if you could get one. Imagine what the prices would be now, with that kind of loan? And you couldnt deduct mortgage interest payments. But there wasnt always income tax, either. Hey, go back far enough and only royalty was allowed to own real estate.

[peterb]

In good times it can suck to be a LL. I would not want to be one in this economic climate unless I was able to charge below market rent and still cash flow.

[peterb]

In good times it can suck to be a LL. I would not want to be one in this economic climate unless I was able to charge below market rent and still cash flow.

[peterb]

In good times it can suck to be a LL. I would not want to be one in this economic climate unless I was able to charge below market rent and still cash flow.

[peterb]

In good times it can suck to be a LL. I would not want to be one in this economic climate unless I was able to charge below market rent and still cash flow.

[peterb]

In good times it can suck to be a LL. I would not want to be one in this economic climate unless I was able to charge below market rent and still cash flow.

[peterb]

Any “investment” one makes is essentially a bet being placed on an expected future outcome. Certain variable like past performance, time frames and the amount of the investment may allow for the mitigation of the risk that that expected future outcome may or may not be realized. But, this does not change the fact that the bet is still being placed on an “expected” future outcome.

[peterb]

Any “investment” one makes is essentially a bet being placed on an expected future outcome. Certain variable like past performance, time frames and the amount of the investment may allow for the mitigation of the risk that that expected future outcome may or may not be realized. But, this does not change the fact that the bet is still being placed on an “expected” future outcome.

[peterb]

Any “investment” one makes is essentially a bet being placed on an expected future outcome. Certain variable like past performance, time frames and the amount of the investment may allow for the mitigation of the risk that that expected future outcome may or may not be realized. But, this does not change the fact that the bet is still being placed on an “expected” future outcome.

[peterb]

Any “investment” one makes is essentially a bet being placed on an expected future outcome. Certain variable like past performance, time frames and the amount of the investment may allow for the mitigation of the risk that that expected future outcome may or may not be realized. But, this does not change the fact that the bet is still being placed on an “expected” future outcome.

[peterb]

Any “investment” one makes is essentially a bet being placed on an expected future outcome. Certain variable like past performance, time frames and the amount of the investment may allow for the mitigation of the risk that that expected future outcome may or may not be realized. But, this does not change the fact that the bet is still being placed on an “expected” future outcome.

[peterb]

Every “investment” is speculation. Unless you can predict the future, it’s a gamble.
The one exception being Goldman Sachs, of course. Mainly because they can write the future as needed.

[Author]

Posts