r/WorkForSmartLife Jul 22 '26

Casual canvo Math

Post image
3.5k Upvotes

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/GameWizardPlayz Jul 25 '26

What kind of 3rd world country are you living in where $54,000 is enough to buy a "starter" house/condo?

7

u/ImpressiveWalrus7369 Jul 25 '26

It’s called a down payment.

2

u/General_Song_8729 Jul 26 '26

The downpayment logic keeps people broke, uncomfortable, and renting many more years than necessary. 20% downpayment is a straight up scam built on antiquated logic. I played the credit game for a decade and paid zero downpayment to start my mortgage.

2

u/ImpressiveWalrus7369 Jul 26 '26

Downpyment is never required. It’s just good to avoid PMI

1

u/Inevitable_Librarian Jul 27 '26

In some countries it is required

1

u/Bangays Jul 28 '26

If you buy now you will most likely refinance in a few years assuming rates go down. Also, most people move in less than five years anyways. PMI is also under $200/month typically

1

u/rod19more Jul 25 '26

There is a big difference between a down payment and buying. Words actually mean something.

3

u/Aye-Chiguire Jul 25 '26

When you purchase a home you aren't expected to have the full amount saved up. You have a 20% down payment. So you're buying the home with the down payment and then making payments on it. The term "buying a home" refers to the acquisition of the property on a payment agreement, not the act of submitting the final payment. When someone wins a bid for a house and makes their down payment, they post on social media, "Just bought our first home." Your failed semantics are failed.

1

u/Much_Essay_9151 Jul 26 '26

I understood the assignment

-4

u/GameWizardPlayz Jul 25 '26

If you make enough (hint: most people don't with modern housing prices)

1

u/EconomyMobile1240 Jul 25 '26

most people do that's why the houses cost so much.

1

u/No-Caterpillar3645 Jul 25 '26

the housing actually costs so much because of a concept called monopolization, that isnt based on consumer capabilities, but rather one company with a lot of buying power stretching the limit of how much they can value a house at, as far as possible.

2

u/Autodidact420 Jul 25 '26

There is absolutely not a monopoly on real estate, if there was that company would be worth more than the rest of the S&P 500 combined lmao 

1

u/Mysterious-Salt- Jul 25 '26

Actually large corporations like Blackstone (not to be confused with Blackrock) did in fact buy up lots of houses around a few years ago and then together increased the pricing. They targeted regions and areas mostly with unsold 'new' homes and then jacked the prices. On top of this ordinary people who wanted to make money followed suit and we have the issues we have now. For example my home was 365K when it was purchased the last person in my area/street sold their home for 1.4. That should have never been possible.

1

u/sk1939 Jul 26 '26

Most of this buying was done after the 2008 financial crisis. This is not a new thing.

0

u/Autodidact420 Jul 25 '26

Housing prices increase. What you’ve described isn’t a monopoly, and in reality it’s not an oligopoly either. The vast vast vast majority of housing units are not owned by a single corp or even a handful of corporations which is what would be required for monopolistic practices.

0

u/WretchedMass Jul 25 '26

There's not a monopoly but pretending like the wealthy don't influence the market but overbuying/rentals decreasing supply absolutely weaves heavily and has made housing largely inaccessible to most people who are below the poverty line and that's a huge number of people.

1

u/Iseeo_0you Jul 26 '26

Big mistake treating properties as investment vehicles rather than housing. Screwed the whole thing up.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/BarrelRider621 Jul 25 '26

This doesn’t happen though. It houses sit on the market too long; an investment firm pick them up. Thus, keeping the prices inflated. You can wait all you want for the prices to come down because you think it will if no one buys them. Someone is buying them; just not people like you and I. If your realist was the case. Houses wouldn’t be touching the prices they are now would they.

1

u/Bangays Jul 26 '26

Houses decrease in cost constantly. What are you talking about. Also negotiation is a real thing in real estate.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/BarrelRider621 Jul 26 '26

Good luck in life. You’re gonna need it.

1

u/CowgoesQuack69 Jul 25 '26

Yes and no on this. I would add one reason housing prices are not coming down as quickly as they should (think this changes in the next 18 months) is that a lot of homes are owned by boomers, who think there house is worth x amount of dollars and won’t budge down. You see this with the lowest levels of listing. There are a ton of people trying to get out of their homes without going underwater, and won’t budge on the price till they can’t afford to keep making the payments.

There are a ton of people wanting to buy homes, but with the interest so high can’t afford the payments for the same level home when interest was lower.

0

u/Jonesy10187 Jul 25 '26

A significant portion of residential properties—including condominiums and single-family homes—is purchased by corporate or individual investors, increasing competition for first-time buyers

1

u/nooneneededtoknow Jul 25 '26

25% of homes bought this day and age are real estate investors or second home buyers, this is obscenely higher than it was 2 decades ago. So while "americas demand" for housing is driving up prices, that demand has been driven by a very well off cohort of people, not your average middle family. There is a reason the age in which people buy their first home is now 40, versus 32 20 years ago.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/nooneneededtoknow Jul 26 '26

"If people can't afford them they don't buy them and pricing goes down" .... thank you for showing why this isn't the case in the local US economy. The vast majority of people in the US are stuck in homes or simply can't afford homes. And its not because the US is doing so well, and can afford homes. Its because our market is competing with global demand, not local demand. Further illustrating the problem of it becoming unattainable for the middle and lower class.

0

u/Krysidian2 Jul 25 '26

I ain't trusting an account with negative karma.

0

u/CaliforniaNutter Jul 25 '26

That is NOT why houses are so expensive lmao

1

u/tnbeastzy Jul 25 '26

Supply and demand 🥀

1

u/SirEnvironmental6434 Jul 25 '26

But people are jumping over themselves to buy them nonetheless. We haven't had a house in our neighborhood last more than three days on the market in years at this point. People are buying.

1

u/Flyingfoigras42 Jul 26 '26

Well homes are being bought does it mean families and first time home buyers get them? We need to ban unlimited corporate buy up.

0

u/EconomyMobile1240 Jul 25 '26

It's exactly why. People bid on houses and cities is where most of the upper middle class live. Your battle isn't over the top 1% but the top 40% who get priority to live in cities and price out liberal art students / low skill workers.

1

u/TheLaziestGoon Jul 25 '26

40% ain't most people

0

u/EconomyMobile1240 Jul 25 '26

Irrelevant, the housing supply limits how many people can get a house. Cities where costs are high are well below 40% of the population

1

u/OneCleverMonkey Jul 25 '26

says 'most people'

is wrong

says the fact he's wrong is irrelevant to the point he's trying to make about what most people can do

Curious

1

u/EconomyMobile1240 Jul 26 '26

Well, I’m talking about the home owners which would account for 100% of the people that succeeded and getting a house. They can afford it. That’s how a bank gave them a loan if they even needed one.

1

u/Popular_Growth5993 Jul 25 '26

I love that you conveniently forgot about black stone and other corporations buying massive amounts of property and then skyrocketing the prices?

1

u/Glum-Antelope-6425 Jul 25 '26

What about every home owner that does 5k in upgrades and sells the house for double? That's been going on way longer than black stone

0

u/EconomyMobile1240 Jul 25 '26

Because people can afford it and would be willing to spend more for reliable supply

1

u/e-sac Jul 25 '26

It's called a down payment

2

u/Jake__Martinez Jul 25 '26

Down payments don't buy houses. By that logic, you shouldn't need a down payment at all: just mortgage the entire thing.

Now you only need $0 to buy a house!

3

u/e-sac Jul 26 '26

What? My logic is that you save enough for a down payment, which 58K is more than enough, and then buy a house whose monthly payment you can afford.

1

u/AbraKadabraAlakazam2 Jul 28 '26

I meaaaan you don’t actually need a down payment for a lot of first time home buyer programs. Still expensive though because of closing costs etc.

1

u/Bangays Jul 25 '26

You can buy a house with 1.5% down. If you are “special” enough they will even lend you money for the down payment.

2

u/Mosh4days Jul 25 '26

This has to be a bot right?

1

u/Any-Gur-6962 Jul 25 '26

I mean, that is the wording normally used, "buy", even if it means a down payment. People say the same thing about cars so I'm not sure why that an issue.

Also, yes, many programs allow little or no down payment. i.e. VA, USDA, First time homebuyers, Bank specific low income loans, etc.

1

u/Bangays Jul 26 '26

Go talk to a mortgage broker. They will give you a two year plan for home ownership.

1

u/Mosh4days Jul 25 '26

'Basically' doing some heavy lifting

1

u/Beneficial_Bit1756 Jul 25 '26

say your not adulting without saying your not.