undefined | Better HN

0 pointspjc504y ago0 comments

Retail _traders_ tend to lose money, retail _investors_ who buy and hold tend to do OK in the long run.

> investment is tied into a basic necessity, like a house

? What does this refer to?

0 comments

I mean the rights of tenants are such that if you want to live in decent conditions / a stable domicile, you have to buy a house, thus becoming a property investor.

sokoloff4y ago

I think the act of buying a house to live in should be considered more an act of consumption than of investment.

It’s not 100% consumption, but it’s almost surely we’ll over 50% consumption and yet people get confused by the fact that a slice of it is forced savings and a sliver of it is an investment and they focus on these latter two more than is appropriate and in so doing are prone to less rational decisions than if they thought of it as mostly consumption IMO.

pasabagi4y ago

I wish it was just consumption! If houses always depreciated in value, then they would cost about as much as it costs to build them.

Unfortunately, because a bunch of political factors, they endlessly balloon in price.

sokoloff4y ago

I think houses mostly do depreciate in value. The land underneath them does not and this can often mask the former.

I live in a nice part of my city. My house is 100 years old, has terrible insulation, very old retrofit wiring, and needs constant maintenance to stave off decline. The house, with all the upgrades over the years, is likely worth about what it was when built. The land underneath it is a lot more valuable than it was 100, or even 25, years ago.

1 more reply

the-dude4y ago

I believe in Japan houses are considered fungible. There even might be a taboo in living in a 'used' house.

djbebs4y ago

The houses do. The land they're on don't

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

pasabagi4y ago

I mean the rights of tenants are such that if you want to live in decent conditions / a stable domicile, you have to buy a house, thus becoming a property investor.

sokoloff4y ago

I think the act of buying a house to live in should be considered more an act of consumption than of investment.

pasabagi4y ago

I wish it was just consumption! If houses always depreciated in value, then they would cost about as much as it costs to build them.

Unfortunately, because a bunch of political factors, they endlessly balloon in price.

sokoloff4y ago

I think houses mostly do depreciate in value. The land underneath them does not and this can often mask the former.

1 more reply

the-dude4y ago

I believe in Japan houses are considered fungible. There even might be a taboo in living in a 'used' house.

djbebs4y ago

The houses do. The land they're on don't

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse