Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Chris E's avatar

I respect your work and your arguments but I propose they are missing a few very key points, both quantitatively and intrinsically. First, from purely an investment standpoint, adjusted for volatility, real estate has been the top performing asset over the long run, even better than equities. Mobility is only one piece of the puzzle and there are intrinsic benefits around familial stability, and family formation, etc. Thirdly, It's a hard asset with (implied) cashflows that move with the price of rents. Fourthly, It's more likely, for those in western economies, that the market prices you out with rent increases than your government steals your home outright or through Fiat, taxation, etc.

Lastly, If you aren't going to own the home you live in (and ignore the tax benefits), you should at least own real estate you can rent out to others. After all, why doesn't the honorable Mr. Mazzone, who I respect greatly, simply rent the land/property from someone else instead of buying the property to build and rent out? The control of the asset is the most valuable piece.

Overall, these benefits outweigh the mobility arguments for most individuals and allow us to directly "hedge" against housing inflation (one of life's biggest risks) at the same time.

Expand full comment
Michael Ginsburg's avatar

If you don't own the home, someone else does.

What happens if that someone doesn't like you any more for whatever reason?

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts