zimm
Expedition Leader
The issue being, human behavior isn't factored into the equation.Neither is a $1,000/month to 2,000/month rent payment that goes down the drain wherever you move!
Within an income demographic, the conscious renter dies with more wealth.
The reason is behavior.
People buy houses because they want their OWN place. They want pools. They picture kids. The picture entertaining. They picture space. They want living rooms, parlors and dens in the same house. So what happens in practice, is people consistently purchase and pay for way more than they need, and do so over a longer period of time. Freestanding properties are inefficient, and maintenance intensive. the 4 bedroom you own for 40 years with only two kids sits empty and cost money for 20 of them. 30 year mortgage tables don't favor you until later in the loan making frequent moves prohibative.
Meanwhile, The guy sitting next to you pulling the same salary that rented, only rented what he needed, when he needed it, and the efficiency savings went into compounding investments.
It's kinda why I get a kick out of the "overestimation" of real estate in inherited wealth theory when the racial wealth gap is discussed. There are many reasons, but real estate in most cases is a drag. It could have been even more pronounced. Using a house to build wealth is as efficient as a whole life insurance policy. Yea, there is a lump sum left over, but it's nowhere near what would be there if people knew how to invest, and didnt spend money on stupid crap like grenadiers.