How is that any different from taking on a lease and then sub-leasing it? Who gets to keep the difference? How about this real life situation. The guy locked in the owner of a midtown NYC commercial building for a monthly 10k lease on one of the floors and is sub-leasing individual offices for over 100k a month. If we use the profit logic, sounds like the lessee is more of the owner.
Let me get this straight. You are completely wrong about your statement concerning mortgages being called, you admit it, and then you're gonna tell me to "do my homework"? LOL! Let me submit this possibility to you. Maybe all of your assertions are wrong. Did that ever occur to you? Certainly you have already proven you no next to nothing about real estate. I'm not here to educate you. But I suggest you do a little study before you post again about real estate. Start by actually checking out what the IRS does with a lien attached to a home. OldTrader
Handing your hard-earned money over to the scumbags that govern your residence is hardly an 'obligation.' It's legalized theft, especially since they are leveraged up on your expected 'contributions' to their ponzi scheme. If, at the end of the month, you have a negative cash flow from an investment/asset, it is actually a liability. This system is all based on credit/leverage. I don't think a mortgage is a bad debt, it allows you to leverage yourself immensely. If I can get a 30year mortgage at 5% and make 50% on the borrowed funds, then and only then is my house an asset. If you're not leveraged you're not participating. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have some cheque drops to administer to some unsuspecting lovers.
In most cases, the cost of rent is much higher than half the cost of the payment. Sometimes the cost is roughly equal, and in my "flyover area", rents at 80 to 90% are the norm. When the pendulum was swinging the other way and interest rates were higher, it was even possible to buy a place and rent it out immediately for positive cash flow. SM
You never really own your home even if you have 100% equity. Don't believe me? Try skip your real estate taxes.
C'mon, this is ridiculous. If you have a mortgage, you are a homeowner with a mortgage. Different to someone who owns their place free & clear. And different to a renter. In other words - you own the owner, and you owe the bank. End of story. Meaningless semantic politically-laden BS won't make any difference.
Utter BS. If you own the property, even if your mortgage is worth more than its value, you can decide who can enter, who can stay with you, how you improve the property, whether you want to rent etc. As long as you meet the payments, you are the owner. It's no different to a guy who has $1 million in debt but owns a Ferrari free and clear - so long as he meets the payments on the debt, the Ferrari is his.