Povertymaxxing. It's more brutal imo, then being incelmaxxed

[eduardkoopman]

I don't totally understand, why some people stay in a location/sate where the rents are so high that you gotta life in a car.
Then I would rather go move to HillbillyTown in Indiana, then to stay in the more wanted/desireable places. If you can find a job there, obviously. rents at least there are cheap, and so is cost of living.

 

[Lorsss]

When I start working I will rent a house with other tenants to save money

 

[Deleted member 3990]

tfw when I will inherit 2 mil.€ worth of 3 houses and acre

 

[eduardkoopman]

to save money

this is key, imo.
Never life financially on the edge. In other ways it's okay, but with money better not.
1. have 3- 6 months of living expenses in money/cash; as a sefety net. Always
2. set up a system to save for different funds for investements/expenses that are inevitably gonna happen (car replacement, new furniture, "the yearly holiday", etc.)
3. don't borrow money with exception of houses or for business/(extra) income
4. Have about 25% room/saving/buffer on your income. Aka, spend max. 75% of your income.
5. Have safety netts for income and bad luck. Some countries provide this in social security system, or employers. If they don't, take out private insurances for them or other systems to have that safety net. for work disability, etc..
6. have a retirement-type of plan and system that one follows
7. have fun with the money that's still left over AFTER doing above.

Above concepts are from what i have heard. And what I experienced so far in life. Obviously I made plenty financial mistakes so far.

tfw when I will inherit 2 mil.€ worth of 3 houses and acre

lucky in that way you are. You have a massive head start and safety net in that kind of way. Although whom ever knows for sure, if you will inherit anything. Maybe the person you want to inherit that from, will marry a golddigger 1 year before his death ans she will make sure she gets it all. Akka, a woman that goes AnnaNicoleSmithMaxxing

 

[Deleted member 3990]

this is key, imo.
Never life financially on the edge. In other ways it's okay, but with money better not.
1. have 3- 6 months of living expenses in money/cash; as a sefety net. Always
2. set up a system to save for different funds for investements/expenses that are inevitably gonna happen (car replacement, new furniture, "the yearly holiday", etc.)
3. don't borrow money with exception of houses or for business/(extra) income
4. Have about 25% room/saving/buffer on your income. Aka, spend max. 75% of your income.
5. Have safety netts for income and bad luck. Some countries provide this in social security system, or employers. If they don't, take out private insurances for them or other systems to have that safety net. for work disability, etc..
6. have a retirement-type of plan and system that one follows
7. have fun with the money that's still left over AFTER doing above.

Above concepts are from what i have heard. And what I experienced so far in life. Obviously I made plenty financial mistakes so far.

lucky in that way you are. You have a massive head start and safety net in that kind of way. Although whom ever knows for sure, if you will inherit anything. Maybe the person you want to inherit that from, will marry a golddigger 1 year before his death ans she will make sure she gets it all. Akka, a woman that goes AnnaNicoleSmithMaxxing

veeery unlikely

will inherit it within 15 years but am not allowed to sell it and need to maintain it

so, not that cool tbh

 

[eduardkoopman]

will inherit it within 15 years but am not allowed to sell it and need to maintain it

Asset rich, Relatively. And cash poor, Relatively.
The common states, of "old" money.

That's kinda the difference of more self-made/enterpreneurs rich people. They have more habit to be cash rish, and less assst rich. They don't cencern so much for "future generations".
But these old money type of situations, always try tpo prevent the "ferarri syndrome" from happening. So there all these rules, and restrictions, and family memeber watch what you do, and so on.

Here, A DogPill for dudes inheriting some money, wealth, possessions.

MyDogArea.com | Everything You Need To Know About Dogs

Explore a world of canine care and companionship. From training tips to health insights, discover everything you need for a happy & healthy life with your dog.

www.shepped.com

 

[MogTheMogger]

fuck dude, its the pill i need to take, is the only thing preventing me to looksmaxx.

 

[eduardkoopman]

fuck dude, its the pill i need to take, is the only thing preventing me to looksmaxx.

Looksmaxxing is expensive for you?
Which type of looksmaxxing stuff is to expensive for you?

For me, only surgery and professional injected fillers are imo for me to expensive.

 

[MogTheMogger]

Looksmaxxing is expensive for you?
Which type of looksmaxxing stuff is to expensive for you?

For me, only surgery and professional injected fillers are imo for me to expensive.

lefort 1 + bsso, i think every surgery, it sucks i guess, but yeah. im trying my hardest to know what the fuck should i do, years of vidya and porn fucked up my life.

 

[Bluepill]

don't borrow money with exception of houses or for business/(extra) income

Or neither. Borrowing money to buy a house is a huge risk. I don't know why people think it isn't.

 

[Bewusst]

What do you work as

 

[Jagged0]

lefort 1 + bsso, i think every surgery, it sucks i guess, but yeah. im trying my hardest to know what the fuck should i do, years of vidya and porn fucked up my life.

Lefort is a meme why do you guys actually think it’ll work

 

[Deleted member 4209]

Lefort is a meme why do you guys actually think it’ll work

ur avi is giving me an erection

 

[eduardkoopman]

Or neither. Borrowing money to buy a house is a huge risk. I don't know why people think it isn't.

Reasons, people think it isn't are:
* historically housing prices go up;
* you will always have cost of housing, renting isn't cheaper in many situations;
* you can fix your cost of housing for the next 30 years by buying basically. whereas rents go up every year most often;
* forced way of saving (by paying off mortgage); while if rented wild be tempted to squander the excess money;

Above things only make sense, if a person is willing to stay in 1 house for a long time. And doesn't co-own it with someones that will seperate

What do you work as

legal shit

 

[MogTheMogger]

Lefort is a meme why do you guys actually think it’ll work

explain to me why is a meme?

 

[Bluepill]

Reasons, people think it isn't are:
* historically housing prices go up;
* you will always have cost of housing, renting isn't cheaper in many situations;
* you can fix your cost of housing for the next 30 years by buying basically. whereas rents go up every year most often;
* forced way of saving (by paying off mortgage); while if rented wild be tempted to squander the excess money;

Above things only make sense, if a person is willing to stay in 1 house for a long time. And doesn't co-own it with someones that will seperate

legal shit

Reasons, people think it isn't are:


* historically housing prices go up;
This shouldn't matter. Even if you have historical "evidence", you should also ask where. Housing prices in Venezuela, outskirts of Detroit, or in Lower Manhattan.

* you will always have cost of housing, renting isn't cheaper in many situations;
Doesn't matter if the value of property goes down. Renting can be a lot cheaper and it's also much more flexible.

* you can fix your cost of housing for the next 30 years by buying basically. whereas rents go up every year most often;
It's possible to for me to lose my main source of income. It's also possible that it happens during a depression. You know what happens during a financial crash or a depression: the value of property goes down, as the potential buyers sense desperation and are more careful with their money. People who are a lot in debt with no income can be forced to sell at low prices. See, it's possible to end up in a lot of debt with no property.

* forced way of saving (by paying off mortgage); while if rented wild be tempted to squander the excess money:
By making myself extra vulnerable. I can't afford losing my income, and I can't benefit from a financial crash. Bad strategy in my opinion.

 

[eduardkoopman]

Imo, you approach buying versus renting, to much with per-opinion. It's mostly just mathematicall, and calculating for human nature. I agree, renting big upside is it's flexibility, and short-term it appears as the best option.

This is imo. The best video I ever seen about this subject matter. It's highly personal, what is the best option.
I get a bit influenced by haveing see the human nature of people that rent. Often these renters have more dispossable income in the beginning; (because the mortgage payment (interest + paying ot down to zero in 25 years) and all the extra costst of own a home is higher then rent). Yet, then I pften see these renters spending that money on fun or stupid/unnecesairy things; and at an older age therefore ending up with less wealth then the home-owner. A disciplined renter though, whom sets the money aside or invests it godd; will do likely just as good or maybe even much better as the home-owner in the long run. But how many people are disciplined financially? What I see around me, less then 5-10% of people I guestimate. The home-owner path (someone that stays in 1 place), is often a fool-proof and undsiciplined-people route to take, to still build up a little but op wealth in a lifetime.

So there is imo. A mathematical component to this question. But also an human nature component. On an individual basis, it highly depends on personal factors. But human nature for most people is, undisciplined with money (most people is ee do this: if they have 500 disposable income per month, they spend 500 per month. if they have 2000 disposable income per month, they spend 2000 per month).

Reasons, people think it isn't are:

* historically housing prices go up;
This shouldn't matter. Even if you have historical "evidence", you should also ask where. Housing prices in Venezuela, outskirts of Detroit, or in Lower Manhattan.

On a personal basis, and thus also location basis you are right. obviously my statement was in genral, the average, the median. Because in general discussions, that's the approach to take. Otherwise we would be speaking about a specific situation and person. But it was talked about in general.
It's for me, imo, kinda annoying to try to counter general statements with exception examples.
Like if i say, "people have to 2 legs", which is genrally true. And then you say it's not because there are people that don't and you make the exception list of like xx amount of people.

* you will always have cost of housing, renting isn't cheaper in many situations;

Doesn't matter if the value of property goes down. Renting can be a lot cheaper and it's also much more flexible..

renting is imo nearly always more flexibel. Renting being "cheaper"; depends on how you look at it, and also the long term perspective. And if you add wealth creation to the max of the concept of '"cheaper". or only look at disposable monthly income. It's not that simple/short-cut. imo. That video shows that perfectly

* you can fix your cost of housing for the next 30 years by buying basically. whereas rents go up every year most often;

It's possible to for me to lose my main source of income. It's also possible that it happens during a depression. You know what happens during a financial crash or a depression: the value of property goes down, as the potential buyers sense desperation and are more careful with their money. People who are a lot in debt with no income can be forced to sell at low prices. See, it's possible to end up in a lot of debt with no property..

I agree, that there is this mentioned extra risk when buying/owning a home. It's a very big downside of woning a home, i agree. I have seen it around me, in the last financial-crisis/depression. It's an important factor to add to the decision I agree for owning versus renting. I have people seen ruining their financial situation for years, decades, and some even basically for the rest of their whole life.

* forced way of saving (by paying off mortgage); while if rented wild be tempted to squander the excess money:

By making myself extra vulnerable. I can't afford losing my income, and I can't benefit from a financial crash. Bad strategy in my opinion.

I agree on your mathematical apporach, and the risk of being extra vulnerable (when income drops).
I also see the human nature of 95% of people that rent. And have extra disposable income (because of being renter), basically sqandering that money on all kinds of things. And thus never having any savings/money; to make use of the opportunities that happen during a financial crash.
It sounds you are smarter then those 95% of people, and have more control of your behaviour (money wise). So for you it sounds, that renting might really be the best option. Because of what you know and how you are, as a person.

To add. I'm also a renter by choice. I'm also pretty disciplined with money spending, putting it aside (for investing also to make it grow), and trying to make money grow other ways then by owning a home. But I see i'm an exception on this, most people are simple as fuck when it comes to money. And when they rent, and thus have more dispossable income. They buy stupid nicknacks all day long, and stuff their garage full with it.

Essay end.

Tl;DR. all kinds of info and discussion about renting vs. buying a home. Pretty complex, not such thing as a 1 sentence answer. Although in general for most common people whom will stay in 1 house for a long time (20+ years), Buying does often seem as the best option overall. Allthough the risks with home-woning are higher.

 

[Bluepill]

obviously my statement was in general, the average, the median. Because in general discussions, that's the approach to take

Yes, and that's why people lose money and go bankrupt. They look at the average and don't think about the distribution (normal distribution, pareto etc). Personally, I don't care about the average. When a person mentions the average, I can't help but to think that he either doesn't know what he's talking about, or that he's trying to sell me something.

Renting being "cheaper"; depends on how you look at it, and also the long term perspective. And if you add wealth creation to the max of the concept of '"cheaper". or only look at disposable monthly income. It's not that simple/short-cut. imo. That video shows that perfectly

In the first example of the video, the person who buys the house wins the renter by 17 % (after 35 years). Not worth the risk. In real life you know anything about the next 35 years. You can't predict the tax laws 35 years ahead of time. The video is the same kind of propaganda a bank would show its clients.

I agree, that there is this mentioned extra risk when buying/owning a home. It's a very big downside of woning a home, i agree. I have seen it around me, in the last financial-crisis/depression. It's an important factor to add to the decision I agree for owning versus renting. I have people seen ruining their financial situation for years, decades, and some even basically for the rest of their whole life.

Good. Not worth the risk. I'm a renter for life, too.

Buying does often seem as the best option overall.

I still disagree for the reasons given above, and there are many more that we haven't talked about.

 

[DoctorPMA]

To add. I'm also a renter by choice. I'm also pretty disciplined with money spending, putting it aside (for investing also to make it grow), and trying to make money grow other ways then by owning a home. But I see i'm an exception on this, most people are simple as fuck when it comes to money. And when they rent, and thus have more dispossable income. They buy stupid nicknacks all day long, and stuff their garage full with it.

If you are smart with money then renting is not bad assuming that you are living in a good location with a decent pricing. The issue with renting is that the rent money is the money that goes to someone else. On the other hand with mortgage your money goes to the house that YOU will own. In the long run it beats renting. I think in most cases if you can afford a mortgage in a decent place it is better to go for that than a rent.

 

[Vermilioncore]

I'm everything bad one can possibly have all rolled into one ugly fuck

 

[eduardkoopman]

If you are smart with money then renting is not bad assuming that you are living in a good location with a decent pricing. The issue with renting is that the rent money is the money that goes to someone else. On the other hand with mortgage your money goes to the house that YOU will own. In the long run it beats renting. I think in most cases if you can afford a mortgage in a decent place it is better to go for that than a rent.

It all depends on the hight of rents, and the interest rates.
But, renting should be significantly cheaper monthly; then the monthly costs (and monthly downpayment on mortgage) of owning a home.
Because as a renter you need to have excess money left, that you can invest/stall/etc.. in something else (to make you money). Otherwise you're not ending up in a good situation long term, as a renter. Because the home-owner is "saving" by makeing hishome more his won possesion (getting rid of mortgage). Plushe might get lucky in the future on increased home worth/value.
As a renter, you also need to have money/possesions; that could make you more wealthy.

In my situation.

renting
I rent including taxes for about 450/month

Owning.
Owning this home I rent. It would cost monthly I guestimate around:
440 mortgage
20 extra taxes
75 extra insurance costs
175 extra house maintenance costs
Total: around 700.

So, I should have 250 extra dispossable income, renting. At this moment.

If I wanna end up in a better or equal position as a home woner. I should put that extra 250 away/into investmenets/etc.. that it will add to my wealth long term. Most people I know, will likely with these 250 extra per month; but stupid nicknacks at wallmart, or a cooler TV or new furniture more often, and in other stuff that losses 50% of it's worth/valueafter the firt day of buying it and will be worthless in a couple of years.
I aim to be a bit smarter, since the last 2-3 years. And I'm putting some of that extra money into the stock-market the past 2-3 years. Aiming to make returns that way. And be open for other options/opportunities/investments

the rent money is the money that goes to someone else. On the other hand with mortgage your money goes to the house that YOU will own.

You know, what I feeling wise hate alot about buyung a home with mortgage?

A 100.000 home; that you buy for 100.000.
It actually costs you:

100.000 home price
4000 notary fees,buying taxes, and other fees
1500 mortgage-advisor fee
70.000 interest payments on mortgage (30 years 2.7%), and forced insurances (50/month)
Total: 175.000 is what it costs to buy a 100.000 home.

This calculation is kinda annoying to my eyes.

On the other hand. renting for 30 years which starts at 450/month and increases like 2% per year. Will make you spend in these 30 years:
Total: 219.000 on rent costs. (see attachment)
And this is also a whopping big number.


Basically when it comes to housing/roofing myself. there is no winning. Both options (owning vs renting), are very fucking expensive.
It's the biggest expense we all will have on our lifetime.

Then on the other hand, it's imo a basic necessity. Without a roofing/home; life is fucking shit.

 

[Deleted member 275]

rent for 450/month? You are on social rent + renting subsidy? @eduardkoopman

I pay 350/month for a 18 square meter student room with shared bathroom/kitchen lol. Friends who live in the same city are paying 800-1000 euro in rent/month to have a 2-bedroom appartement with own kitchen/bathroom. And they live outside of the city centre in a worse location than me.

2 of my friends live at home with their parents for free while working full-time to save up for a house, 2 can afford the 1000 euro rent/month because they live together with their gf that pay half, 1 is on subsidized social rent so only pays ~500/month, and 2 are basically stuck forever renting because paying 1000 euro/month for rent doesn't allow them to save much money.

Anyways in the netherlands poverty doesn't exist tbh, so looks are even more important imo because you can't make much of a difference with money.

The way I see it, the difference between someone who doesn't give a fuck about carreer and money drives a used prius, while career try-hards here drive a new porsche. I don't think the diff between a prius and a new porsche is worth selling your soul to corporate life for tbh, girls won't care so much.

This chart destroyed all of my motivation to carreermax in the netherlands tbh:

Bekijk image

Practically no difference in earning 22k/year or 42k: The government doesn't want you working full-time here it seems. Will either work forever part-time in the netherlands or move abroad if I want to make it big carreerwise tbh.

 

[eduardkoopman]

rent for 450/month? You are on social rent + renting subsidy? @eduardkoopman

Yep social housing. Once you get in that one, then yu cn stay obviously. So, that is nice. Plus I'm self eployed, so i could move income from 1 ear to another without much risk of that being seen by IRS, so I could create a down yearif I want to and then let that income from that year be the incometo use for getting a new rental home. And be in the social housing bracket range. Not 100% ethical, but sometimes or plenty times one puts one own interest first.
Adn I don't life in the West, but at the north/east side of the country; so rents are much cheaper there then in the West. I have 2 bedrooms and a small backyard and stuff with the house. So it's still a good house, especially for a 1 person household like me

I pay 350/month for a 18 square meter student room with shared bathroom/kitchen lol. Friends who live in the same city are paying 800-1000 euro in rent/month to have a 2-bedroom appartement with own kitchen/bathroom. And they live outside of the city centre in a worse location than me.

That's the difference from the West and the "country side" in the netherlands.
I don't even life in a appartment, but an actual house with backyard and stuff. And i only pay 450.

Anyways in the netherlands poverty doesn't exist tbh, so looks are even more important imo because you can't make much of a difference with money.

I largely agree.
In the netherlands it's like this:
* low income -> society/government feels you need help, and you get alot of "free money"/cuts/etc.
* middle class income -> You need to pay shitton of taxes, and you don't need and get any help.
Consequenceof above: low income and middle class income people; kinda earn a bit the same; there is some differencebut it's really small/little. Like earning 1000 monthly before taxes more then you low income neighbour; but in expendable income the gap is only like 200 net with the neighbour (if you're lucky).

I also calcultated and see. A guy alone making 37000 per year. Or a guy alone makeing 22000 per year. The actual net income gap will be really little. because mr. 22.000 can get al kinds of subsidations and cuts, and barely pays any taxes. Whereas mr 37000 per year, gets no subsidisations annd cuts, pays shitton of taxes, and has to pay high rent if he can't buy a home.In net income; these 2 won't have much difference. especially in cases when a person has minor children (that life with them); because then they get alot of subsidasations/free money for the kid.
I have even seen situations, where earning more salary caused a decrease in net income; because of loss of subsidations.

This chart destroyed all of my motivation to carreermax in the netherlands tbh:

Bekijk image

practically no difference in earning 22k/year or 42k. Will either work forever part-time in the netherlands or move abroad if I want to make it big carreerwise tbh.

Legit. It's like that here.
It doesn't matter here, if you are low income or middle class. it's all the same. Higher middle class income in the netherlands, means shit. While being higher middle class you are already top 20% of income earner, but you are still kinda a bit about as poor/rich as a person that is middle class, or a person that is low middle class income, or even plain low income people.

Only in the Netherlands, does the rich lifestyle begins, when you can earn around 10.000 per month before taxes. then the fun kinda starts, at least if you don't life in the expensive locations like Amsterdam and have to spend thousands on rent for a decent home.

 

[diggbicc]

this is key, imo.
Never life financially on the edge. In other ways it's okay, but with money better not.
1. have 3- 6 months of living expenses in money/cash; as a sefety net. Always
2. set up a system to save for different funds for investements/expenses that are inevitably gonna happen (car replacement, new furniture, "the yearly holiday", etc.)
3. don't borrow money with exception of houses or for business/(extra) income
4. Have about 25% room/saving/buffer on your income. Aka, spend max. 75% of your income.
5. Have safety netts for income and bad luck. Some countries provide this in social security system, or employers. If they don't, take out private insurances for them or other systems to have that safety net. for work disability, etc..
6. have a retirement-type of plan and system that one follows
7. have fun with the money that's still left over AFTER doing above.

Above concepts are from what i have heard. And what I experienced so far in life. Obviously I made plenty financial mistakes so far.

lucky in that way you are. You have a massive head start and safety net in that kind of way. Although whom ever knows for sure, if you will inherit anything. Maybe the person you want to inherit that from, will marry a golddigger 1 year before his death ans she will make sure she gets it all. Akka, a woman that goes AnnaNicoleSmithMaxxing

based and shekelpilled

 

[je3oe]

Thats why we must be thankful for the smallest things
thanks op, voor de interessante doc.

 

[DoctorPMA]

It all depends on the hight of rents, and the interest rates.
But, renting should be significantly cheaper monthly; then the monthly costs (and monthly downpayment on mortgage) of owning a home.
Because as a renter you need to have excess money left, that you can invest/stall/etc.. in something else (to make you money). Otherwise you're not ending up in a good situation long term, as a renter. Because the home-owner is "saving" by makeing hishome more his won possesion (getting rid of mortgage). Plushe might get lucky in the future on increased home worth/value.
As a renter, you also need to have money/possesions; that could make you more wealthy.

In my situation.

renting
I rent including taxes for about 450/month

Owning.
Owning this home I rent. It would cost monthly I guestimate around:
440 mortgage
20 extra taxes
75 extra insurance costs
175 extra house maintenance costs
Total: around 700.

So, I should have 250 extra dispossable income, renting. At this moment.

If I wanna end up in a better or equal position as a home woner. I should put that extra 250 away/into investmenets/etc.. that it will add to my wealth long term. Most people I know, will likely with these 250 extra per month; but stupid nicknacks at wallmart, or a cooler TV or new furniture more often, and in other stuff that losses 50% of it's worth/valueafter the firt day of buying it and will be worthless in a couple of years.
I aim to be a bit smarter, since the last 2-3 years. And I'm putting some of that extra money into the stock-market the past 2-3 years. Aiming to make returns that way. And be open for other options/opportunities/investments

You know, what I feeling wise hate alot about buyung a home with mortgage?

A 100.000 home; that you buy for 100.000.
It actually costs you:

100.000 home price
4000 notary fees,buying taxes, and other fees
1500 mortgage-advisor fee
70.000 interest payments on mortgage (30 years 2.7%), and forced insurances (50/month)
Total: 175.000 is what it costs to buy a 100.000 home.

This calculation is kinda annoying to my eyes.

On the other hand. renting for 30 years which starts at 450/month and increases like 2% per year. Will make you spend in these 30 years:
Total: 219.000 on rent costs. (see attachment)
And this is also a whopping big number.


Basically when it comes to housing/roofing myself. there is no winning. Both options (owning vs renting), are very fucking expensive.
It's the biggest expense we all will have on our lifetime.

Then on the other hand, it's imo a basic necessity. Without a roofing/home; life is fucking shit.

If you rent you throw that money out just to live in a house that you will never own. If you buy it is yours and you pay less afterwords. You can sell it or rent it out yourself. As I said, renting can be a better option in certain situations. Paying 700 bucks for mortgage is super cheap anyways. I dont see why not do it if location is decent.

 

[eduardkoopman]

Paying 700 bucks for mortgage is super cheap anyways. I dont see why not do it if location is decent.

imo. Buying only makes sense, if you are planning to, and can life in that house for a long time. Check that video that I posted before. Buying a home, you will have a alot of upfront costs (notary, advisroy costs, fees, etc.). It will usually take a decent amount of time/years before the value of the house increaed enough to make up for the buying costs. Last years the housing houding prices have been going up alot and quick/fast in most places in the West. But I also remember 2008 - 2012; those were brutal years for plenty people that owned a home.they bought before 2008