I have given up buying a house

[The Mint Man]

when I am 65 I will then be able to take out my super and buy a brand new house/unit/retirement village unit etc, that will suit my needs.

yeh... when your 65 you could be 6 feet under too or the money could be used to put you up in a home to be looked after for the rest of your life.
Much rather have access to the profits NOW rather then in 42 years time (for me), who knows what could happen in between now and then. What I do know is that I can do whatever I want at the moment.

 

[nizar]

Had you invested your deposit in shares 3 years ago you'd have made about 80% profit.

It is a no-brainer.

Anyone who thinks houses are ALWAYS a good investment is wrong.

Realist

Its easy to say after 3 years of a bullmarket

From 2000-2003; shares went down and property almost doubled in some cases

Look at long term picture; im sure Buffet would

 

[finnsk]

Mortgage interest is 7% so that is $28,000 a year.

In ten years time you'll have paid $780,000 and your house will be worth $1M - so you'll have made $220K (less inflation)

Also dont forget what it will cost to buy and sell

 

[nizar]

Wayne and others

Do u remember this article?

http://thereisnohousingbubble.blogspot.com/

Was really good and appropriate to post here but too bad its gone

 

[finnsk]

From 2000-2003; shares went down and property almost doubled in some cases

Do you belive that house price is going to double in the next 7 - 10 years?
If they double how will people be able to buy?

 

[krisbarry]

yeh... when your 65 you could be 6 feet under too or the money could be used to put you up in a home to be looked after for the rest of your life.
Much rather have access to the profits NOW rather then in 42 years time (for me), who knows what could happen in between now and then. What I do know is that I can do whatever I want at the moment.

Same could be said about about yourself too, your could also be 6ft under when you turn 65.

Much rather see my profits going into re-investing (buying more units in my current super fund) than to see it eroding away in the current housing market.

Guess it just the way you look at it right.

I still have choice with my superannuation money too, I can invest it this way or that way, this market or that market. so its not like its tied up for good. I have the flexibility to move it around in all different money markets.

 

[Realist]

Realist

Its easy to say after 3 years of a bullmarket

From 2000-2003; shares went down and property almost doubled in some cases

Look at long term picture; im sure Buffet would

But we all agree buying Property in Sydney in 2003 instead of investing that money in ASX shares would have meant instead of making an 80% profit you have made quite a loss.

Therefore Property is not always a good investement!

It is easy for old farts that have owned a property for 50 years to say it was a good investment. I'm sure they made a million dollars from their purchase. In that time Warren Buffett made $70 Billion though.

Is property a better investment than shares - I personally don't think it is for me. I do think it is for some people - newbie traders that use leverage, people that can't save, people that live outside a main city etc.

Old farts may be better off to sell their property they've owned for 50 years, and invest their money in super.

 

[Julia]

There are really good arguments for and against both owning and renting.

Something which may not mean much to many of you but which means a huge amount to me is simply pride of ownership and delight in where I live.
My home and garden are as I have created them and I feel proud and happy to live here. I can't imagine getting that warm fuzzy if I were renting anything.

Julia

 

[Realist]

Do you belive that house price is going to double in the next 7 - 10 years?

A Sydney apartment worth $600,000 now may be worth over $1 Million in 2016. It's hard to see it being worth much more though.

I suspect that same apartment may be worth only $550,000 in 2009. So it may double, but it may go down a bit before it does double.

If they double how will people be able to buy?

Wages will be higher, taxes lower, Under 30's will not buy apartments in Sydney, they will rent. More people will rent overall. Poorer people will leave Sydney, richer migrants move in. Govt will give big incentive to first home buyers. Parents will help kids out more, mortgages will be for 40 years instead of 30. Australia will offshore lower paying jobs - overall Aussie will be more skilled and higher paid.

Easy!

 

[Realist]

Something which may not mean much to many of you but which means a huge amount to me is simply pride of ownership and delight in where I live.
My home and garden are as I have created them and I feel proud and happy to live here. I can't imagine getting that warm fuzzy if I were renting anything.

Good point.

Same with me. I take great pride in owning Fosters shares.

Whenever I buy VB, Crown or Penfolds I get a warm fuzzy feeling! (particularly shiraz)

If anyone ever buys a can of VB - Realist gets 0.000001 cents.

Drink up!!

 

[krisbarry]

The ease at which to deposit your money in super is time effect money well spent. Just a few taps of a keyboard, Bpay's all my deposited money into the super account, then little Johnny Howard sends me a thankyou cheque at the end of the tax year, a nice cash bonus of $1,500 each and every year. If you gear this up, then its just like having investment properties, that is the way I see it, plain and simple!

Look at the up-keep on housing....

Repairs, Lawnmowing, gardening, painting, insurance costs, local tax costs, utility costs etc etc

ahhhh now where is that BPay button....quick easy and simple!

 

[bullmarket]

Hi stc

................

Look at the up-keep on housing....

Repairs, Lawnmowing, gardening, painting, insurance costs, local tax costs, utility costs etc etc

ahhhh now where is that BPay button....quick easy and simple!

But there's a Jim's xxxx for just about all of the above nowadays and maybe eventually for all of them

cheers

bullmarket

 

[Ageo]

Super to me is like a bank interest earnings account that doesnt allow you to take until your 65. Of course its better than nothing but its not for me, as i prefer to be in control of my money and i would rather have access to it now then 65. Super is a nice safer investement for people that arent comfortable to invest there own money.

my

Adrian

 

[The Mint Man]

ditto,
exactly what i was trying to say but I think stc missed the point!

Of course i could be dead by 65 I never said I wouldnt be..... what I was saying is, super wouldnt be much good to me if i was dead or dieing.

 

[krisbarry]

Neither would a house right. so that argument has been put to rest

 

[The Mint Man]

would also like to point out that Im not just talking about property here, im also talking about other investments such as shares (considering we are on a shares forum ).
Once again, if I invest in any of the above with money that is not in a super fund then I will have full controll over when I take the profits and put them into my back pocket or re invest them. wont have to wait 42 years.

 

[krisbarry]

true, and that is what works for you. Like I said it depends on a range of circumstances.

At the present time I am able to get free rent/board and I have chosen a different route in life.

But I bet ya bottom dollar when you and I reach 65, we will eventually end off in exactly the same position, and that is of a much larger nest egg than we have currently have.

Two different routes to wealth building and creating, each with its own positives and negatives.

 

[Knobby22]

when I am 65 I will then be able to take out my super and buy a brand new house/unit/retirement village unit etc, that will suit my needs. I reckon it is just as smart as buying a property when you are 20 or 30.

That way I have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in bank interest.

My super will have grown substanially with continued investment from both myself, my employer, and the government. Then to add in the extra divdends from the companies that will be re-invested into buying more units, a great nest egg awaits me into retirement.

Its the same nest egg, just taken a very different path to the norm.

An old man in a porsche, leading a lonely and shallow existance, no kids, no one who gives a damn about him trying to impress younger women, not missed by anyone much when he dies, all too common.

 

[Happy]

Neither would a house right. so that argument has been put to rest

Yes and no.

On occasions, when you are lonely, house can double up as temporary morgue for up to 3 years.

I think that was the longest lonely death before body was found

 

[Realist]

An old man in a porsche, leading a lonely and shallow existance, no kids, no one who gives a damn about him trying to impress younger women, not missed by anyone much when he dies, all too common.

Sounds great.

The other option is a poor old man still paying alimoney, hen-pecked and bitter, divorced twice, lost the house to his first wife, lost the investment property to his second. The kids have left and now live overseas. He's too bitter to have friends or a partner. And still has to work just to afford to live. All too common these days as well.