On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 12:51:16 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 3:18:29 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 07:35:37 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 9:11:32 AM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
On 4/5/2017 10:35 PM, wrote:
Snip



I'm sure glad I'm not buying or selling in the current market. We were
looking 2 years ago but I'll put in stair lifts and stay in the house
we have for a lot less than just the real estate comissions involved
in changing houses - and there are no decent bungalows available for
what we are likely to get for our 2 story - and I refuse to deal with
a mortgage in retirement.


What's a mortgage? ;~)

A method used to raise cash at a low interest rate so that it can be invested
at a higher rate of return.

...and a sure-fire method of bankruptcy.

Not "sure-fire", but a possibility. ("sure-fire" to me means guaranteed. That
just isn't the case.)

If you're over-leveraged, it's just a matter of time until the cards
fall. We all saw that a few years back.


Possibly risky and something that has to be managed carefully, yes, but a
strategy used by wealthy people (and businesses) quite often.

Also of really poor people.

Yep, that's why I said "Possibly risky and something that has to be
managed carefully" It's not a tactic to be employed casually.


Lots of rich folks (and businesses) have mortgages that they could pay off
this afternoon if they wanted to.

Oh, hell, I could have done that some time back but why bother?

Why pay interest if you don't have to, unless of course, you are using your
money to make more than the loan is costing you or the inflation rate is
higher than your interest rate?

Because the cost of the money was so low the value of the "safety net"
was larger. Cash in the bank gives off soft fuzzies.

Even billionaires take out mortgages.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/20...re-need-a-loan

https://www.daveramsey.com/