400k house estimated - became a 470k house / an experience report

Would never lease. At most rent one in someone else’s vacation for a week. Yes, it’s also mindset. It’s a matter of the mind. But not only that. It’s also real, existing lifetime achievement. It’s also the good feeling of leaving something to the children that our parents couldn’t, a mark in life that remains, not forever, but for a while. It’s freedom from obligations. Rent and installment, both are obligations; the tenant also possesses the apartment, but it doesn’t belong to him and quickly he gets kicked out. With a loan, the bank is not inherently bad, but it’s not just mindset, it’s also real that the debtor owes them something, is in debt. And if today you build for 600-800 thousand on credit, then 15 years of installments don’t finish it off, it means lifelong debt. Nasty thought. I grew up petite bourgeois, save during the time, so you have in need. Only spend what you have. Having is better than needing. That runs deep. K.

Only give out what you actually have. Having is better than needing. That runs deep. K.

That sits well and can save Schmalhans's ass where Prahlhans is caught by the cuckoo.

That is where society, advertising, and people's stupidity lead us. Comparing ourselves to others and the illusion of being wealthy.
However, spending 50% of the income on the house and also leasing the fancy car, which one simply never owns and only burns money. And for what? To be able to chase the illusion that one has the money and can therefore buy social recognition.
Either you can realistically afford things, or not. With the house, admittedly, it is very difficult and not possible. Because the value potentially increases. Other things like vacations, cars, TVs, etc., I would never finance. You take out money, pay interest, for things that are either worth significantly less afterward or gone altogether. In my opinion, that is simply stupid.

That's where society, advertising, and people's stupidity lead us. The comparison with others and the illusion of being wealthy.

In the past, in 4:3 black-and-white mono, people still understood that television was just television. Today they believe all workers are fashion designers and advertising agency owners, and a hotel with not even twenty rooms supports an entire Denver clan. I'm not sure if "stupidity" isn't already a euphemism of the highest order for that.

The bank has a contract with me and as long as I fulfill my obligation under this contract, the bank owns nothing at all.

I see it the same way. In total (i.e. when I consider my overall assets) I also have no debt, because the loan is backed by a value, namely that of the house*. It is something completely different to take out loans as writes, for pure consumption, in extreme cases even without a related object, world trip, etc. A car, for example, has a value, even though of course it constantly decreases. I have to make sure that I at least pay off the depreciation. If I do that, a loan on such a durable consumer good does not negatively affect my assets. A kitchen is different, it is specially designed and can usually only be flogged off on ebay afterwards... it is durable, but not value-stable. * Exceptions are >=100 financings and areas where it costs more to build the house than it is worth afterwards.

Well, if it is a new car, you have to come up with a 25% down payment to compensate for the depreciation in the first year. The value of the car drops rapidly in the first few years. Additionally, there are usually high costs for inspections and repairs, since one often does not go to the local repair shop to have the new Audi (insert any other brand) serviced. A car is therefore simply consumption. This applies to watches, jewelry, clay pots, stamp collections, Smurf collections, etc.