• roofuskit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    3 days ago

    You are completely missing the point. Because they have money to begin with the have the money to invest. For example, buying a home instead of paying twice as much to live in a motel because you can’t get a loan because you weren’t born with wealth.

    The principal is about the cost of poverty. It’s not meant to be taken literally.

    • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      Exactly. To use another example it’s cheaper to simply own your home outright than to pay rent for the rest of your life.

      • MinFapper@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        …ish. My wife and I just did this calculation and (at least in America) property taxes throw a wrench into it.

        A decent rental home in Texas costs about $2650 per month. A similar house costs about $460k to buy, and run about $1000/mo in taxes. So you’ll only save about $1650 per month.

        Even putting that 460k into a bank account at 4.5% interest will give you $1725/mo, let alone stocks, index funds, and all the other investments you could be doing that will out-perform real estate.

        Of course, that doesn’t disprove your point about poverty since you need to have the money to buy/invest. But it’s just a reminder that houses are not the wealth builder that a lot of people imagine them to be.

        Always research and determine the best option for your financial situation. Gate-keeping financial literacy is another tool the wealthy use to keep people in poverty.

    • qarbone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      And that’s not even getting into the realities that it was a statement made some 30, 40 years ago(?) and the qualities of “quality” can shift in much less time than that.