I agree to a point. I don’t think it’s true that going into debt is always a good idea. Yes, the system is fucked up, but part of that fuckedupedness is inconsistency.
No one is saying it’s always a good idea. But good financial planning for life requires planning to take on debt based on what you need near term, but can plan to afford long term.
For example, if you buy a house and take out a mortgage you will have a monthly payment that might be equivalent to rent. But unlike rent, you can sell the place you live and recoup the value of the house you own because you took on debt. But on the flip side you can plan that wrong and be house poor where you can afford your mortgage but have no money for the rest of things you need to do in life.
I mean, of course I’m not advocating maxing your credit on meebos or whatever frivolous spending floats your boat. The way you phrased it, it’s obvious that your elders meant going into debt to invest in your future.
So you can use and enrich corporations for smart phones, buying groceries, paying for transportation, your electronic payments, insurance, etc. But draw a line in the sand for loans to better your life whether it’s education, home ownership, or car ownership?
If you have to go into debt to afford something, then by definition, you can’t actually afford it. If I need to buy a car, I buy one with the cash I have available to purchase a car. I don’t rely on a bank to give me money I don’t have to make a purchase that I couldn’t otherwise afford.
I mean, they’re right. I also have lived well within my means. Total commitmentphobe for finances.
But if I had gone into debt, invested the money in real estate or even stock market, I would be in a much better place. In hind sight, of course.
Those are the rules of this economy. It sucks ass, but there’s no denying it.
I agree to a point. I don’t think it’s true that going into debt is always a good idea. Yes, the system is fucked up, but part of that fuckedupedness is inconsistency.
No one is saying it’s always a good idea. But good financial planning for life requires planning to take on debt based on what you need near term, but can plan to afford long term.
For example, if you buy a house and take out a mortgage you will have a monthly payment that might be equivalent to rent. But unlike rent, you can sell the place you live and recoup the value of the house you own because you took on debt. But on the flip side you can plan that wrong and be house poor where you can afford your mortgage but have no money for the rest of things you need to do in life.
I mean, of course I’m not advocating maxing your credit on meebos or whatever frivolous spending floats your boat. The way you phrased it, it’s obvious that your elders meant going into debt to invest in your future.
Frankly, I’d argue my “elders” have nary a clue at this point. I’ve yet to see how spending money one doesn’t have helps anyone but corporations.
So you can use and enrich corporations for smart phones, buying groceries, paying for transportation, your electronic payments, insurance, etc. But draw a line in the sand for loans to better your life whether it’s education, home ownership, or car ownership?
If you have to go into debt to afford something, then by definition, you can’t actually afford it. If I need to buy a car, I buy one with the cash I have available to purchase a car. I don’t rely on a bank to give me money I don’t have to make a purchase that I couldn’t otherwise afford.