this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2025
93 points (98.9% liked)
Personal Finance
4935 readers
1 users here now
Learn about budgeting, saving, getting out of debt, credit, investing, and retirement planning. Join our community, read the PF Wiki, and get on top of your finances!
Note: This community is not region centric, so if you are posting anything specific to a certain region, kindly specify that in the title (something like [USA], [EU], [AUS] etc.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
More that I'm reproducing convincing evidence in a form that I understand and that I think I can communicate effectively in a comment.
My point is that you don't need to own a house to retire or be successful financially. Your choice of rent vs buy is far less important than other decisions you could make. "Throwing money away" on rent or mortgage interest is missing the mark, and both are symptoms of not understanding finances.
I also didn't list home insurance or taxes, which in my area comes to ~$4k/year (and we're on the lower end). That's enough to cover the moving expenses if you pay someone to move you every 2-3 years. However, I've also known people who stayed in the same apartment for over a decade.
I tried to account for the biggest factors and keep things simple to prove the point that it's closer than most probably assume.
I thought they were pretty reasonable. This article cites 3-5% for home appreciation, and this article cites over 10% for the State&Pepper 500 since 1957 and just shy of 10% going back to 1928. My numbers don't account for inflation, which is why I added inflation to rent.