English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

My main asset is my income, 75% of which I save every month. My secondary asset is the interest from my savings account. My main liability is my rent. My interest is steadily approaching my rent and will eventually overtake it. So why does everyone recommend that I invest my savings into property, lose my secondary asset and swap my main liability (rent) for an alternative liability (mortgage + interest on mortgage + house maintenance costs). Am I not better off renting and saving? Is this advice all based on the assumption that house prices will continue to rise and the potential returns from property speculation will outpace the increase in the monthly interest I receive from my savings? Or is there something I'm missing which shows that it is fundamentally better to use money to put down a deposit on a mortgage than invest it in a high-interest savings account?

2006-12-23 09:22:08 · 12 answers · asked by Alan L 1 in Business & Finance Investing

12 answers

I think your question, whether you intended or not, is more one of lifestyle than finances. You are doing well it sounds like, so the issue of your overall well-being financially is less of an issue than the effect a change would have on your lifestyle. Renting is well-kept secret as a means of controlling costs in your life. Once you go down the road of home ownership, which if fine, you open yourself up to an entirely new lifestyle and financial responsibility. Inevitably, you will be hit with some huge expenses over time with home ownership, things you can't even foresee, and of course we're talking about things that cost $700 to $10,000. You have to pay for everything, maintenance, insurance, damages, leaking roofs, everything and that can be very expensive along with property tax. With rent, you have a fixed cost and the freedom to manage all your other assets without burden. The question to me is more, do you want to take on the lifestyle of living in and owning a home as opposed to the lifestyle of rented space. Personally, I like renting.

2006-12-24 09:17:48 · answer #1 · answered by The Scorpion 6 · 0 0

Historically, in the very long term, stocks and shares have done better than property, but in the last 15 years or so property has done much better.

I think this is a permanent change and from now on property will keep rising faster than shares, mainly because of immigration.This is hardly mentioned in the media for fear of racist cries, but 1/2 million immigrants are coming in every year and they need some where to live, at any price. House building is only 150, 000 per year.

Unless you are sure your rent cannot go up, you would be well advised to buy the property.

2006-12-28 07:16:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This is a typical British attitude. In Europe many people rent. I've had two mortgages in the past but now I rent. Both times I had to move because of my work, once after one year and once after four. Although I made a profit on both transactions I wouldn't have done had my second move been a year later. With a mortgage you have less readily available capital: it's more difficult to arrange an expensive holiday at short notice.

Nowadays I prefer to invest in the stock market. By comparison property is poor investment as you can't spread the risk. Property prices, like share prices, can go down.

If you're happy renting then there's no need to change. In the second property that I owned, I almost certainly wouldn't have tolerated a particular neighbour for two of those four years had I been renting.

I personally believe that on decisions like this you shouldn't take anyone else's advice but decide for yourself.

2006-12-23 10:02:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

HEY if you are single and you like to travel alot then renting is the way to go.But if you are kind of settled down and you don't do much except work then buy a house and get a mortgage on house and use the interest from all the money you have now to pay mortgage instead of rent.Just because you have enough money to buy a house for cash does not mean you should.Stay liquid and take on the debt and keep your job and keep plowing excess liquidity into your account which will increase interest income.

2006-12-23 11:53:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It is all down to what is termed "gearing" and "the time value of money"
How it works is you put £20,000 down and buy a house (not an investment- a home) which is worth £200,000. You then repay your mortgage over 25 years with money that is worth less and less as inflation gets to work on it. E.G 25 years ago I bought a three bedroomed detached house for £23,000. I've seen similar houses up for sale now at £130K. If I still lived in it I would be living in it free of charge for the rest of my life, you'll be paying rent as long as you live. As it is, I've moved up the housing ladder and now own a house worth £210K which cost me £68K about 12 years ago. The mortgage finished this year and I have asset that with equity release could give me additional income in retirement. You'll have nothing.

2006-12-23 09:42:33 · answer #5 · answered by Mr Politeness 2 · 0 0

Why not have a mortgage paid by your interest and if the property market collapses then you won't lose too much and can get out of it back into renting. At this time it's more or less just as cheap to buy as it is to rent. (depending on where you are of course)

2006-12-23 09:32:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

why not if you want stay in your property that you are in , but invest in a buy to rent,become a landlord buy a property renting out with enough rent to pay the mortgage and maintenance costs and profit, it is a responsibility being a landlord ,however your investment will grow,you will own the property, that you could sell, if needed, but all costs will be covered by your tenants towards the mortgage etc in rental payments .

2006-12-23 09:47:31 · answer #7 · answered by batty 3 · 0 0

it is considered by some that paying rent is giving your money away and with nothing 2 show 4 it. if u paid morgage in place of rent it could be more but at least u have someting 2 show 4 it.
it depends on your age. if u r in your 50s then rent. if u r in your 20s then buy.

2006-12-23 09:40:51 · answer #8 · answered by Great North Run 2 · 0 0

there are times when the housing market makes it more financially reasonable to rent than own....and this might be one of those times depending on where you live.
(think housing bubble)

if, as some assume, housing prices will come tumbling down, then someone who has been renting can take advantage of that opportunity and buy cheap, rather than buying into a bloated market.

2006-12-23 10:40:48 · answer #9 · answered by Sizzle Pizzle 3 · 0 0

Don't forget that the profits from selling your main residence are tax free. You can also rent out one room of your own home for up to £4,000 a year - also tax free. Bit of a no-brainer really.

2006-12-23 09:34:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers