Global Feed Post Login
Replying to Avatar Vitor Pamplona

Many of my friends have been preferring to own an S&P index and rent as opposed to owning a house. I find myself in that understanding as well.

Flimsy US Houses depreciate too much, too fast, and require too much regulatory upkeep (taxes, licenses, reviews, approvals to modify, insurance, not as liquid, etc) to be worth the hassle.

If this is true for the rest of the US, my main concern is decentralization. It doesn't make much sense to have the entire population owning your most valuable 500 companies as their main asset. It's a lot easier to shape/control 500 companies than millions of houses.

But maybe I am overthinking this. Is this a valid concern?

Avatar
⚑ Dee Kay βš‘πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡ͺπŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¨πŸ‡ΏπŸ‡§πŸ‡·πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ή 1y ago

Central European Metropolitan properties bought in early 2000 were a decent investment. Especially at 0.5% fixed mortgages.

Now it's very risky due to changing working patterns but mainly due to inflated money supply.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
⚑ Dee Kay βš‘πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡ͺπŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¨πŸ‡ΏπŸ‡§πŸ‡·πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ή 1y ago

London, Prague, Barcelona, Paris, Budapest, Bucharest just to mention a few.

Brick and mortar with tall ceilings built early 1900 and true properties.

Thread collapsed