As the housing market continues to plunge
, many economists are declaring the decline more or less permanent: we are witnessing, they say
, the end of home ownership as a form of long-term, nest-egg-producing investment.
The New York Times' Ron Lieber
though, says this may be an exaggeration. No matter what happens to the
housing market--and "it is dangerous to assume with any certainty," he
notes--"a mortgage is still a form of long-term forced savings." Saving
is "more important than ever" in this economy, with both
pensions and 401(k)s in tatters.
In other words, "before you
swear off real estate, reconsider a few of the basics." First, he says,
you'd probably be looking at lower monthly payments if you buy
post-bubble. Second, buying a home may still be, in most cases, better
than "renting and investing the difference between the rent and the
total costs of ownership." Why? Because in the renting option, "you
need to actually save the money," which few do, plus "you need an after-tax
return that’s better than whatever a home would deliver," and you need
not to "raid the savings along the way." Third, buying means you won't
have to deal with "difficult landlords." Fourth, sometimes buying is
the best way to get into the neighborhood you want.
Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments
or send an email to the author at
hhorn at theatlantic dot com.
You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.