I don't consider Trump a dumb man but his 50 year mortgage idea is pure stupidity

[crosstin]

And it's not going to make homes more affordable. If anything it will offer poor dumb people a way to hand even more of their money over to rich people, and bring up prices of homes in the short run. On a $500k loan if you figure the interest rate will be .5 to .75% higher than a 30 year, you'll only be saving around $300 a month while taking almost twice as long to pay off and hardly chipping away at the principle the first 25-30 years

In order to make homes cheaper you are going to have to go after mom and pop investors in rental property who contrary to popular belief own the vast majority of single family homes for rent, not corporations like Blackrock who represent a tiny fraction of single family home investment property. Lowering interest rates will just bring property values up again and increase inflation. Briefly lowering capital gains tax will loosen up inventory and bring down home prices in the short term if your goal is to make homes more affordable

But a 50 year mortgage is just crazy talk

Https://na.rdcpix.com/35b957f6db77f4fc77fe48d83d46e196w-c1865865799srd-w925_q80.avif

[Real Men Wear Green]

Trump didn't think of this he's just the salesman. He isn't sitting at a computer working out compound interest math problems to figure out how a garbage man can buy a house.
offer poor dumb people a way to hand even more of their money over to rich people isn't an unfortunate side-effect, it would be the point.

[highwhey]

https://na.rdcpix.com/35b957f6db77f4fc77fe48d83d46e196w-c1865865799srd-w925_q80.jpg


https://i.pinimg.com/736x/aa/87/b0/aa87b0bf465e4fc5f34857ab8153a1a2.jpg

[Axe]

That's even more disturbing when you consider the fact that he may only have a few years left to live due to his old age.

[bladefd]

Moron has no idea what he is saying... "50 YAY!! BIGGER NUMBER THAN FDR!!!"

Savvy businessman, my ass. He doesn't understand finance 101.

If someone took a 50yr loan at 30, they would likely be dead before they finished paying off the loan lol. What happens then? The bank takes over the house? Do NOT take out a 50yr loan. Ever. You're better off renting if you don't have enough income for a 30yr loan. Even 30yr loans aren't great tbh.

[Off the Court]

You know it's a horrible idea when the elite Trump cucks of this forum aren't even defending it.

[Yes or No]

There are multiple factors at play but the root issue of housing affordability is currency devaluation. Wages do increase alongside said currency devaluation but they seldom keep up. Demand for hard assets outpaces new inventory thus driving the prices up more and more.

I am not a fan of big government but the best result might come from limiting the number of homes someone can own when it's not their primary residence. I am unsure.

[Off the Court]

There are multiple factors at play but the root issue of housing affordability is currency devaluation. Wages do increase alongside said currency devaluation but they seldom keep up. Demand for hard assets outpaces new inventory thus driving the prices up more and more.

I am not a fan of big government but the best result might come from limiting the number of homes someone can own when it's not their primary residence. I am unsure.

It's inflation coupled with the boom of work-at-home. People no longer need to move (sell their home). So the supply of available homes is low because a large percentage of the working population simply do not need to move any more.

[Hey Yo]

So Americans will soon have no choice? It's do the 50yr or no loan for you??

Where are you guys seeing that?

[ShawkFactory]

So Americans will soon have no choice? It's do the 50yr or no loan for you??

Where are you guys seeing that?

This isn't the issue anyone is taking. While this potentially addresses more lower income people being able to afford housing on a month-to-month basis, it doesn't at all address the actual issue: housing prices themselves. More people in the market with less monthly burden could actually exacerbate this problem.

[Hey Yo]

This isn't the issue anyone is taking. While this potentially addresses more lower income people being able to afford housing on a month-to-month basis, it doesn't at all address the actual issue: housing prices themselves. More people in the market with less monthly burden could actually exacerbate this problem.

The reactions in this thread read as if there will be no choice.

It's the same faux outrage that most provide with a lot of things that revolve around Trump. Nobody's claiming it's a great, stop end plan. Hell, it's something that was merely suggested... not even close to becoming a thing. It may never come to fruition and people would've been getting their balls in an uproar over nothing.

SSDD

[crosstin]

I am not a fan of big government but the best result might come from limiting the number of homes someone can own when it's not their primary residence. I am unsure.

You're absolutely right. Younger people have given up dreaming of owning a home because they simply aren't affordable any more, compared to renting. It used to be the opposite. Renting was cheaper, or at worst, about the same as renting. Then again the average age of a single family home purchaser was 37 in 2000. In 2025 it's 56. That's nuts considering 25 years isn't a long time for such a rapid transition to take place.

Owning multiple single family homes is now a huge thing. Some of these people rely on it as a primary source of income. But to most it's just investment and passive income to those that are already mostly financially set. And it's not the big corporations buying up most of these homes even though that's what make headlines. Corporations own less than 2.5% of SFHs, the rest of the 27% investor owned single family homes in America are just regular people. Corporations are also selling more homes than they are buying right now too so they aren't biggest problem.

If the government wanted to make homes more affordable they'd add special taxes(slowly over a great span of time)to people who own more than 2 homes and rent them out. If they offered brief capital gains tax relief that would also shake loose a bunch of inventory, especially from those locked in with super low interest rates. That alone would have an immediate and huge impact on home affordability. But it goes against the free market and would infuriate hundreds of thousands of mom and pop investors. It's also uncertain how big of an impact millions of people losing equity in their homes would affect the economy.

Or maybe the best solution is to just sit and wait for home affordability goes through an organic correction. Boomers hold most of the private real estate in America and they will start to die off in droves within 5-10 years. Maybe that alone will help home affordability.

[Off the Court]

Yes when most American Home owners are ready for an upgrade, they no longer want to sell their starter home, they want to keep it and rent it out. And I do not blame them, you own the value of the home itself that will always rise in the long term (maybe not short term) and then constant passive income. There is real work involved there though.

Also when some are looking to upgrade their home, they now hand their starter home off to their children instead of putting it on the market.



The one thing that can (and will) alleviate it all is the large rise in new homes and apartments being built. The supply will eventually catch up.

[ZenMaster]

Terrible suggestion to just keep the ponzi going, I hope no one ever takes a 50 year loan.

Fixing housing prices has become close to impossible in many western countries, it's very unfortunate.

[ShawkFactory]

The reactions in this thread read as if there will be no choice.

It's the same faux outrage that most provide with a lot of things that revolve around Trump. Nobody's claiming it's a great, stop end plan. Hell, it's something that was merely suggested... not even close to becoming a thing. It may never come to fruition and people would've been getting their balls in an uproar over nothing.

SSDD

HE posited this idea on Twitter putting himself next to FDR by coming up with this plan. No, it probably won't happen, but he put it out there and so scrutinizing accordingly is completely fair game.

[diamenz]

https://i.ibb.co/b5n3HNhX/Untitled.jpg

[Bill Gates]

I applaud MTG for her ability to go against MAGA, however if you have lived in your home for over 5 years, $500k of the sale is federally tax exempt. What she is talking about basically already exists.

[Bill Gates]

Should be noted that 15 year car loans are being proposed, since car prices are also way up there. Which is a horrid idea considering it is questionable that a car can even last 15 years.

[Real Men Wear Green]

MTG talking more and more like a liberal. I wonder if she would turn Democrat after 2 hours of introspective thought.

[Bill Gates]

The entire problem with the housing market is just a capitalism thing. It is a very simple issue of supply and demand. Low supply/high demand = high prices.

A REAL solution? The Gov should flat out give people financial help when buying a home based on their own personal income. A family of 4 making $80k a year total? That family needs real help, not work around help and tax deducations. They need actual money.

[ArbitraryWater]

This isn't the issue anyone is taking. While this potentially addresses more lower income people being able to afford housing on a month-to-month basis, it doesn't at all address the actual issue: housing prices themselves. More people in the market with less monthly burden could actually exacerbate this problem.

Bingo.

[ArbitraryWater]

The entire problem with the housing market is just a capitalism thing. It is a very simple issue of supply and demand. Low supply/high demand = high prices.

A REAL solution? The Gov should flat out give people financial help when buying a home based on their own personal income. A family of 4 making $80k a year total? That family needs real help, not work around help and tax deducations. They need actual money.

Since they cant just print extra money, where would you spend less?

The industry that does the most when cut is immigration

[Bill Gates]

Since they cant just print extra money, where would you spend less?

The industry that does the most when cut is immigration
Ideally it wouldn't come from printing up extra because that is inflationary. Ideally it would come from the tax dollars of the wealthy.

Healthcare needs the exact same help, it is becoming unafforable to the middle and lower classes.

Our tax dollars are much better off serving our own citizens in this way than building more stealth bombers.

[Baller234]

Wow you would think Trump is forcing people to take a 50 year loan with a gun to their head.

It's just another option. I have news for you, most buyers are going to consider this if it comes to fruition. The average person is only going to own their home for about 10-13 years before selling or moving. The length of the loan never mattered.

Every single person who purchases a property in current year will be in the green 10-13 years if they hold onto it. Yes they will be paying a lot of interest in the beginning, but who cares, they're also paying some principle. At least they're building equity. Beats paying a landlord.

The housing market is stagnant right now. This is just a means to get more people into the game. Does it address the root cause? No. Will it help some people? Probably. Like I said I bet you plenty of people will be tempted by the lower payment. This may give the market a mini jolt.

Anyone campaigning against this like it's the worst thing in the world is angling or it's because they hate Donald Trump. This would be a totally optional choice and it will result in more people being able to own a home. Obviously other things need to be addressed as well, but this might be something they could do to boost things in the short term.

I'm seriously struggling to even think of the downside. If you don't want to take out a 50 year mortgage, don't. Newsflash, at one point 30 year mortgages were seen as predatory. Then it became the new norm.

[ShawkFactory]

Wow you would think Trump is forcing people to take a 50 year loan with a gun to their head.

It's just another option. I have news for you, most buyers are going to consider this if it comes to fruition. The average person is only going to own their home for about 10-13 years before selling or moving. The length of the loan never mattered.

Every single person who purchases a property in current year will be in the green 10-13 years if they hold onto it. Yes they will be paying a lot of interest in the beginning, but who cares, they're also paying some principle. At least they're building equity. Beats paying a landlord.

The housing market is stagnant right now. This is just a means to get more people into the game. Does it address the root cause? No. Will it help some people? Probably. Like I said I bet you plenty of people will be tempted by the lower payment. This may give the market a mini jolt.

Anyone campaigning against this like it's the worst thing in the world is angling or it's because they hate Donald Trump. This would be a totally optional choice and it will result in more people being able to own a home. Obviously other things need to be addressed as well, but this might be something they could do to boost things in the short term.

I'm seriously struggling to even think of the downside. If you don't want to take out a 50 year mortgage, don't. Newsflash, at one point 30 year mortgages were seen as predatory. Then it became the new norm.

Did you even read the thread? :lol

[Baller234]

Did you even read the thread? :lol

I'm referring to MTG types, acting like it's some crime against humanity.

"In debt forever! In debt for life!" Her own words. She's trying to scare people. Nobody owns their home for 50 years anymore. It's just a means to help more people get in the door.

The price of real estate has nothing to do with asset managers and companies buying up homes. That's like a micropoint decimal fraction of homes. For MTG to even put that out there and campaign on that is laughable. "I'm fighting Blackrock!" Lol sure.

This 50 year mortgage thing is just an alternative for home buyers.

[Axe]

You're absolutely right. Younger people have given up dreaming of owning a home because they simply aren't affordable any more, compared to renting. It used to be the opposite. Renting was cheaper, or at worst, about the same as renting. Then again the average age of a single family home purchaser was 37 in 2000. In 2025 it's 56. That's nuts considering 25 years isn't a long time for such a rapid transition to take place.

Owning multiple single family homes is now a huge thing. Some of these people rely on it as a primary source of income. But to most it's just investment and passive income to those that are already mostly financially set. And it's not the big corporations buying up most of these homes even though that's what make headlines. Corporations own less than 2.5% of SFHs, the rest of the 27% investor owned single family homes in America are just regular people. Corporations are also selling more homes than they are buying right now too so they aren't biggest problem.

If the government wanted to make homes more affordable they'd add special taxes(slowly over a great span of time)to people who own more than 2 homes and rent them out. If they offered brief capital gains tax relief that would also shake loose a bunch of inventory, especially from those locked in with super low interest rates. That alone would have an immediate and huge impact on home affordability. But it goes against the free market and would infuriate hundreds of thousands of mom and pop investors. It's also uncertain how big of an impact millions of people losing equity in their homes would affect the economy.

Or maybe the best solution is to just sit and wait for home affordability goes through an organic correction. Boomers hold most of the private real estate in America and they will start to die off in droves within 5-10 years. Maybe that alone will help home affordability.
I'm sure lots of folks nowadays wish they could be 'expats' at a young age.

[ShawkFactory]

I'm referring to MTG types, acting like it's some crime against humanity.

"In debt forever! In debt for life!" Her own words. She's trying to scare people. Nobody owns their home for 50 years anymore. It's just a means to help more people get in the door.

The price of real estate has nothing to do with asset managers and companies buying up homes. That's like a micropoint decimal fraction of homes. For MTG to even put that out there and campaign on that is laughable. "I'm fighting Blackrock!" Lol sure.

This 50 year mortgage thing is just an alternative for home buyers.

You are the first person to mention MTG.

[Baller234]

You are the first person to mention MTG.

Uhh..

Did you miss the first post at the top of this page? The one with the huge screenshot?

Lol literally 3 posters on this page were talking about MTG.

[Hey Yo]

Uhh..

Did you miss the first post at the top of this page? The one with the huge screenshot?

Lol literally 3 posters on this page were talking about MTG.

:oldlol:

[diamenz]

Terrible suggestion to just keep the ponzi going, I hope no one ever takes a 50 year loan.

Fixing housing prices has become close to impossible in many western countries, it's very unfortunate.

you buy a home that's fifty years old and by the time it's paid off it's a hundred. unfortunate no doubt.

[Baller234]

:oldlol:

"Did you read the thread?..."

- guy who didn't read the thread.

:oldlol:

[crosstin]

A REAL solution? The Gov should flat out give people financial help when buying a home based on their own personal income. A family of 4 making $80k a year total? That family needs real help, not work around help and tax deducations. They need actual money.

I have my doubts on this working unless the government is going to be making the payments too. We already went through something similar in the early 2000s where anyone that wanted a house could get one. It obviously ended horribly. If the government starts helping people get into a house, it will only increase demand and higher home prices. The government will have to be making people's payments as well. The only way to make homes more affordable is to reduce demand and increase supply. You can either do something about investors or like another poster stated build a sheetload of houses. Our population is stagnating and boomers are dying off so it will eventually correct but for anyone without a good income, or the ability to save, looking to buy in next 10 years then you're probably screwed.

[Baller234]

I have my doubts on this working unless the government is going to be making the payments too. We already went through something similar in the early 2000s where anyone that wanted a house could get one. It obviously ended horribly. If the government starts helping people get into a house, it will only increase demand and higher home prices. The government will have to be making people's payments as well. The only way to make homes more affordable is to reduce demand and increase supply. You can either do something about investors or like another poster stated build a sheetload of houses. Our population is stagnating and boomers are dying off so it will eventually correct but for anyone without a good income, or the ability to save, looking to buy in next 10 years then you're probably screwed.

That was totally different. Those were option ARM mortgages. When the housing market cratered the interest rates shot up and those people were under water.

These are fixed rate mortgages. You'll still need the same qualifications as before. It's just about lowering the monthly.

[crosstin]

That was totally different. Those were option ARM mortgages. When the housing market cratered the interest rates shot up and those people were under water.

These are fixed rate mortgages. You'll still need the same qualifications as before. It's just about lowering the monthly.

Correct but that was only part of the problem. The other half of the problem was stated income loans. Banks were literally "correcting" people when they said how much money they made.

"You need to make $5000 a month to afford this home. How much money do you make?"
"uhmm around $3000 a month" "
"I don't think I heard you right. You need to make $5000 a month to afford this home. So how much do you make a month?"
"Oh! $5000 a month!"
"Perfect. Sign here"

In 2006 nearly 40% of loans were stated income loans

In order for a healthy home market to succeed, you need to bring home prices down to the buyer. Not the buyer up to the current home prices (by whatever means).

[rmt]

This is the same concept as a 7 year auto loan EXCEPT on an APPRECIATING (house) instead of DEPRECIATING (car) asset - BIG difference. With this $38 trillion debt, the government will have no choice but to print more money and inflate away the dollar. This is explained in The Great Melt Up (below - episodes 1-4) where only REAL assets (including real estate) will keep up.

This is what Trump does - throw ideas out there. His most stupid one was getting rid of the filibuster :-(


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NYZRRyuXvk

[ShawkFactory]

Uhh..

Did you miss the first post at the top of this page? The one with the huge screenshot?

Lol literally 3 posters on this page were talking about MTG.

Yea fair. I didn't pay attention to the screenshot, only what people were actually saying in here. Oh well.

As for the topic though, you're starting to sound a little more like a liberal here too though. Give people options to buy a home regardless of what it does to the market. This is kind of just kicking the buck down the road.

And hey...maybe that's just how things work in this type of economic environment. Things inevitably will spiral out of control and you have to continuously put band aids on it to make it manageable for people day-to-day. Not really opposed to that and if we're too far gone already (which let's be real..we probably are) then fvck it.

[highwhey]

This is the same concept as a 7 year auto loan EXCEPT on an APPRECIATING (house) instead of DEPRECIATING (car) asset - BIG difference. With this $38 trillion debt, the government will have no choice but to print more money and inflate away the dollar. This is explained in The Great Melt Up (below - episodes 1-4) where only REAL assets (including real estate) will keep up.

This is what Trump does - throw ideas out there. His most stupid one was getting rid of the filibuster :-(


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NYZRRyuXvk

oh man i don't even know where to start

[rmt]

oh man i don't even know where to start

Since we're not mind readers, maybe you can just STATE what you think.

When we bought our home in the early 90s, it was under $200k - now it's over 4 times that. Inflation has not been that high over that time period, and the country's debt then was nowhere near what it is now. Meaning more inflation/rise of asset price and less dollar value in the future. I imagine a 50 year mortgage will only magnify/inflate the value of a house.

What needs to be tied to inflation is the $250k tax exemption that one can claim on selling primary residence - that is static and its value erodes with time.

[highwhey]

Since we're not mind readers, maybe you can just STATE what you think.

When we bought our home in the early 90s, it was under $200k - now it's over 4 times that. Inflation has not been that high over that time period, and the country's debt then was nowhere near what it is now. Meaning more inflation/rise of asset price and less dollar value in the future. I imagine a 50 year mortgage will only magnify/inflate the value of a house.

What needs to be tied to inflation is the $250k tax exemption that one can claim on selling primary residence - that is static and its value erodes with time.

again, i don't even know where to start

[ZenMaster]

you buy a home that's fifty years old and by the time it's paid off it's a hundred. unfortunate no doubt.

Does have some applications though, like if you've just accepted that you won't be able to get into the market on a 30 year, then you can take this and still get benefits when prices rise that you wouldn't renting. You can also better yourself while having the relative lower monthly expense so you can make more later and pay off the mortgage much quicker. Also, even though it does suck how much more expensive it'll get over 50 years compared to 30, but you can set up the next generation of your family into a much better situation inheriting a house that's mostly paid off.


The entire problem with the housing market is just a capitalism thing. It is a very simple issue of supply and demand. Low supply/high demand = high prices.

A REAL solution? The Gov should flat out give people financial help when buying a home based on their own personal income. A family of 4 making $80k a year total? That family needs real help, not work around help and tax deducations. They need actual money.

A problem across most of the western world is that housing is now seen as an investment that you expect to rise while you have ownership. All politicians of the countries own and many have entities supporting them who also benefits from housing rising, so any plans to build higher, taking airnbnbs off the market, force empty offices into apartments, it's all not in their own interest to get it done.

[Baller234]

Does have some applications though, like if you've just accepted that you won't be able to get into the market on a 30 year, then you can take this and still get benefits when prices rise that you wouldn't renting. You can also better yourself while having the relative lower monthly expense so you can make more later and pay off the mortgage much quicker. Also, even though it does suck how much more expensive it'll get over 50 years compared to 30, but you can set up the next generation of your family into a much better situation inheriting a house that's mostly paid off.



A problem across most of the western world is that housing is now seen as an investment that you expect to rise while you have ownership. All politicians of the countries own and many have entities supporting them who also benefits from housing rising, so any plans to build higher, taking airnbnbs off the market, force empty offices into apartments, it's all not in their own interest to get it done.

NOW see an investment? Real estate?

Real estate has always been seen as an investment.

[TeflonDonTrump]

Moron has no idea what he is saying... "50 YAY!! BIGGER NUMBER THAN FDR!!!"

Savvy businessman, my ass. He doesn't understand finance 101.

If someone took a 50yr loan at 30, they would likely be dead before they finished paying off the loan lol. What happens then? The bank takes over the house? Do NOT take out a 50yr loan. Ever. You're better off renting if you don't have enough income for a 30yr loan. Even 30yr loans aren't great tbh.


Savvy business men know if you can lock in a rate of 2.3% for a home, which millions did in 2018, you would wish the loan is 1000 years long clown

[Baller234]

Savvy business men know if you can lock in a rate of 2.3% for a home, which millions did in 2018, you would wish the loan is 1000 years long clown

Blade is a fukking retard.

"If someone took a 50yr loan at 30, they would likely be dead before they finished paying off the loan lol. What happens then? The bank takes over the house?"

No you moron, the owner's estate does. By the time that person dies, hopefully in their old age, that same property will be worth exponentially more. Whoever inherits the property can either:

- Live there and keep making payments
- Live there and refinance
- Rent the house to tenants and turn it into a monthly income
- Sell the property, pay back the bank in full, and walk away with hundreds of thousands in profit.

The bank doesn't take over the property unless there's a failure to pay.

Imagine making fun of other people for being financially illiterate, and then in the next breath try to make the case that renting is better than owning a home and taking on a 30 year mortgage. Which is basically the standard length mortgage for most home buyers.

[Bill Gates]

Savvy business men know if you can lock in a rate of 2.3% for a home, which millions did in 2018, you would wish the loan is 1000 years long clown

This is false. Do you know what amortization is?

[Baller234]

This is false. Do you know what amortization is?

You're an idiot.

If a bank is lending you money at 2% then you absolutely, positively want to borrow as much money as you possibly can during that time. You should be taking on MULTIPLE mortgages if you can and buying as many properties as humanly possible.

[rmt]

Short of increasing the housing supply, lowering the monthly payment is a way of getting more people into homes. The point is that because of our $38 trillion debt, the government will have no choice but to inflate the US dollar. So 30-40-50 years into the loan, your (fixed) mortgage payment will be peanuts (you are repaying the loan with CHEAPER dollars). The alternative of renting benefits the landlord - not the tenant as landlord has a FIXED mortgage and increases the rent to cover property taxes and insurance.

Of course, lowering the barrier will allow more people to qualify and drive up demand. Really the solution is to build more houses but that's on the local government regulations, environmental crazies protesting, selfish surrounding owners voting to restrict more building, etc.

[Bill Gates]

You're an idiot.

If a bank is lending you money at 2% then you absolutely, positively want to borrow as much money as you possibly can during that time. You should be taking on MULTIPLE mortgages if you can and buying as many properties as humanly possible.

He was talking about the length of the loan. You wouldn't want a 1,000 year loan at any interst rate. The first like 100 years would be mostly just interest payments that the appreciation couldn't make up for. Not for decades anyway.

[TeflonDonTrump]

He was talking about the length of the loan. You wouldn't want a 1,000 year loan at any interst rate. The first like 100 years would be mostly just interest payments that the appreciation couldn't make up for. Not for decades anyway.

Why wouldn't you want a 1000 year loan at 2.3% interest when you can get returns of 5% elsewhere. Do you even know what you are talking about? I would never pay off any loan for perpetuity if its at 2.3% when s&p gives out 5

I'll gladly pay any interest at 2.3% if i can get 5% elsewhere.

[Bill Gates]

Why wouldn't you want a 1000 year loan at 2.3% interest when you can get returns of 5% elsewhere. Do you even know what you are talking about? I would never pay off any loan for perpetuity if its at 2.3% when s&p gives out 5

I'll gladly pay any interest at 2.3% if i can get 5% elsewhere.

You were talking about a 1,000-year home mortgage at 2.3% not a straight cash loan. We are talking about Americans getting into homes right? I was already being generous with the 2.3% part given that interest rates are no where near that today anyway so it's pointless.

[bladefd]

He was talking about the length of the loan. You wouldn't want a 1,000 year loan at any interst rate. The first like 100 years would be mostly just interest payments that the appreciation couldn't make up for. Not for decades anyway.

You are right on the money. Interest must be paid first before you ever dent the principal. On a 1000-year loan, the interest would be outrageous. Even a 50yr loan, the interest would take a couple of decades to pay off before you even start paying back the principal on the loan.

The only scenario it would be worth it is if you take the loan and do extra principal payments annually to get the interest down. You would need extra capital for that.

[TeflonDonTrump]

You were talking about a 1,000-year home mortgage at 2.3% not a straight cash loan. We are talking about Americans getting into homes right? I was already being generous with the 2.3% part given that interest rates are no where near that today anyway so it's pointless.

Even if its a 1000 year mortgage i wouldn't pay it off. Any money i earn i can use it to invest in something else. Just different money goes elsewhere. You really aren't that smart huh.

[ZenMaster]

NOW see an investment? Real estate?

Real estate has always been seen as an investment.

Sure, but more so today where people expect higher returns and are much more likely to own a second home they rent out as a generating asset.

[Baller234]

Sure, but more so today where people expect higher returns and are much more likely to own a second home they rent out as a generating asset.

I don't think the average person was as savvy back then, nor do I think they were thinking along those lines. People spent money differently back then. They were more frugal. The average family didn't even look to own more than one car, let alone more than one house.

But even still, it's not real estate investors driving up the price of homes. There's no reason to go after real estate investors.

[crosstin]

But even still, it's not real estate investors driving up the price of homes. There's no reason to go after real estate investors.

I'm not saying that the government should go after investors but how can you say investors don't drive up prices? There's no way you can justify that statement when investors target low price homes and 27% of all homes under 450k sold this year (and at least 26% every year since 2021) were sold to investors. Even worse. If you live outside California, NY, Texas or Florida, most of the investor homes purchased in your state were by out of state investors.

[Off the Court]

Even if its a 1000 year mortgage i wouldn't pay it off. Any money i earn i can use it to invest in something else. Just different money goes elsewhere. You really aren't that smart huh.

:facepalm


Gazillion year loans exist today. It's called "renting" :roll:

[ShawkFactory]

You're an idiot.

If a bank is lending you money at 2% then you absolutely, positively want to borrow as much money as you possibly can during that time. You should be taking on MULTIPLE mortgages if you can and buying as many properties as humanly possible.

Herein lies the problem. While this is a smart individual investment in times like these, it's horrible for the market in the long run. I don't know how you stop this other than barring individuals from purchasing a certain number of properties. Don't know what that would look like though.

[Baller234]

Herein lies the problem. While this is a smart individual investment in times like these, it's horrible for the market in the long run. I don't know how you stop this other than barring individuals from purchasing a certain number of properties. Don't know what that would look like though.

How is more people being able to purchase homes a bad thing? When the cost of money is cheap, that's a great thing for home buyers.

Both investors and end users.

[ShawkFactory]

How is more people being able to purchase homes a bad thing? When the cost of money is cheap, that's a great thing for home buyers.

Both investors and end users.

I was referencing your comment about individuals buying as many homes as possible when rates are low.

It’s basic supply and demand dude. Yes it’s great for investors but it’s horrible for future buyers because it will inevitably sky-rocket the prices.

A 1300 square foot condo now costs more than a 5000 square foot home with a basement did 30 years ago. Younger generations are screwed.

[Baller234]

I was referencing your comment about individuals buying as many homes as possible when rates are low.

It’s basic supply and demand dude. Yes it’s great for investors but it’s horrible for future buyers because it will inevitably sky-rocket the prices.

First of all there's nothing stopping a homeowner from also becoming an investor. When money is cheap, buying a second property is still a smart move even if you already own a home. Also, homes are turned over all the time from end to user to investor and then back to end user. A lot of those investors are going to sell eventually, especially if there is strong demand and they can get out at a great price.

People need homes to rent too, not just buy. Investors in the market have their place so long as the number of investors doesn't outweigh the number of end users, and that's never going to happen.


A 1300 square foot condo now costs more than a 5000 square foot home with a basement did 30 years ago. Younger generations are screwed.

So then unless we do something about:

- Inventory
- Blocking international money

You should want interest rates to come down and the price of money to be as cheap as possible.

[ShawkFactory]

When money is cheap, buying a second property is still a smart move even if you already own a home.

I've never argued against this. In fact, I think I've gone out of my way to acknowledge that yes, it is a smart move for an individual.


Investors in the market have their place so long as the number of investors doesn't outweigh the number of end users, and that's never going to happen.

Of course that's never going to happen, but it doesn't matter. If you have 10 people and 10 homes, then a reasonable market with reign. However, if one of those 10 is wealthier and decides to buy 2 of those homes then that will put pressure on the other 9 fighting for 8 places. And prices of all of them will increase.

I don't know if there is a fix because even if you increase inventory there is only a finite amount of desirable space to live. Infinitely increasing supply is not feasible.

[crosstin]

Of course that's never going to happen, but it doesn't matter. If you have 10 people and 10 homes, then a reasonable market with reign. However, if one of those 10 is wealthier and decides to buy 2 of those homes then that will put pressure on the other 9 fighting for 8 places. And prices of all of them will increase.

I don't know if there is a fix because even if you increase inventory there is only a finite amount of desirable space to live. Infinitely increasing supply is not feasible.

Well it hasn't been going on long enough for you to say "never". Investors holding on to single family homes to rent out en masse is a relatively new phenomenon. Up until the mid 2000s that number never reached over 10%. And those that did mainly concentrated on urban and vacation areas. Now they are buying everywhere in the US, urban, suburbs, and rural. As long as they can make a buck. Of course house flippers have been going on forever, but not 20-30% of homes held on to for rentals.

[rmt]

Supply affected by technology - more national/international buyers, airbnb, zillow, realtor.com - available to all.

[Lakers Legend#32]

I consider Trump dumb as sh!t.

The only thing dumber is his cult members.