Regarding the mortgage, the movement, and the instability of its value I do agree that renting will help you with that. But renting will always cost more than having a house(no mortgage) and paying bills, repairs, maintenance, and anything else. This is due to the landlord having to make you pay more than he has to spend to make it profitable. In practically, if someone is a landlord as their only/main source of income (were talking big firms or rich individuals here not people on retirement or anything) they are spending the tenants money for all repairs maintenance and anything else whilst pocketing the surplus/profit.
Of course, in our current capitalist system buying a house straight up is nigh impossible but most people prefer owning a house and will only say they prefer renting because they don’t have the income to own a house straight up because of the initial cost, even if it’s cheaper long term. Like anything in capitalism, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
If, by inheritance or other means, you get a house, the expenses are naturally somewhat lower than living for rent. But it does not change anything in that I do not see the advantages of owning a house, it only increases your responsibility for the house and takes away your freedom of movement.
I have guaranteed income and enough to be able to get a mortgage, but I prefer not to, with the difference that my bank account is positive, with no mortgage or outstanding credit. Not like a relative of mine who bought a house in the suburbs and did well for a few years, until a railroad track was built in front of his yard. Now he still owes the €200,000 mortgage despite the fact that his house has already completely lost its value and he has to put up with the noise of the train that makes jump the cups in the display case. No thanks.
Regarding the mortgage, the movement, and the instability of its value I do agree that renting will help you with that. But renting will always cost more than having a house(no mortgage) and paying bills, repairs, maintenance, and anything else. This is due to the landlord having to make you pay more than he has to spend to make it profitable. In practically, if someone is a landlord as their only/main source of income (were talking big firms or rich individuals here not people on retirement or anything) they are spending the tenants money for all repairs maintenance and anything else whilst pocketing the surplus/profit.
Of course, in our current capitalist system buying a house straight up is nigh impossible but most people prefer owning a house and will only say they prefer renting because they don’t have the income to own a house straight up because of the initial cost, even if it’s cheaper long term. Like anything in capitalism, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
If, by inheritance or other means, you get a house, the expenses are naturally somewhat lower than living for rent. But it does not change anything in that I do not see the advantages of owning a house, it only increases your responsibility for the house and takes away your freedom of movement. I have guaranteed income and enough to be able to get a mortgage, but I prefer not to, with the difference that my bank account is positive, with no mortgage or outstanding credit. Not like a relative of mine who bought a house in the suburbs and did well for a few years, until a railroad track was built in front of his yard. Now he still owes the €200,000 mortgage despite the fact that his house has already completely lost its value and he has to put up with the noise of the train that makes jump the cups in the display case. No thanks.