Is Trump’s mortgage plan a bad idea?

Well, I think nearly anyone, no matter how smart/educated they are can fall for a scam with the right techniques or circumstances (not to mention changing technologies with AI voice replication, etc.!). And you list a number of very legal, and very predatory not-quite-scam ones that can be dangerous.

A sadly huge part of industry is peddling dreams at an “affordable” price, and homeownership is one of the BIG dreams. Again, I’m not saying it’s a scam, or even a bad idea, but when everyone is selling you the sizzle, it’s important to read the fine print. For example, getting stuck in a series of endless 2-3 year cell phone upgrades, or even a 5-7 year series of car upgrades is more-or-less recoverable. 50 years of obligation to anything requires that much more planning ideally.

Then again I should say, lots of people get life-long expensive commitments in terms of kids at an early age, and many to most of them seem to manage. :person_shrugging:

That’s a BIG presumption. I’m pretty financially literate, but I’ll admit that when I save a couple hundred bucks a month on something like this, it almost never goes into investments or anything useful, but rather into the general fund where it most likely gets spent on whatever fun stuff minor surpluses get spent on.

It’s like getting a raise at work; if you’re living within your means and smart, you’ll just set up your direct deposit to just put that excess straight into a savings account each month. But nobody consistently does that; most people like having a bit extra to spend on fun stuff.

I think the trick may be to go in knowing what your end goals are, beyond “I need a phone.” I think a lot of people don’t really plan for the long haul beyond “I want to buy a house.” And that’s when they get you. Lots of stuff looks idiotic if you’re planning to live there for 15+ years, but if you’re coming off a renting situation, and grew up with parents who also rented, you may not know what to look out for.

But still….you need to account for it. It went somewhere. You spent the extra $150 a month on hookers and blow. Okay…what was two decades worth of cocaine binges worth to you? Was it worth $400,000? Then the 50 is still the better option. You need to give me a dollar figure, or there’s really no point in comparing the two mortgages.

The problem is that many people don’t think that way until it’s too late. If they ever do. Carrie Bradshaw saying "“I spent $40,000 on shoes and have no place to live!” isn’t much of an exaggeration .

The OP asks whether the 50-year mortgage is a bad idea. It’s not. Being stupid is, was, and always will be a bad idea. That’s nothing new.

One thing I think shouldn’t get lost in this discussion …

Housing has some parallels with oil and gas extraction: it’s very complicated, very labor intensive, and very capex intensive. They also all deal with finite commodities.

When everybody in the developed world can manufacture a widget, relying on relatively abundant component parts or raw materials, the market can press hard with downward pricing pressure.

Meanwhile, the things that keep finite commodities scarce – from a purely economic standpoint – are not the enemies of the players in these industries (eg, fossil fuel, housing). They are the friends.

Just like with higher education and health care, the primary problem is the trajectory of the underlying costs. Nearly everything else is trimming around the edges.

I remember watching a documentary about Vancouver, BC’s efforts to address the affordable housing program. I’ll have to look into their progress:

This is also another case that – like minimum (vs. living) wage – I’m reminded that wealthy people money (ie, institutional investment in the housing market) is every bit as inflationary as poor people money.

ISTM that housing has become a standout example of a market failure, and – as some people say about higher ed – the government making the capital more available to the buyer will primarily also be inflationary.

I was thinking more in the sense that most comparisons are comparing how that extra money could be invested in some way, vs. putting it into a mortgage. Then I was pointing out that in reality, few people actually invest that extra money.

Of course, there’s a value to whatever you spend it on, but that’s a vague and difficult valuation. Is it worth it to have bought 15 years of more expensive beer versus having 15 years of additional equity in your home? Who knows? How do you actually make that comparison?