Where did the idea that owning a home was part of the American Dream? It’s a myth. It always has been. During the bubble, when prices were skyrocketing, homeowners were in heaven. When the bubble popped, many of the same homeowners are in the lower rings of hell. They’re not really homeowners anymore. In fact, they never were. They were, and still are, in debt to the banks that own the mortgages. And many of them own more than their homes are worth. This is the American Dream?
The mainstream financial media have finally caught on to the myth of home ownership. The Wall Street Journal ran an article entitled, “Home Ownership in the U.S.: Rethinking Big Part of the American Dream.”1
The author, David Wessell, states, “It’s time to have a serious conversation about the American approach to home ownership and mortgages. A system once celebrated for putting so many families into their own homes and for making mortgages so widely available has become, as one housing economist puts it, ‘a case study in failure.’” Failure is the operative word.
As usual, the federal government has its grubby paws all over this. From 1918 on up, presidents have been harping on the benefits of home ownership as a ticket to the vaunted “middle class”. “Herbert Hoover, Franklin Roosevelt, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush all talked as if owning a home was the only way to join the middle class. Not only did it promote social stability—recall Mr. Bush’s ‘ownership society’—and build well-maintained neighborhoods, home ownership became a hedge against inflation and a way to save for retirement. Until it didn’t.”
Ah yes, until it didn’t! Here are some of the myths:
Home prices always go up, until they fall.
A home is an investment. No, it’s a liability. It’s not an investment unless you are renting it out for income, or you are selling it at a profit.
You build equity in your home. Only if prices keep going up and you stay in your home long enough to make a sizable dent in your mortgage. And it’s still just a paper profit.
The government exacerbated the problem by creating the 15- and 30-year fixed rate mortgage. Before that, most mortgages were only 3-5 years with a balloon payment. In the 70s, the government began encouraging, or better yet, forcing, banks to lend to minorities. This led to the creation of subprime mortgages. During the Federal Reserve-induced boom, anyone with a pulse could get a sub-prime mortgage, driving housing prices through the proverbial roof. Millions of people who could not afford a home, bought one. Now they are stuck in an upside-down mortgage, or are in foreclosure.
I do not advocate owning a home. Millions of people still buy into the myth of ownership. They still think it is an investment. They still think that home prices will go up. They still think they’re building equity. I know too many people who are upside down in their mortgage; people who took our second and third mortgages to build add-ons or buy more stuff; people who bought vacation homes; people in foreclosure. People are frantically trying to refinance to remain in their homes. Banks will try to refinance since they do not want to foreclose and deal with reselling an asset. They only want to deal with debt. Unfortunately, while these people will stay in their McMansions, they will be in debt for the rest of their lives. Then there is the cost of owning a home: mortgage insurance, home owner’s insurance, home owners association fees (if applicable), utilities, maintenance, repairs, property taxes, security, and the list goes on. There’s a reason why Robert Kiyosaki called a home a liability.
Is there a good reason to buy a home? Maybe. But I can’t think of one. I’m not counting buying a home for rental income. That’s different. I’m talking about buying a home to live in. First off, do you want to live in the same home for the next 15-30 years? Can you find a city and neighborhood where you could live for that long? Unless you can pay cash for your house, know that you will be in debt for a good 15-30 years. Forget all about building equity and all that nonsense, do you want to be in debt for up to 30 years? Do you have a 10-20% down payment? Will your income and future income support the mortgage, insurance, maintenance and property taxes?
If all this sounds good to you, then plunk down the cash, sign the mortgage docs and move in! Or, you could just rent the same house! No maintenance, no property taxes, no down payment, no mortgage and freedom to move. But what about building equity? Use the cash you’re saving to invest in other things, like gold and silver!
My two big reasons for never owning a home personally are: I do not want 30 years of debt, and I want the freedom to move without the hassle of selling a home. Renting gives me that freedom. Should a new opportunity present itself, I can move quickly. Right now, I’m starting to look for a house to rent after years of living in apartments. I have nothing against apartment living, I rather like it. However, the city of Burbank is getting ready to pass a smoking ban that would prevent me from smoking my cigars on my patio. Hence, I’m being forced to move to a house. I don’t want to move out of Burbank since my office is here and I walk to work. Everyone has their priorities. What are your priorities? Does home ownership make sense to you? I urge you to consider renting and get out of the perpetual debt trap.
Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.
- http://bit.ly/beU9Ip ↩



