Home ownership still a good investment?

Moderated by Rick Badie

The American Dream has morphed into a nightmare for many metro Atlanta homeowners. Some observers, like the college law professor who writes today, question whether homeownership is all it’s cracked up to be and suggest the nation rethink its quest for owning homes. An executive for a nonprofit credit counseling agency, however, challenges such notions and calls homeownership a solid, long-term financial investment.

Home ownership has risks

By Mechele Dickerson

Many Americans believe that you haven’t achieved the American Dream until you own a home.

For decades, the U.S. has enacted housing policies that advance and heavily subsidize homeownership to make sure people believe the road to riches must end at your own home.

Given the economic realities most Americans currently face, these homeownership beliefs are fundamentally flawed.

Homeownership is said to be a good thing because it makes people thrifty, responsible and financially secure. Homeownership is also said to be good because it forces people to save money to buy a home and then pay for it.

Until recently, homeownership was viewed as a risk-free, low-cost way to increase household and generational wealth because houses always increase in value and always sell for more than the owner owes.

Americans also have been convinced that homeownership is good for communities because homeowners take better care of their homes and are more involved citizens than renters. Having involved citizens ensures neighborhood stability and strengthens communities.

Homeownership can’t make people thrifty or financially secure because too many Americans are financially fragile. Americans face uncertain economic futures because of persistently high unemployment rates.

Recently released Census data shows household income for all but the highest earners continues to fall and is at the lowest since 1995. Most households now have low (or no) savings but rising and crushing consumer debt.

Many homeowners profited handsomely during the crazed housing boom that preceded the current housing crash. This same boom made homeownership unaffordable for other potential owners. So, to make sure cash-strapped people would keep buying homes, federal housing policies encouraged lenders to create “flexible” loan products.

The flexible but high-cost mortgage products looked nothing like the mortgages people used to buy homes in the past. Buyers with bad credit were qualified for loans. These products discouraged savings; many required no down payments. Because borrowers weren’t required to document their income or assets and many loans had artificially low initial (“teaser”) monthly payments, borrowers from all income groups had an incentive to behave irresponsibly and borrow more than they could repay.

When unemployment rates rose, interest rates rose, household income remained low and housing prices plummeted. The housing market crashed. It still hasn’t recovered.

Many homeowners still cannot sell their homes or refinance mortgages because their houses are worth less than what they owe. Lenders who were once eager to help renters buy homes are much less willing to help homeowners stay in those homes.

This has trapped millions of Americans in homes they cannot afford to keep and cannot afford to sell.

Though rarely discussed, the loss of homeownership can create neighborhood instability and harm homeowners who have behaved responsibly. Foreclosures create abandoned and rundown homes. Homes near these rundown properties decrease in value even if the owners of those homes have been financially responsible.

Many homeowners continue to suffer in the current housing crisis as they watch the value of their own homes plummet simply because they live near foreclosed properties.

The reckless pursuit of higher homeownership rates at all costs has caused millions of homeowners to lose decades of accumulated household wealth. Many Americans can no longer afford to be homeowners. Pushing homeownership on them will not fix the economic challenges they face.

For many, homeownership is no longer a good thing. It has become a high-cost gamble that just isn’t worth the risk.

Mechele Dickerson is a University of Texas law professor.

Having your own house is still worth it

By Phil Baldwin

I took an informal poll of my agency’s housing counselors to find out if they would say homeownership is still worthwhile. Without exception, I heard an emphatic “yes!”

Keep in mind, our counselors spend their day speaking with people trying to save their homes from foreclosure.

How do they stay so positive about the benefits of homeownership?

It’s because they are experts at taking a sound, long-term approach to buying a home.

The fact is that people who wait to buy a home until after they’ve done their homework can still benefit from the investment the same way past generations did.

My nonprofit organization conducts monthly workshops in metro Atlanta to prepare people buying their first home for the responsibilities of homeownership. Attendance for these workshops has remained strong.

We advise people to answer a few questions to determine if they are ready to own a home.

Do you plan to stay in the home for at least five years?

Do you have a significant down payment saved?

Can you get a fixed interest rate loan so your payments will be predictable over time?

Do you have enough income to cover expenses that come with ownership, like lawn care and other maintenance?

Once you’ve considered the pragmatic side of homeownership, you can think about other reasons to buy a home. Is it in a neighborhood that’s right for your family? Your goal might also be to find a place where you can live through your retirement years.

Going through this checklist was the normal approach to home buying until the first half of the 2000s. It is still a great way for Americans to build wealth, as they use money they might have paid to someone else to create equity in a place that also keeps the rain off their heads.

But in the early 2000s, a combination of historically easy credit and expansion of exotic financial products lured people with the false promise that the old approach to homeownership was old-fashioned.

Residential real estate was marketed as a viable short-term speculative play. Far too many people gambled on homes, instead of investing in them. And this approach got them into trouble.

Some people seeking our counsel to save their home from foreclosure took out first mortgages for 80 percent of the purchase price and at the same time borrowed the other 20 percent to use as a “down payment.”

Others come to us with interest-only loans that typically require only a monthly interest payment until after five years when the payments jump skyward.

It was never realistic to expect a quick return on a home. People buy homes for emotional reasons too, but they should take the long-term view when it comes to their financial expectations.

Buying a home is a sound addition to your mix of investments and savings that will build your net worth. It has historically been a good hedge against inflation.

I hope some good comes out this painful mortgage crisis. It would amount to a silver lining if people now understand buying a home is not a get-rich-quick scheme. It is a serious life event for most of us, and we need to treat it that way.

Phil Baldwin is president and CEO of CredAbility.

By Mechele Dickerson

Many Americans believe that you haven’t achieved the American Dream until you own a home.
For decades, the U.S. has enacted housing policies that advance and heavily subsidize homeownership to make sure people believe the road to riches must end at your own home.
Given the economic realities most Americans currently face, these homeownership beliefs are fundamentally flawed.
Homeownership is said to be a good thing because it makes people thrifty, responsible and financially secure. Homeownership is also said to be good because it forces people to save money to buy a home and then pay for it.
Until recently, homeownership was viewed as a risk-free, low-cost way to increase household and generational wealth because houses always increase in value and always sell for more than the owner owes.
Americans also have been convinced that homeownership is good for communities because homeowners take better care of their homes and are more involved citizens than renters. Having involved citizens ensures neighborhood stability and strengthens communities.
Homeownership can’t make people thrifty or financially secure because too many Americans are financially fragile. Americans face uncertain economic futures because of persistently high unemployment rates.
Recently released Census data shows household income for all but the highest earners continues to fall and is at the lowest since 1995. Most households now have low (or no) savings but rising and crushing consumer debt.
Many homeowners profited handsomely during the crazed housing boom that preceded the current housing crash. This same boom made homeownership unaffordable for other potential owners. So, to make sure cash-strapped people would keep buying homes, federal housing policies encouraged lenders to create “flexible” loan products.
The flexible but high-cost mortgage products looked nothing like the mortgages people used to buy homes in the past. Buyers with bad credit were qualified for loans. These products discouraged savings; many required no down payments. Because borrowers weren’t required to document their income or assets and many loans had artificially low initial (“teaser”) monthly payments, borrowers from all income groups had an incentive to behave irresponsibly and borrow more than they could repay.
When unemployment rates rose, interest rates rose, household income remained low and housing prices plummeted. The housing market crashed. It still hasn’t recovered.
Many homeowners still cannot sell their homes or refinance mortgages because their houses are worth less than what they owe. Lenders who were once eager to help renters buy homes are much less willing to help homeowners stay in those homes.
This has trapped millions of Americans in homes they cannot afford to keep and cannot afford to sell.
Though rarely discussed, the loss of homeownership can create neighborhood instability and harm homeowners who have behaved responsibly. Foreclosures create abandoned and rundown homes. Homes near these rundown properties decrease in value even if the owners of those homes have been financially responsible.
Many homeowners continue to suffer in the current housing crisis as they watch the value of their own homes plummet simply because they live near foreclosed properties.
The reckless pursuit of higher homeownership rates at all costs has caused millions of homeowners to lose decades of accumulated household wealth. Many Americans can no longer afford to be homeowners. Pushing homeownership on them will not fix the economic challenges they face.
For many, homeownership is no longer a good thing. It has become a high-cost gamble that just isn’t worth the risk.

9 comments Add your comment

Meg Thornton

September 20th, 2012
11:34 am

Per the first column that states, “Though rarely discussed, the loss of homeownership can create neighborhood instability and harm homeowners who have behaved responsibly,” the law professor apparently hasn’t noticed the thousands of articles in the past three years that have indeed discussed the negative impact of foreclosures on neighborhoods. And why didn’t the editor catch this oversight? Although I’m not judging the columnist’s or the editor’s intent, it kinda reminds me of the genesis of the housing crisis itself: The instigators and “regulators” were not made to be accountable, especially from 2001 through 2006 when a Republican-led House, Senate and White House championed laissez faire economic policies. We need to ardently support leaders such as Elizabeth Warren, Alan Simpson, Chris Dodd and others who present intelligent, courageous, and yes, even collaborative solutions to establishing safeguards that ultimately are in everyone’s best interest, except those who profit the most from lack of regulation.

[...] federal housing policies encouraged lenders to create “flexible” loan products. Read more on Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) Simple At-Home Facelift Alternative Powerful Enough To Make Both Men and Women Look Younger In [...]

BHG

September 20th, 2012
9:04 am

I’d say home ownership is still a sound decision, but not one that should be made lightly. When my wife and I bought our first house, we made sure that 1) It was in a stable, mature neighborhood; 2) It was the right size for my needs; 3) We viewed it as a home, not an investment; and 4) We could afford the payments and other costs on a single salary.

Those precautions paid off when the economy crashed and my wife couldn’t get a steady job for over 3 years. We were still able to live quite comfortably with no fear of losing the house or anything else. Now we’re in a good position to sell off that house and recover most of the money we put into it, and to take advantage of the depressed market to upgrade to a place that meets the needs of our growing family.

In short, there’s nothing wrong with buying a house, as long as you do plenty of research, math, and planning beforehand.

Motocross Survivor

September 20th, 2012
7:32 am

It seems amazing to me that a lender would not require a borrower to verify income amount, as the first article claimed. They sure required it when I took out my mortgage in 1999…a 15-yr mortgage that I paid off in 6 yrs btw. I bought a very modest condo, put over 20% and didn’t have this problem. Most people are in arrears because they didn’t think things out, made poor decisions, and now it’s all boohoo.

Koeesha

September 19th, 2012
9:09 pm

Like most investments timing is key, and whether RE is a good investment depends largely upon when one became a property owner.

Someone who bought 3-4 years ago @ the very top of the market has probably gotten slammed, and it’ll take awhile to get back to even. Smart home buyers coming in today are getting the deal of a lifetime and are likely to realize a very nice gain on their investment. In any event, as an earlier poster noted, the expense of home ownership goes way beyond just the monthly mortgage payment…I just wrote a check for $600+ to the plumber.

SAWB

September 19th, 2012
3:11 pm

As pointed out home ownership is not for everyone especially if you are one of those folks that are property rich, but cash poor. It is absolutely necessary to budget for the expected and unexpected cost of home ownership and those you who are not disciplined enough to do so should probably just rent.

However, if you are disciplined and wish to pursue home ownership it is still a very good decision. I currently live in a nice home that is paid off. I know that as long as I can scrape together my yearly tax payment I at least have a roof over my head from now on.

J W C

September 19th, 2012
2:31 pm

To paraphrase Bill Clinton….”Arithmetic”. If you might move before ten years, rent. If you think you deserve a McMansion (but have a normal income), rent. If you cannot expense and budget, rent. If anticipated home ownership expenses exceed 50% of your income, rent. If you must outsource most maintenance, rent. The expense line crosses to the positive only if you buy a house you can afford, stay in it long enough to pay for it, can keep the county from stealing you blind via property taxes, and if you tend to take care of your things. Otherwise, home ownership is not for you….as millions have recently learned so painfully. OH….don’t believe real estate or mortgage people. They earn their living by selling/financing homes. Your interest is not their concern.

$100,000 Underwater After 5 Years

September 19th, 2012
12:12 pm

RE: “Home ownership still a good investment?”

* F * No!

nelson

September 19th, 2012
11:44 am

I have a home, been in it since 1975. It gave me stability that I did not have before. I put 20% down and paid the mortgage off in 11 years. The cost of maintence is high. $1800.00 for new water line from the main to the house. $3350.00 for new heating system. All in the last couple of months. Within the last couple of years $2200.00 chimney, $2600.00 new floor. This is all on a very modest place.
Without the money I would have been whistling Dixie on skid row. Stay away from a house without plenty of spare cash.