Sure. How about that Santa Cruz example the guy gave at the second page? Going off of those numbers, a $589,000 house in a similar area (which is a BS comparison to begin with, it should really be the exact same area, but nevermind that). Plugging that into a simple mortgage calculator brings up the sum of $3,437.24 per…
Well a real example would be more convincing. here's a house in santa cruz for rent: http://sfbay.craigslist.org/scz/apa/2385688890.html here's a house nearby for sale: http://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Cruz/420-Western-Dr-95060/home/2129860 nearly a 1000 more per month for the rental depending on size of deposit and interest…
This info graphic makes several classic mistakes: 1) it compares the cost of renting an apartment to the cost of buying a house. I have pets, other people have kids. Where does the pool go? how can you work on your custom hotrod in an apartment? what if you're into chainsaw sculpture? 2) a lot of the costs listed are…
Yeah, I'm not trying to establish some hard rule. For sure that Santa Cruz example seems way out of whack. Why would anyone rent it at that price if buying is actually cheaper? Makes no sense to me. But the other way around isn't really a hard rule either. That renting is throwing your money away. It all depends on the…
I know what you're getting at here, but that's not really correct. I'll use an example here. Right now, I could probably get a very nice home for $125k. 5 years from now, it's probably going to be worth $150k-$175k, depending on how this market turns around. That's $25k-$50k more than what I paid for it. That's above what…
Yeah, they're made up. But they're to illustrate the point that the monthly cost of owning a house will always be higher than the monthly cost of renting. But man, if you can find a place somewhere where it's the other way around, where it's more expensive to rent than it is to buy, then for sure get that on the spot. 100%…