Bardamu
2022-12-19 09:11:09
- #1
I can't hear this stupid argument anymore that it's supposedly so much better to go into debt with 400k and build a house and still pay rent in retirement. It's up to everyone how they do it. For the interest I would pay on a loan, we can cover 11 years of cold rent (900)!!! And at the same time still enjoy life somewhat. Inflation is all well and good, but if I have a pile of debt at the bank, the money keeps losing value, and the interest stays the same, am I not better off having no debt? The house doesn't belong to me anyway until 30 years later. Until then, the bank has the house and my interest – worse deal. And for what? So that when I'm old I can say: That belongs to me. Nothing belongs to anyone, I’m just talking about property tax, who decides how and what and where you build? Not the "owner"! And it only takes a change in the law and expropriation is also possible. In WWII, my grandma had war refugees living with her for years. She had to take them in. And when I go to the grave, what have I given up my whole life and paid the banks interest and had sleepless nights for? For passing it on to the ungrateful offspring, if any, who mostly don’t want it anyway because it’s outdated and possibly still in debt? There is no ownership in this case, you enslave yourself and get on a hamster wheel. It baffles me how some people can insist on this so much even though they can’t afford it. It’s almost like idiocy. Life is not just about having and owning.