Investing in both real estate and stocks can be prudent choices, particularly when backed by a robust trading strategy that can navigate you through prosperous periods.

You're not doing anything wrong; the problem is that you don't have the knowledge needed to succeed in a challenging market. Only highly qualified professionals who had to experience the 2008 financial crisis could hope to earn a high salary in these challenging conditions.

@@parrish8386 Could you kindly elaborate on the advisor's background and qualifications?

I won't pretend to know everything, though. Her name is Melissa Rose Francks but I won't say anything more. Most likely, you can find her basic information online; you are welcome to do further study.

Thanks, I just googled her and I'm really impressed with her credentials. I reached out to her since I need all the assistance I can get.

Durin's Bane not in school apparently

@@louisdrouard9211 Seriously? Why did they regret it?

That is socially unacceptable to say that in North America. Like saying you wish you never had kids. There are definitely those out there.

@@00dfm00 Maybe if you bite off more than you can chew (i.e. take on the biggest, most expensive house you can), then I can understand such regrets. but if you Don't live beyond your means, and can make ends meet each month, surely buying a property is better than borrowing one (why throw £1200 away in rent each month when you could be buying a house for the same money? One brick at a time.

@@louisdrouard9211 did they live beyond their means? Where I live, monthly rent prices and mortgage repayments are more or less the same. In fact, sometimes it's cheaper to have a mortgage (e.g. a property that costs £1200 a month in rent might only cost you £1000 in mortgage payments if you were buying it instead). I've literally just experienced this now. My wife and I were eligible for a mortgage about 30k more than the property we went with (but we didn't want to be struggling to make ends meet each month, so we opted for a cheaper property). Before this, we'd spent time looking at rent prices - for similar properties (size, location, number or rooms, etc.) landlords were asking for more rent than the banks were asking for in monthly mortgage payments. Imagine you have a property worth 250k, and the rent and mortgage payments are exactly the same each month, I just don't see how paying 400k over 30 years for a property is beneficial as rent, when you could spend 400k over 30 years as a mortgage and actually end up owning it. It depends on many factors (lifestyle, age, etc.) Obviously someone with a mortgage is somewhat 'trapped' (e.g. they can't just 'give a month's notice' and ride off into the sunset), but at the same time, they can put some roots down and get comfortable knowing that noone can evict them.

The idea of "Home ownership" is what banks are building their campaign upon.

Also a desire to be a part of your community for the long term and not just a transient employee.

Putting 90% of your savings in 1 single asset is not exactly stable.

majority of people in Switzerland , big cities in china rent are you saying they don't have a healthy desire to have a stable or predictable living situation.

@@victoneter don't forget that it's an asset which appreciates in value

This video sponsored by bankers

>The economist >understand

The government subsidized and pretty much mandated those loans.

@@iamhardwell2844 Because bankers don't get rich of mortgages🙄😅

An'anaviy Bank tizimi ribo ustiga qurilgan shu uchun Islomiy bank tizimida bunday bemazagarchilik ta'qiqlangan

And so can subprime mortgage lending.

....and security ; when you know you won’t randomly have x days to move out because the landlords are moving in.

u r so right brother

It looks like Mobile RV and Van living on a mass scale might be a future trend.

Fernando Landaverde i have always said this...i dont get it

... who wanted to buy a house

Which president encouraged everybody to own a home...

Which banks created 0% down. What policy back up mortgage insurance.

It was also caused by idiots bidding up the price so high the price tripled in 15 years, while wages were flat.

@@donm2067 Hey, hey, hey! This is the tone police and you're under arrest. 👮‍♂️🚨

If you are new to the market, I recommend seeking professional assistance. The most effective approach to creating a well-organized portfolio is to begin with a professional who is knowledgeable about the turbulent yet profitable market.

Over the past three years, I have been working with a professional who has provided daily guidance on my investment decisions. With their expert analysis, I have realized gains of over $1 million. Their insights have helped me avoid losses and capitalize on market breakthroughs, particularly during downtrends.

@@MarkFreeman-xi3rk How can I contact your Asset-coach as my portfolio is dwindling?

Can't divulge much, it's only right you do your due diligence. I'm been guided by “Margaret Johnson Arndt” and most likely, the internet is where to find her deets.

Thank you for this tip. It was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her résumé.

Did they paid it off right away at the start, or does it goes over a loan?? Let me make it clear: till the rest of the loan isnt paid back- it cant be called theirs. This is the illusion or some sort of impostor syndrome.

@@mikahist4155 incorrect

@@mikahist4155 its the most easy and logical way to secure retirement... keep renting forever, rent prices rise with inflation and as a retired person your income wont rise with inflation.. it can be troublesome. sorry for bad english":)

if interest rates start shooting up it wont be long before you will

i regret it‼️

Exactly. Plus a house can last multiple generations if everything goes well.

If you start investing since your 20s, you'll end up with much more by your 60s. That's why entrepreneurs are less likely to buy houses early on.

john tenorio buy a house early, save&invest while paying off the mortgage, then invest more once the mortgage is paid off. For those buying a home in there 40s-50s, it's a much bigger gamble.

@@lefthanded5473 Save and invest early and buy a house when you can afford it. Lending money was the root of the crisis.

You are ignoring the simpme fact houses cost money to own, overall renting and owning cost the same.

How landlords want to keep poor people fool

Landlords are thieving domestic Terrorist parasites.

or "You will own nothing and you will be happy"

that's correct

they did mention that in the video. but again this is a failure of policy in many countries who leave the elderly on their own without adequate supports.

For 2023, it’s hard to nail down specific predictions for the housing market is because it’s not yet clear how quickly or how much the Federal Reserve can bring down inflation and borrowing costs without tanking buyer demand for everything from cars to homes.

Interest rate is currently at 4.75%(8th rate hike since March last year) Inflation at 7% and mortgage rates is at over 7.5% but yet minimum wage remains the same and my retirement portfolio has suffered tremendously these past years, so my question is how do senior citizens retire and live off such unstable economy. The long term game is obviously not for me at this point.

On the contrary, even if you’re not skilled, it is still possible to hire one. I am a project manager and my personal portfolio of approximately $350k took a big hit in April due to the crash. I quickly got in touch with a financial-planner that devised a defensive strategy to protect and profit from my portfolio this red season. I’ve made over $650k since then.

@@joshbarney114 I will be happy getting assistance and glad to get the help of one, but just how can one spot a reputable one?

@@sophia253 My advisor is “Colleen Janie Towe” is a highly respected financial consultant in the industry. For further information or to connect with her, a simple online search with her name will suffice. I wish you every success in your endeavors

Right! They didn't mention this option.

If you take the money you would have saved for a down payment and invested it into the stock market, you wouldn’t have nothing to show for it. In some situations buying may be better value, but if you are disciplined renting can be just as viable if not better for building generational wealth.

@Richard Jackman and you say that as home prices are starting to fall due to rising interest rates. This is cherrypicking. (Note: All of this short term stuff is irrelevant if you are in a financial position where you don't have to sell your house or your stocks and can hold for the long term.) As for the veracity of kashmoney's statement, I haven't seen anything to suggest that the risk adjusted returns of the real estate sector are higher than other sectors, but ordinary people can dial up the risk and expected returns in real estate with leverage (e.g. a mortgage) in a way that they couldn't elsewhere.

@Richard Jackman You've only established that 11 months is the timeframe YOU care about (the previous poster said nothing about 11 months and his statement, made during a bear market, suggests a longer term outlook). If 11 months is your investment horizon, you should not be putting the money in a house or stocks. It is common sense. A more fair assessment is that VTI (a US total market cap weighted index fund) has had an average 7.5% annual growth since inception, meaning that it is a viable way to gain wealth. In other words, the poster wasn't entirely wrong. The second thing is that, you intentionally seem to be ignoring what rising interest rates will do to some of the more overvalued property markets (this is already visible in some of the more overvalued US and Canadian markets).

Remember: the Economist is not a journal made for the working class interests, it's made to spread the ruling class ideology, be careful when watching their videos!

im a landlord and i highly approves this.

@@nzmak3220 exactly - only landlord should own homes- multiple homes :)

💯💯💯

London has a ridiculous housing price.

@@oliverm1255 unintended consequences - how's London's rent prices compare? if you raise taxes on home owners (the landlord) do you really think the landlord doesn't raise the rent to pay for it?

Exactly.

Oliver Walker and the government bailed out banks and industries before because of the “too go to fail” so it signalled banks could be reckless because Uncle Tom would there to bail them out of any issue.

The problem isn't home ownership per se, but politicians _listening_ to home owners. This is an almost unavoidable democratic problem: the eligible votes to whatever city council you want to stand for is inevitably going to be home owners, while the beneficiaries of development projects are largely the people who don't (yet) live there and don't (yet) have a vote. This creates immense pressure towards being overly restrictive. Short term the home owners win, long term everyone loses. Singapore is actually the exception that proves the rule: it's both rich and has a high home ownership rate, but it's also a draconian one party state with leaders who have much less need to pander to the rabble.

Buying more than what they could chew...

@@theadam7598 - the Government is us. WE collectively bailed out the banks.

But imagine if rentals are dirt cheap. You wont have problem securing a place to stay.

@@tohneyteoh But rentals aren't dirt cheap, rents have been going up by a lot.

@@tohneyteoh find sompelace wich your rent take less than 15% of your monthly budget In american city it’s impossible

@@tohneyteoh You are right. Most Anglo-saxon countries believe that homeownership is inherently safe, whereas rentals are not. However, the advantage of homeownership over rental lies in policies that only reinforce the "benefits" of owning while further discouraging renting. Tenure neutrality should be the norm, what is currently needed is more policies ensuring stable and affordable rentals in order to balance the benefits from both tenure forms. Rising costs are not only driven by supply, but also by demand, which is itself artificially reinforced by homeownership-driven policies.

@@jdenino6022 because you retards keep banning affordable housing developments from being built...

next video, why working 12 hours a day would make your life better....

they state that buying bring more problems than renting, then they talk about the crisis in 2008. as if people buying homes was the cause of it but not the banks and the financial market taking too high risks for the sake of biggest interest.

Yes, thank you. Seems like a massive ad to create a renter's market.

True! Totally biased

did you actually watch the entire video?

Clearly a bias in the Economist's argument. The landlord class would be very happy if working people never own their home. Rent seeking has always been a hallmark of the ruling classes.

Unregulated? Right wing gov? No rent cap? Not enough social housing - creating demand?

Which part do you disagree with

Not if they have loads of money. If they don't, and they're responsible citizens, then they kind of are.

Sounds to me like you just have poor tenant protection laws over there? I live in Germany and I can do whatever I like to my flat, I've never been "inspected", it's recently renovated and a decent location, and my landlord can't increase my rent unless they make some improvement to the building that I materially benefit from.

You have to get a financial-advisor/broker to aid you diversify your portfolios to include commodities, inflation-indexed bonds and stocks of companies with solid cash flows, as opposed to growth stocks where valuations were based on future potential earnings.

I agree, my proffit have been quite consistent, regardless of market situation, I got in early 2019 and the constant downtrends and losses discouraged me so I sold off, got back in Dec 2020 this time with guidance from a portfolio-adviser. I found her on a CNBC interview where she was featured and reached out to her afterwards. long story short, its been two years now and I’ve gained over $85ok following guidance from my inveestment adviser.

@@wiebeplatt4749 Please can you leave the info of your invstment analyst here? I overheard someone talking about how a couple made $200k during this red season. I need such luck lol

@@marianparker7502 CORINNE CECILIA HEANEY is the analyst/brokerage-adviser. She has been of great help and her tutelage has brought me to a higher understanding of profit generation. You can look up her name on the net for her page and reach out. Understands the job perfectly.

@@wiebeplatt4749 This recommendation literally came at the right time, I dipped by $11k in stocks last week alone. Its crazy! I just looked up CORINNE CECILIA HEANEY online and researched her accreditation. She seem very proficient & I wrote her detailing my Fin-market goals . Information they say, is power. Thanks for this.

@Georgina Louis please who is the expert guiding you? i have lost so much as a beginner investing into stock without a proper guidiance of an expert.

@Georgina Louis This is useful information; I copied her whole name and pasted it into my browser; her website appeared immediately, and her qualifications are excellent; thank you for sharing.

This is a terrible documentary, they are conflating too many imponderables and forming grandiose conclusions.

Yeah because the financial industry wants you to view your home as an investment so that they can extract more and more money out of you.

Exactly, wealthy people invest in real estate to make more money, meanwhile people who actually need places to live can't afford them.

Thats true. They must blame speculators and not home ownership. Greediness can ruin everything.

Man you nailed it 👊 the funny thing is people are STILL asking silly questions like "why the prices of homes are going up?"

You gave her stability probably because you make more money, not because you owned a home. If you want an asset that accumulates value over time that you can later sell, you could invest the money you would have spent on mortgage payments and a down payment and put it in the stock market. Edit: Buying homes is just a way to make people invest in an asset without really thinking about it, when you could just as easily invest in the stock market. Home ownership just increases home prices infinitely for younger people. Maybe you dont understand because you might live in an area where housing is reasonable, but many places are turning slowly into the third world because they are too expensive and people are just living to bay Bill's and nothing else.

@@HelloFriendComTech Sure. There are risks with every investment vehicle (stocks included). If all else fails at least I d still have a roof over my head.

@@mollyb7722 You have a roof over your head that you have to pay mortgage, interest, repairs, property taxes etc. If you think you actually own anything then stop paying taxes on your home and we'll see how long they let you stay there, the point is, homes are going up faster then wages can keep up and in some places the average home is over 1 million. In the long term, on a country wide scale, home ownership is a bad investment. Also, stocks arent really much of a risk atall if you invest over the long term and have a diversified portfolio.

@@mollyb7722 Also, let's say you have 100,000 to put down on a home at 26, if you put that in the stock market and got an average rate of return of 7%, then by the time you reach retirement at age 66, you would have nearly 1.5 million in the bank and better yet, if everyone did this, house prices would not go up so much and your kids would have affordable housing aswell.

@@mollyb7722 Lastly, vehicles are considered liabilities, not assets, because they lose value over time.

It's up to 60% of your net income in Israel. Outrageous.

And obsession with homeownership causes that because homeowners are more likely to lodge protests against new construction and development that would help reduce rents by offering more supply.

Henry George entered the chat

​@@NAUM1Any new supply should be reserved for first-time buyers and not landlords. Why rent when the home can be yours...

It is true that when you buy a home with a mortgage, you will eventually pay off the loan over time and own the property outright. This is not the case when you rent a property, as you are simply paying to use the property for a set period of time, typically on a month-to-month basis. However, when you buy a home, you are responsible for the costs of maintaining and repairing the property, as well as property taxes, insurance, and other expenses. These costs can be significant, and they can add up over time. Additionally, owning a home can be risky in the sense that you are more exposed to fluctuations in the housing market and interest rates. If the value of your home decreases or interest rates rise significantly, you may find yourself in a difficult financial situation. Renting, on the other hand, can offer more flexibility and lower upfront costs. When you rent a property, you typically only need to pay a security deposit and first month's rent, whereas buying a home requires a down payment and closing costs. Renting also allows you to move more easily if your circumstances change, such as if you need to relocate for work or if you experience a change in your financial situation. In summary, while it is true that owning a home allows you to eventually own the property outright, it is important to consider the costs and risks associated with homeownership as well as the benefits and drawbacks of renting. The decision to rent or buy a home ultimately depends on your individual financial situation and lifestyle preferences.

Still have taxes and insurance. For me this is the equivalent to 5 months of my last rental. My furnace going out covers the rest of the year

@@joyaustin6581 lots of other costs but atleast no mortgage

My home is paid for when you add my real estate taxes and house insurance they amount to less than 200 a month where can you rent for that? Even when you factor in a new roof a new Heating & Air conditioning unit I'm still ahead compared to rent

Your property tax is more than my rent. You lose.

@@joyaustin6581 And your rent would have to cover for that as well and still make profit for the landlord.

I think it costs more to own. Being a landlord and an owner I have a perspective on both balance sheets and in the longer term it's surprising how equal they are. I'm a lucky sod, I know, but made loads of sacrifices when I was younger and for example even now do not take 'holidays' as I enjoy building maintenance. Avoiding children and divorce were other massive cost saving measures. Owning does give you more security and power over your own destiny which for me is the decider.

So true it’s a asset that if your even semi intelligent about how you buy and where you buy it you can sell it for as much if not more than the however much you originally bought it for

But they did mention that owners do not sell as much as is needed. I know so many people, including my parents who've been living in the same property for as long as I've known them. My grandparents have been living in their home for more than sixty years and it's become worth so much more now (even adjusted to inflation). But they're not selling it because they're living comfortably so why would they?

Do the math or review previously done calculations when he says is equal that is exactly what I means. The reasoning is behind home buyers tend to by more than they rent. One rent $1000 then buy for 1500 a month. In the long run is the same.

With mortgage, you know what you owe each year. With rent, you have no idea what you have to pay the next year, next year, and next year... In my last rent, my rent increased $600 per month in 2 years.

Did you watch the video? House prices in Swiss have only risen 70% to Britain's 340%. I'm sure it's still expensive but it's clearly not like in other countries.

Switzerland is the example they always go to. It's how they sold Brexit to the masses. That we would somehow be the next Switzerland... Don't fall for it people. The Economist clearly has a specific agenda serving very specific interests...

Did you watch the end, UK government subsidies it's homeowners on a massive scale driving up house prices. Also it could be measured in local currency, so divide by 6 conservatively. that currency really got handed down. Switzerland is one of the few countries that tax imputed rent, taking away one of the tax cuts home owners get in other countries. Further, pension funds invest heavily into the housing market, for better or worse, but definitely outcompeting homeowners. As a Swiss living in the UK i can tell the reason why you'd want to buy in London is because as a tenant you have zero rights and every other apartment is mouldy, wet and cold. Students are not accepted, pets are not allowed, minimum contract duration of 2+ years, basement apartments, it's a bedroom if it fits a bed etc etc. There are laws against this exploitative behaviour in Switzerland.

Just because you think it doesn't mean it's true. Back it up with data.

@@LRF49 child

@@Woke-CardBoard Wokoso

@@LRF49 okay child

@@Woke-CardBoard Okay wokoso

The Great Reset propaganda machine begins

Not it's quite true. Yes the Banks were highly responsible for the predatory leading practices. But if it wasn't with the cultural obsession with ownership, and be open to being preyed on. There would have been no prey for banks to make mortgage profits.

@@ottottotto980 If the government and federal bank didnt bail out or insure the banks making high risk payments then the equation is pure profits regardless of the outcome.. If it fails, the government outs in the difference, bank takes the property and sell it again.. If it succeeds you pocket the profits.. If the government stops insuring these high risks individuals then the bank wouldnt have loaned these people in the first place

Exactly

After 20yr of payments you own your home but your always going to have to pay property taxes

It’s because these films are made by idiots who, by their own wrong choices, never bought a house so they feel a bit better about themselves

20 year old house is not that valuable, especially when you account for all the maintenance money and time. When you rent, you pay a little extra for freedom. Some people dont really care for their freedom, and are happy to imprison themselves for 20 years just to save some thousand bucks.

Gonzalo not to mention how you can make money off of your home now before selling through Airbnb or house hacking. It’s not even close when you factor that in that buying is better

It took you 15 years to work that out

Right

Atleast you could travel the world. That's the best thing about rent

REITs absentee landlords should be banned, prohibited, forced to divest. And no one apartment or housing rental company should ever exceed 10% of the market share in a 100 mile area. They've bid up the prices as investors with low interest rates seek a return, they piled in to REIT's which are forced due to their prospectus to buy up real-estate, they can't sit on the cash. And they do it sloppy paying well above asking prices to close deals, even accidentally entering bidding wars with their own agents in their own fund... cartoony idiocy.

That’s what’s happens when you the government put more investment incentive on housing market over the stock.

Thank you. I'm trying to buy a house gave up and looked for rentals and saw hundreds of starter houses for rent. I'm priced out, inflated prices. It's not an asset it's a necessity, they should buy luxury houses but not starter homes.

Ann Otter if investors that buy foreclosures and renovate them wouldn’t increase those barriers because They are still pricing out a lot of people. There are no true “starter homes”

it is not the Banks or investors destroying the entry level housing market - it is the intentional Government / RBNZ policy to print digital money continually that dilutes buying power of the existing M3 money supply in circulation - do the math! homeowners and investors are simply hedging their savings as sanctioned and fostered by Government policy. it is a store of asset buying power. refused to buy shares after the '87 crash, i will never forget the look of my Accountancy tutors face as she walked into the lecture theatre on black tuesday , i bought property instead and never looked back - a humble 90 m2 house i bought in Berhampore for 25K in 1989 sold for $1.05 M - so again - do the math

Cause the critics just went right into the comment section and forgot to go back up and hit the dislike after they post their comments lol

London has a ridiculous housing price.

@@zheli655 biased

Liking a video like this doesn't necessarily mean you agree with the conclusions but rather that you are interested in the content and would like the youtube algo to serve you more such content

Negative people talk more than others and insist that everyone listen to their moaning.

But your children still need to pay taxes ;(

Property taxes would like to have a word with you.

@@rock3tcatU233 Still way way cheaper than renting all your life ✌️

​@@ssruiimxwaeeayezbbttirvorg9372 Assuming 1% property tax, inheriting a $1,500,000 home would run you $15,000 annually in tax or $1,250/month which is what many suites are renting for in large cities right now. $1,250 a month for what could be a small mansion? Sure, I'll take it.

No property taxes in the UK, just “council tax” that the occupant of a property pays, whether they own or rent. About £130/month for an average house.

Exactly what I’m thinking!

Second this! So many parallels are made with such a level of generalization that at the end nothing is relevantly argued. It’s sad to say it out loud, but this video is clearly made with an agenda in mind.

Why would they ruin their point?

homeowner?

That's journalism in the 21st century. Journalism isn't journalism anymore. They're all extremely biased documentarians.

That is perfectly fine. The problem is not that people are allowed to own homes if they choose. The problem is government subsidies for homeownership over renting and restrictions on building more housing that raise the value of existing homes, benefiting established homeowners and hurting everyone else.

im a landlord and i highly recommend this video.. hahahahaaa

@@nzmak3220 Funny.

I don't. I sold my flat in March and am now renting. Much less hassle and I'm paying less than I was due to not needing buildings insurance, no repair bills, the same monthly payment as my mortgage was and no factor bills. The stress of selling was an absolute nightmare and I didn't even technically make a profit. Never again.

@@pnklady3788 where I live, rent is higher than mortgage payments. A 2 bedroom apartment is now $1500 with no utilities included. A mortgage is 500-$1000 a month and you need to pay utilities. Every year the cost of rentals goes up, but income does not increase. Cost of living keeps increasing as well. It's like renters here are doomed to fail if they get sick, loose a job or face some sort of emergency.

I rent and have no serious aspirations of owning a home.

Nope, penniless journalists with agenda's that don't involve home ownership for them - or for you for that matter.

More a less. Coservative journalist appointed by their chief that at the same time was ordered by an average european conservative with a wealthy position that surely owns his own house.

@@jipm92 This is a left leaning outlet and continuously pushes contented oriented around globalism and neoliberalism.

Who are the real landlords?

I live in Australia in the house that my husband has owned since Dec 1994. As the main breadwinner he has gone through periods of unemployment. As he had the mortgage already long paid off by the time we married eighteen years ago he was not the least bit concerned. Certainly not concerned enough to move the family away from my part time job, our daughters school, my mother, our friends, and our support networks. So no matter what home ownership might do to an economy, it would seem to be in the best interests of individual families. We sure ain't rushing to sell to join the renters. No thanks.

Respect for your compassion, with your siblings. And the late you will own nothing and be happy song just went down the toilet 😅🤣😚

Where are your children

Under your house? Like a Mole?

Technically all the "houses" in Singapore are more like Condos, so even if you look at from a Government sponsored condo perspective you still arise at something completely different than the random neighborhood models of other cities.

To be honest you can argue that the US government subsidizes the housing market too. There's a ton of insurance and government intervention in the mortgage market on behalf of the borrowers.

Didn’t the dyson guy lose money buying a fancy place in Singapore?

Lol, prove what? Singapoure it's a city, not a big country with hundreds cities and thousands villages, just try to explain me (i am from Russia) how goverment controls will work well in such big country like US)

In Singapore all public housing (and a big percentage of private condos) are leaseholds. The state owns the public housing (and the land of leasehold condos) and citizens buy a lease for 99 years (if new) or whatever is left (if second hand). Reason being is that land is scarce and need to be redistributed again. However no one knows for sure what will happen when the lease expire. Officially it's taken back by the state, what social issues that will create and what the solution will be we will see when starts happening in a few decades

I hope everything is going well economically for you:-)

Thank you for raising this

So where do you live whilst waiting in the queue?

You need to understand that if you own a property in switzerland, following is important to take into account: Anyone who owns residential property must pay tax on its imputed rental value as fictitious income at the federal and cantonal level. (mas) The imputed rental values ​​may not be less than 60% of the average market rent at the cantonal level and not less than 70% at the federal level. This might be an explanation, why the rate of ownership is that low.

@@francozipperling29 wow, thank you that does explain a lot! Is that charge incurred monthly for the duration of ownership?

Have you tried to rent in Swiss? A million rules and red tape, comparing to "I make my own rules" when you are in your own house 🏠. Video does not address that at all.

@@vaz3301 there's a limit to that too with zoning, property tax, HOA and permits needed to make changes.

Leerill Same in USA. I lived in the mid Atlantic region near NYC. So housing was built in tightly packed groupings to maximize land use I moved to a low cost southern state where land is abundant. Individually built homes here do have large lots and in some cases acres to build on. But all the planned developments no matter how big the land it’s built on are very much like your description of the London market. Beautiful homes packed tightly together to maximize the developers profits.

i would never ever buy a new build. there thrown up and as you say basically treated like a commodity.

Same in almost every big city in Asia - Bangkok, Singapore, Hong Kong...

Glad you could money off your loved ones. So touching.

🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂 what work.

The obsession with home ownership did ruin the economy. It was called the 2008 recession and there’s been almost no wage growth since then while the cost of living has risen and has thus lead to a rise in populism, Trump and Brexit. The cause was banks predatory lending and cultural pressure to own homes. That is disgraceful yes. This video is is anything but.

moodswings, bravo, you've summed it up!

you mean govt?

@@rajanrangarajan8401 No. The ruling oligarchies.

It's the future of the world Neo feudalism, you don't own anything and everything it's subscription based, it's everywhere from spotify to the whole issue with right to repair.

I was recently looking for somewhere to rent in London and happened across this new build to rent phenomenon. One of the companies that seems to have literally bought up half of London, gutted it and maximised the number of little boxes it can legitimately rent out actually said on their prospectus that they were providing a solution to millennials unable to get on the housing ladder...now you can rent one of their shoeboxes for a minimum of £1500 pcm for life and when I say shoeboxes I’m talking studio apartments, you want a 1 bed...you’re looking at £2000pcm! Our lives are going to turn into an endless reel of renting and subscriptions if we dont do anything!

And the powerful will call it "A sharing economy" ;)

And how clean and specious was the apartment.com0are that to carp in London.

exactly, check out Munich in comparison, very low ownership, prices have gone up almost exponentially. Renters are exploited all the time in Germany *and* ownership has gotten very expensive as well

ilovecomputers amen to that! If western governments increased protections the housing crisis wouldn’t be as awful as it is now.

Same in Netherlands. Rent capping too. Not that a black market doesn’t exist.

Throwaway Alex - in some parts of Europe it does.

Because that's not entirely what happened. There was predatory lending practices that treated homes like slot machines. When the economy crashed and those variable interest rates went up....

And selling people on buying a house more expensive than they could afford when a lesser house could have been managed.

Nonsense, in case you didn't know, banks want to make money. Why would they lend to people who couldn't afford? They were encourage by the federal reserve via low interest rates and subsides, and lower standards encouraged by the government. In a free market, these loans wouldn't have been made.

@@tessbennett3796 smart people should and did get fixed rate loans

@@Tony-hx2fj I mainly agree with that but banks are not the victim here. They started playing with subprime loans and derivatives and then got burned. It wasn't poor people who caused the '08 crash.

That is undeniably true. Except you don't own your house with a mortgage, bank does. And you do not retain the ultimate rights over it - the bank does.

@@rogerdinhelm4671 fair point - down with all that nonsense too, of course.

Why would it bring more security in old age? Because you can sell it for money? My grandma owns her home and she is too old and disinterested in selling and making money. There is no difference for her if she would have been renting or owning now. Her money is locked in her home. She doesn't use money anyway. If she was renting she would be secure too. Can't be kicked out, not in my country Sweden anyway

There are better ways for a society to provide for the aged than destabilizing the real estate market through misguided housing subsidies.

@@testtestsson4927 when you old can't make money or something happened, you know you own the roof on your head. You can sell it, or you can give it to your children. Houses and lands are the most valuable inheritance in my country.

Its macroeconomic in perspective not micro

Definitely

A home is a liability

@@ada-boyYou must be reading Rich Dad Poor Dad. Homes can be both assets and liabilities. But at the end of the day, I'd rather own a home because in most cases, one can recoup equity upon the sale.

@ Denis Piliaev - agreed - I had enough of this nonsense after 8 minutes - deeply flawed analysis based on selective data - I could go on but I have better things to do.

No, ofcourse not. Lets pay property tax after retirement, this is entirely different thing!

Where is your evidence? Feelings are not facts

@@plerpplerp5599 take it easy mate,comment section isn't hard talk.

@@plerpplerp5599 calm down kiddo, we're not trying to burst your sheltered bubble of being spoon feed information from very select sources only that feed a specific bias

Plerp Plerp Calm down bro!!!!!!!! Why are you getting so worked up and angry????

Lol was thinking the same thing watching this "Don't buy houses plebs leave ownership to your elite"

Yes but if something like a water heater goes you won’t have to come up with $1000 on the spot.

@@danielarcure1290 Landlord can also write off those $1000 water heater replacement on his rental incomes

Multiple independent analyses have found that renting in Australia is currently economically more sound than buying. There are all kinds of hidden and known costs associated with buying, owning and selling property. Rental prices are not set by landlords but by the market. Currently renting is quite affordable in Australia. Buying is not. House prices are overinflated by investors. And inflation is not high enough to help buyers get rid of their debts fast enough to make it worthwhile.

Of course, but you are not directly involved with actually doing the maintenance.

@@mklives2 That's mainly because housing is massively overvalued in Australia and will come crashing down.

Ofcourse you do. 🤣

The Trickle-Up economy in motion!

You are sincere.

Me too.😉

Idk man my family owns a small building at 50% of the revenue is taxed, so after above-par keep-up there is no profits. It is just a store in value; unless you own a fleet of apartments landlords don't make much.

Yep. If inflation were "normal," owning would be an even better deal. By the time my mom's house was nearly paid for, her car note was double her monthly mortgage payment.

Your home has only appreciated in value because there aren't enough homes for people to live in, and this appreciation causes people to prevent homes from being built since it is in their interest. That is what this video is about.

this is a Law problem

@@vasopel No, it's a not owning your home problem.

@@redking8585 ? you do know that you can get kicked out of your own house (in most countries) don't you? if you're in debt the bank (or the state) can confiscate your house and you're out! that also is a law problem...

​@@vasopel Yes, I know. Get your finances in order, and buy something you can afford, pay your mortgage and the chances of that happening are near 0. It's not that difficult do your due diligence.

@@redking8585 you are forgetting: economic recessions, illnesses-accidents, layoffs, floods, tornadoes etc ..

Guy on internet says landlords are conspiring so it must bs true

Wouldn't be surprised at all

Congratulations! It's getting harder for working class to afford buying a home. Rent shot up like crazy. Rich are getting richer and they are buying more homes. I think all because government around the world are printing money.

- in Romania everbody aspires to have a home ( 2, 3 if possible - for the lucky few ). The most aspiring thing - is to what - to have a home. People are literal in distress , like they are missing a limb or something - if they do not achive the "home ownership dream". The population prefer to be poor , and with low salarys but to have a home - that highly paid but in rental situation. Your social standing is related with having a home. If you do not have a home you are deamed to be a "pitiful" person. You are judge'd not by what you are ( as a person ) - but by what you own. 40% of house's are flats/apartaments in citys ( most of them from communist time ) , 50% are rural houses in the countryside ( easter european style , semi-informal build, no-architecture-projects just local builders ). And only 4% can be considerd vilas ( multi story-single-houses ) which are the most opulent living conditions. ( most of them in suburbia , a few inside the citys ). All the buildings are concrete , or modern termo-brick -> so durable materials as houses are inter-generational investements. Apartements & vilas cost around 60k 140k . ( with a median salary of 700 euros per month ) The price of a vila ( in suburbia ) is similar with a price of apartement in city. Cheap land price to invested in more "house" but far from the city vs. normal apartament but close in the city. It as hard to Romanians to own a house as everybody in the known world ( 20 -30 year morgages with the current salarys ) but Romanians are big saver's and are not interested it vacantions , experiences , education - but in having a house. ( they are ok with giving 70% of there income to morgage payment ).

The analysis they did was too superficial. There are so many factors that explain the ownership numbers .

I know a woman who owns (what she said) is a really nice house in Romania, but it sits vacant most of the year because she and her husband rent an apartment in Sausalito, CA. Maybe life is better here in Marin County, so owning a nice house in Romania is not a big deal at all.

yes. i have properties in Phuket and KualaLumpur. poor return if any

@@p.a.ch.3861 they are not _your house_, apparently, just a form of investment.

I saved more when I rented. A home can be a money and property tax pit that makes it harder to move for career advancement.

@@joyaustin6581 The question is, why is it this way? Who has decided that taxation should make home ownership inaccessible even for _career_ workers?

@@olgakuminova homeownership is financial liability. You don’t see the tax portion when you are paying rent. It could be taxes that is increasing the price of rent not a greedy landlord. Remember nightmares are still dreams. When you can’t afford a down payment do you really think some one would be able to afford a new roof, new ac unit or furnace, it drives the economy because plumbers, electricians, carpenters, tree trimmers, lawn service, and handymen are expensive when things go wrong. Don’t have foundation issues, HOA concessions, roof leak, pest problem, flooding basement, fence fall or deck rot. Then you have to take time off work to make sure it’s done properly. I pay 3500 year in taxes and insurance alone. It would be higher if you added mortgage insurance and private mortgage insurance. My rent was closer to $700 a month and most rentals came with a pool, yard and gym I didn’t have to maintain. On paper my home has gone up value but when I sell there are taxes on profit on top of realtors taking 6% of the profits. I enjoy more space, painting walls without permission and no pet restrictions but it’s still overhyped based on my experience.

Agree - this was a very disappointing assessment, would have expected better from the economist

What would be the right arguments?

Didnt mention how renting long term needs to include building up investments for retirement, so as to make up for not owning a property.

@@iPondR if you are able to save money rather than spending it on rent.

@@iPondR that's true, although I think that was the only downside to the video, namely not mentioning the ill effects of renting long term

3x more expensive? That doesn't make sense unless there is some sort of renting bubble going on. People are driven by incentives and such a difference would have driven up the price of housing and therefore mortgage interest to make it more competitive with renting. Maybe site some sources.

americans seem very eager to tell falsehoods about Europe, the level of inacuracy is always quite baffeling. They cherry pick one information about one country and try to convince american people that it's the way to go , hiding other relevent informations, limitations and consequences of each model.

There are enough key details missing in the Swiss/British comparison to make it useless: * the house buyer takes out 2 mortgages, the larger one belongs to the bank, and usually because of a wealth tax, only the low interest is paid back - the house belongs in large part to the lender *this had already driven the price of houses up by the '60s, so the 386% rise over 50 years looks stable - the franc has risen 10 times compared to the pound over the same period *There is a fictive rent which an owner pays as a tax, as a counterbalance for renters.

Earlier it was just Shell companies, Corporations and Realtor Investment trusts buying up real estate , but now even students and people on work permit have been brain washed by our Realtors and are buying multiple properties and renting them out. Reality is that the middle class has been priced out of Canadian Real Estates as now prices are going crazy in small towns too.

You are wrong, ultimate freedom is when you own a set of skills wherever you are you are an valuable asset. That allows you to go and live wherever you want thats freedom. House is like any other thing, it can get flooded one day and then you dont own it. And from freedom it becomes prison as in 1 day you just have lost all your assets.

A desire for home ownership is a measure of a successful country / state / city. If everyone wants to rent in a certain area it's usually because they're hoping to leave as soon as possible. Or because prices are insane.

@@HieronimBuszewski we have our own flat but anyway rent in the other city for career reasons and our own one we give for renting. It's no problem. You can move wherever you want too. But we are not young forever, in my country retired salaries are so small that it's impossible to rent a flat for it.

Then you're a fool

I've been paying rent for 51 years.I don't advise it.

One advantage is if you want to start a business. If you need to borrow money, and most businesses do to start or expand, a bank will want something solid as collateral. They won't be interested in the business, as they fail all the time, so if you're renting your appointment at the bank is going to be a short one.

Great points! I agree about running the numbers on spreadsheet or online calculator and do a modeling exercise.

I pay 230€ a year property tax. So it depends where you live i guess. Home ownership is a no-brainer over here.

@@deaddoll1361 That is an interesting situation to consider, but it fails to recognize a key insight that many other comments have failed to realize. When you rent, you will have the ability to invest in other sources, while when you buy, you're essentially locking yourself-in on investing in the housing market. So if you were to start a business, you would have other assets as a replacement for housing which could be used for collateral.

They're arguing that the NIMBY mentality hurts economic development, which lowers your income, along with weaker renter protections which would allow you to accumulate wealth through income and not through family. If you were to rent and rent stayed roughly the same while your incomes rose then you could put more income into something like a private pension or investments which are can also be inheritance but with a lesser impact on the overall economy. All of these allow for the accumulation of wealth without the harm on future generations with poor families. The biggest factor in determining whether you will be wealthy is whether you were born wealthy- allowing the possibility that these arguably failed policies led to that reduction in social mobility. They looked at single man with no children and decent job in London compared to a four-person family with two incomes in Zurich. That's pretty much a full range of examples. I hope I'm understanding your message correctly but your English is really bad so I'm uncertain if I'm agreeing or disagreeing with you.

True. I think one can add: "People used to live in one town for their whole life." This is not the case anymore.

I don't think your average European peasant accumulated wealth.

Considering how dynamic today's job market is, I wouldn't buy my own house unless I was way older (still questionable), had an amazing gap in the market (deals after bubbles) or had established my own business in a certain place. Having a great source of income is simply much more important nowadays.

Except, we see in ither countries people with families choose to rent. Because it's down to government policies.

This video is obviously sponsored by the bourgeoisie

Long term returns

they. buy. in. cash.

They can diversify and have a lower cost of capital

Real assets are key to a truly diversified portfolio.

Not really, because feudalism was a completely different economic system. Even if 100% of people rented homes in the US, there's still capital ownership by a few, not a tiered system of where you worked.

@@Montfortracing Ehh the end result is the same, i.e all land owned by an elite upper class which definitely wouldn't have to work, and like every monopoly/duopoly/oligarchy they definitely can dictate the terms (especially if you espouse the neo'liberal' ideal that governments should remove themselves entirely from citizens 'economic liberty'), meaning it IS exactly "a tiered system of 'where' (or perhaps 'if') you worked"... Except, no wait, its not the same because in feudal society the nobility atleast in theory had an obligation to protect their peasants..

@LagiNaLangAko23 "Even serfs had their "own" homes that they can build as they like". I'm afraid you are unaware of medieval European serfdom. Many were renters of their feudal lord, who owned the land and estate. Neither could they build "as they like".

With modern renter protections in many places, it's nothing like "serfdom". Your idea of it as such a thing is really mainly emotional.

@@Montfortracing - For many Capitalism is simply a more sophisticated for of feudalism. It is based on the same underlying philosophy - ownership of the essentials in life by the few who can then hold everyone else to ransom for their needs.

exactly

Yes, you should continue to pay rent perpetually. If you buy your own home, boomers cannot generate 5% annual interest on their investment. To them, our generation is merely a cash cow to be drained.

My landlord was a millennial who was bought out by another millennial. Who do you think will inherit the property from the baby boomers? It’s millennials that want to live in hip overpriced areas vs moving to a more affordable area.

As boomers die off you see homes on the market for purchase. Investors will not compete unless they can get a quick positive cash flow. Approached me for selling mine as now condos are selling, the same size as my home for $500,000. Homes in my area are selling for under $200,000.

@@stephenverchinski409 I assumed kids and grandkids would call dibs on baby boomer properties

@Seine O'More I'm aware of that. They didn't indicate that holding the asset, or diminishing payments was factored into the calculation

This is a very hard thing to calculate in general, due to too many variables, Today's interest rates are historically low, which might make owning more economically sound than renting at the moment. But at 5% interest on your mortgage with a house around 500k mark (pretty average for a bigger city in Canada): mortgage interest + property tax + insurance + maintenance costs = rental payments. Whatever you consider an asset value is payed on top, so renter supposed to have this money in his pocket as well. Now if renter can invest this extra money at the same return rate as house appreciation, after 20 years both will end up with the same net worth (dow jones index showed the same 300-400% growth since 1970s). However looking in the future i can't see the housing prices to keep growing at the same rate for the next 50 years. Disposable income (accounted for inflation) stopped growing in 80s. Housing prices did not. There is no money to keep inflating this bubble forever. It burst in 2008 (with help of loose regulations), it will do it again in the future. PS: I'm a condo owner, so i'm not talking out of despair. But besides having a primary residence, i'm (being single) also renting out couple bedrooms for extra income. This double function works rather well for me. For an average family though i would not consider a house a must-have. I even considered buying rental properties in the past, but couldn't come up with a decent enough return model to get into all the hustle, that comes along. Since then i also moved around a bit and realized how much of an anchor a property could become. In general i don't see rental inferior to owning anymore from any perspective, financial including.

@@nefigushki the problem is that most people who rent in places like London do not have spare disposable income to invest. Many people in the 30s have been paying rent all their life and hold no assets and often not much savings (in a better case, while many have credit card debts). They're unable to pay the deposit to even start the mortgage and just keep paying rent without accumulating any assets .

@@arturturkevych3816, This is unrelated problem. People living paycheck to paycheck, have to do with either country's economic output being to low, or wealth distribution being shifted too much, or both. Have nothing to do with owning/renting dilemma. Same people, who can't afford to save while renting, would also be one paycheck away from going bankrupt while having a mortgage.

@@nefigushki With low-interest rates, money is cheap, and everything is expensive. With low-interest rates, you can borrow more and are in competition with people like you that can also borrow more, building competition and inflating the buy prices with little correlation with the actual demand as seen by lower rents increase. If/when interest rates go up, prices will mechanically go down. People say that with low interests it's the perfect time to buy, but taking into consideration the risks and inflated prices, a low-interest environment is the perfect time to sell and diversify. Not to mention illiquidity. Full disclosure, I've sold my fully-owned property and I am now 100% liquid with well-diversified investments that provide me a total return well above the saved rents and increase in value I used to get.

Don't wait until the market skyrocket again then you will start biting your fingers wishing you made the decision to invest.

You can start today regardless of the market, invest and change your future! Investing in the financial market is a grand choice I made.

Investing in crypto now is the best because it will outsmart the banking system in the nearest future serving as a global fiat. Already making over 85% profits from my current investment

@@richardbalint2582 Are you trading on your own?

What strategy do you use please?