Hereby I will prove how the realty boomers arguments are false.

What are the boomers arguments?

1.) Buy today, houses always increase in value in the long run.
WRONG. House prices cannot increase more than incomes in the long run. This is obvious if you think about it. If house prices go up more than people can afford to pay, buying stops, like it has stopped now.
Even Warren Buffett have pointed out that houses don't increase in intrinsic value. Unless there's a bubble or a crash, house prices simply reflect current salaries and interest rates. If a house is 100 years old, it's value in sheltering you is exactly the same as it was 100 years ago. Then came the maintenance as the house didn't renovate itself. It also has taxes, and insurance - costs that always increase and never go away. The price of the house went up about as much as salaries went up.
To put this is simple perspective, vegetable were costing Rs.5-6/kg when 5 digit salary was a rarity.
Today, the prices have gone up by about 4 times but so have the salaries. So, sounds very much like the reasoning people use now when they talk about how much their father's house appreciated "in the long run" without considering that salaries rose a proportional amount.

2.) Renting is just wastage of money.
WRONG. As said before renting is now much cheaper per month than owning. If you don't rent, you either:

* Have a mortgage, in which case you are throwing away money on interest, tax, insurance, maintenance, costs that increase forever.
* Own outright, in which case you are throwing away the extra income you could get by converting your house to cash, investing in bonds, and renting a similar place to live for much less money. This extra income is sufficient for emergency expenses,retirement etc.

Either way, owners lose much more money every month than renters and that's assuming prices don't correct to very high level & everything is smooth in the economy.

3.) As a renter, you won't have any money left as you will spend them on vacations,cars & hence won't have equity/savings etc.
WRONG. Equity is just money. Renters are actually in a better position to build equity/savings through investing in anything but housing. Renters can get rich much faster than owners, just by investing in conservative stocks & bonds.

* Owners are losing every month by paying much more for interest than they would pay for rent. The tax deduction does not come close to making owing competitive with renting.
* Owners must pay taxes simply to own a house. That is not true of stocks, bonds, or any other asset that can build equity/savings. Only houses are such a guaranteed drain on cash.
* Owners must insure a house, but not most other investments.
* Owners must pay to repair a house, but not a stock or a bond.
* Owners lose their money as house prices reduce. The EMI's remain constant in spite of reduction in rates. At the end of loan tenure, they would have paid almost twice than that of current renters who will buy at logical rates. Keep interest rates in mind. Most of the EMI is not principal amount but interest.

4.) There are great tax advantages to owning a house.
WRONG. Many people believe you can just reduce your income tax by the amount you pay in interest, but they are wrong. Buyers may not deduct interest from income tax; they deduct interest from taxable income. And even then, the tax advantage is not significant compared to the large monthly loss from owning.

If you don't own a house but want to live in one, your choice is to rent a house or rent money to buy a house. To rent money is to take out a loan. A mortgage is a money-rental agreement. House renters take no risk at all, but money-renting owners take on the huge risk of falling house prices, as well as all the costs of repairs, insurance, property taxes, etc.

5.) RE is based on local factors, it's not a national phenomenon. RE of Delhi-NCR,Bangalore & rest of the cities has nothing to do with Pune RE.
WRONG. Lending rates remain the same throughout the country. ALL loans are harder to get. This will drive prices down everywhere.

6.) A rental house provides good income. So, you can rent if you have purchased as investment.
WRONG. Rental houses provide very poor income in hyped areas and certainly cannot cover mortgage payments. Remember there is almost 300% difference between EMIs & rent for the same house.

It's pointless to do the work of being a landlord if you can make more money with no risk, no work, and no state income tax by investing in assured good returns bond.

7.) If owning is a loss in monthly cash flow, but appreciation will make up for it.
WRONG. Appreciation is negative. Prices are going down. It only adds to the injury of already high EMI's.

8.) As soon as prices drop a little, the number of buyers on the sidelines willing to jump back in increases.
WRONG. There are very few buyers left, and those who do want to buy will be limited by increasing difficulty of borrowing now that many house owners are near bankrupt as they don't save anything at the end of the month due to high EMI's.
No one has to buy, but there will be more and more people who have no choice but to sell as their payments rise. That will keep driving prices downward for a long time.

9.) House prices never fall atleast in Pune.
WRONG. If you see the RE scenario of 1996, prices crashed by 50% & took a whole 7+ years to recover.
Exact 1996 scenario may not be there today but strong correction is inevitable across the city.

10.) House prices don't fall to zero like stock prices, so it's safer to invest in real estate.
WRONG. House prices won't be zero, but the equity or the principal amount you paid can be zero or even negative. What you will pay as EMIs later in actual terms is not for the principal amount but only the interest as house prices dip. So, you will be only serving the bank.

11.) Prices will soften gradually, won't crash immediately.
WRONG. Prices are falling off a cliff. No one knows exactly what will happen, but it looks like prices will continue to fall for long time. These are just more manipulation of buyer emotions, to get them to buy even while prices are falling.

12.) The bubble prices were driven by supply and demand alone.
WRONG. Prices were driven by low interest rates and risky loans & good returns for investors in initial phases of boom in 2004-05.
Prices went up, interest rates went up & buyers savings went down. So prices are violating the most basic assumptions about supply and demand.

13.) There is lack of land.
WRONG. Ample of land is available & continue to be even in future in Pune. Sales volume are down. Even in Japan (small country with less land), prices went down. Current prices here are the same as that of 23 years ago. If we really had a housing shortage, there would not be so many vacant rentals.

14.) If you don't own, you'll live in a cheap neighborhood later.
WRONG. For the any given monthly payment, you can rent a much better house than you can buy. Renters live better, not worse. There are downsides to renting, such as being told to move at the end of your lease, or having your rent raised, but since there are thousands of vacant rentals, you can take your pick and be quite happy renting during the crash. There are similar but worse problems for owners anyway, such as being fired and losing your house, or having your interest rate and property taxes adjust upward. Remember, property taxes are forever.

15.) There's always someone predicting a real estate crash.
TRUE, yet irrelevant. There are very real crashes every decade or so. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

16.) Local incomes justify the high prices.
WRONG. The mortgage should be more than your 3 years earning. It is much higher today. Most are already in danger/red zone.

17.) You have to live somewhere.
CORRECT. But that doesn't mean you should waste your life savings on a bad investment. You can live in a better house for much less money by renting during the down slide in RE.

18.) It's not a house, it's a home.
WRONG. Wherever one lives in it is home, be it apartment, condo, bungalow , mansion or house. Calling a house a "home" is a manipulation of your emotions for profit.

19.) If you don't buy now, you'll never get another chance.
WRONG. History proves otherwise.
Here's a beautiful quote from a analyst:-
"The real issue isn't whether you will be stuck being a renter all your life, she says. Its whether you'll get so scared about being shut out that you'll buy at the market's peak and be stuck in a property you can't afford or sell."

20.) It would take major economic recession or a major earthquake that wipes out this area in order for the price to fall by over 50%.
WRONG. Even today, if the prices fall by 50%, there will still be very few people who can buy at this levels due to uncertainty in jobs & most importantly high EMIs. Also, look at the rental rates for equivalent houses. Which loss per month is larger? EMI or rent?

contd....
Read more
Reply
12597 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Don't believe the govt; inflation is here to stay

    This is a nice article stating how Govt is fooling 'mango man' with false assurances about inflation.
    ----

    We have a fundamental problem in agricultural production, and this is not amenable to short-term
    solutions


    Jul 11, 2010,Sun
    R Jagannathan

    The government's sudden decision to initiate a debate on allowing foreign retailers into India is not a belated realisation that reforms are vital for the Indian economy. Politicians from the Left and Right will surely attack the move as elitist and as being against the interests of small-time kirana shops. The reality is that we need a retail revolution and a supply side agricultural miracle to put runaway inflation behind us.

    Government babus periodically emerge from the woodwork to tell us that inflation will be down to 6% by December, or some other more comforting figure. But it doesn't really matter what the headline inflation, as measured by the wholesale prices index, is. You know and I know what vegetables cost this year and what they did last year. Throughout the winter, when vegetable prices usually fall, we saw only minor dips. The prices of staples like rice and wheat are even today, after a good rabi harvest, significantly higher than they were last year — and certainly well above the official inflation rate. A good monsoon may improve things later this year, but it will be the lull before the storm.

    Why? Any budding economist will tell you that when prices and wages keep chasing each other, inflation is literally going to spiral. There are only two ways to break this vicious circle. One is to drastically curb demand by clamping down on wage increases and raising interest rates. And two, one can improve the productivity of agriculture and reduce inefficiencies in the supply channel — the logistical chain from farm to fork that is tied together by cold storages, transportation, and middlemen.

    The first solution will moderate demand, but is only a short-term remedy. You can't cut wages or raise interest rates beyond a point. At least, not at a rate that will be politically acceptable. In any case, food demand cannot be compressed beyond a point. We've all gotta eat. The second solution will take time, but a retail revolution has to be a part of it.

    This is how it is supposed to pan out. Big retail works by promising consumers low prices and this is ensured by having direct access to producers. In the case of groceries, a Wal-Mart or a Reliance Fresh will enter into long-term contracts with farmers, or groups of them, to buy a fixed minimum at a certain price. This cuts out thousands of middlemen, eliminating their margins. Farmers get paid more and consumers still pay less at the mall. Some kirana shops will go out of business in the process, but others can band together and do deals with the big retailers or even build their own supply chains.

    The other leg of the strategy has to be an improvement in agricultural productivity. Indian agriculture has not received a major leg-up since the green revolution of the late 1960s and early 1970s. In fact, throughout the 1990s and the last decade, Indian agriculture has been facing the downside of the earlier revolution, which involved increasing use of fertilisers and pesticides. Today, thanks to small land holdings, low irrigation investments, and destruction of the natural fertility of the soil through sustained fertiliser use (brought on again by heavy subsidies on fertiliser), farmers are switching off foodgrain and shifting to cash crops. The urban expansion is also eating into farmland, and once again, food output suffers.

    This is why when the government launched its NREGA scheme to guarantee employment to the landless, it had a damaging effect on food prices. The beneficiaries spent more on food, and less of the food produced made it to cities, where inflation soared. Higher payments to NREGA beneficiaries also increased farm and industrial wages everywhere, and this is how we got the classic wage-price spiral.
    However, the problem isn't NREGA, but the long-term failure to set off another green revolution. This is not going to happen anytime soon, as investments in irrigation, improved seeds, and building retail chains will take years. In the short-term, it might make sense to allow genetically-modified (GM) seeds to boost productivity quickly — after building enough safeguards. GM seeds are controversial, but not any more controversial than fertilisers or pesticides — two ingredients that set off the original green revolution. They may be worth a gamble, if we want quicker results — with the caveat that we also need an exit strategy from them if they prove dangerous or problematic.

    Whatever the solution, one thing is clear: there is no easy answer to inflation. Government may talk of taming inflation with a good monsoon or imports, but the food problem is structural in nature and there are no easy solutions. We have to learn to live with higher inflation for the next few years.


    Source:- 3dsyndication
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by real_pro
    The investor remains at the end of the chain...real buyers unfortunately get converted to real renters most of the times!! :)



    100% wrong answer. Investor does not buy to keep the property with him. Flat depreciates after construction gets 5+ yrs old. Investors buy to sell tomorrow. Sell to whom? the end user who does not buy to sell.

    So its important to check the depth of his( end user's) pocket. Don't expect, their pockets to get magically full tomorrow just to pay your asking price.

    So expect your asking price to drop to match their (end user's) pocket depth tomorrow.

    I can say welcome to planet Earth. Magic happens only in Harry Potter movie, not in real life.:D:D:D
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by real_pro
    Haha...this is getting funnier...

    Car is a depreciating asset and RE is always going to be an appreciating asset...can't compare RE to anything!

    Time window...increase your time window for RE and you will always be a winner...no matter what!!!



    You are one confused for sure. You said, 5 L car will cost 20L tomorrow; and now call it depreciating asset. If new car will sell for 20L, old car will definitely sell for 8L atleast.
    CommentQuote
  • Comparing 80s situation is not app.ls to app.ls ...

    Originally Posted by Venkytalks
    Hi Wiseman.

    Most RE companies have got adequate private equity also as a source of funds. RE companies are now flush with funds, thanks to Ben bernanke lowering interest rates in USA to ridiculous levels, so that better returns in India was attractive for US and other investors.

    Stimulus measures by Govt has also created huge corruption related black money which is finding its way into RE. More is on the way after the telecom windfall.

    Price correction will be time related (price stand still till 2013-2014) and is unlikely to see more than 10-15% downmove (that also only in Mumbai which has run up too much - absolutely no chance for downmove in NOIDA and Gurgaon).

    You are also forgetting one very important correlation - food price to farmland.

    Food price inflation causes the yield per bigha to rise. Currently in north india, it is rent of 15000 per bigha per annum and price of 1.5L per bigha = 7.5L per acre.

    This is based on a 10 Rupees per kilo of grain. If price becomes 20 Rupees per kilo, price of land doubles. Already, in UP, price of farmland has risen some 10% per annum for the last 10 years.

    If price of food grain, pulses and vegetables keeps on rising like this, the base rate for land (yes, very similar to base rate for bank lending, based on cost of deposits :D) the base rate for farmland will rise, probably double.

    This percolates down to the RE price also.

    So while I totally agree that the global economy will see serious problems and India will also face hiccups, I anticipate stagflation in India.

    As I have discussed with you many times before, food price inflation always causes rental inflation, which affects flat valuation adversely. You of course have argued against that.

    Inflation also has a habit of increasing the corruption levels (if govt purchases more expensive things like hospital equipment or plant machinery or weapons, commisions are correspondingly more), all of this increases the black money circulation. Black money is always shown uneven distribution, i.e. some people get a windfall which in lakhs and crores, which can only be deployed in RE.

    When multiple factors exist for price escalation in RE, talking of only salary level and demand supply mismatch is too simplistic. Also, builders might simply bypass salaried people totally and artificially manipulate supply (as they are currently doing).

    Have you considered another scenario - all flats are bought by investors who decide to give on rent. Price goes beyond the ability of salaried to buy. Everybody on salary goes on rent.

    Then the rents start escalating. Rents consume half the salary.

    Have you heard of this happening before? I have. Happened in the late 80s. Cost of flat was 10L in Delhi, rent was maybe 5000 per month. Combined salary of both husband wife was maybe 10,000 per month.

    Half or more of the salary went for rent in any decent flat. People opted to live in pathetic flats - could not afford better.

    80s was recession time in US and Gulf, times were dificult in India also.

    Such times can return

    Now people have got used to better living. Renting might force your hand in future to curtail living standards.

    Because you might not be able to afford the rent



    This is not an argument. But comparing the 80s situation to current in terms of rentals being too high might not be correct.

    Reason being ... those were still the days of severe supply restrictions and comparatively little money going into RE against whats happening today. So, given a low salary base (since the world hadn't discovered Incredible India yet) and serious under-supply of properties (as well as the home being the primary means of long-term wealth-building; no F&O, no VC/PE-based get-rich-with-your-idea schemes) you no doubt had a completely different framework to justify a situation of high-rentals-low-salary-base scenario.

    Today, we are awash in cash, there is no dearth of get-rich-quick mechanisms other than RE and there is a huge oversupply of properties. I do not think, under these circumstances the same thing will happen to rentals like in the 80s.

    In fact, as I see it, these are the differences now.

    1. Unlike in the 80s, we are far more susceptible to global economic trends since we are much more integrated (notwithstanding the periodic beliefs that we are de-coupling)

    2. The global economy is in serious DEFLATION (still a huge majority of economic activity is centered around the West, no matter how much we talk about the booming East, we are, in money terms, still a small part of the world's economy) and this is a secular trend which should continue till we overcome the spending binge of the last 25 years!

    3. India's economy is precariously poised with a high deficit and a high debt burden, not really a recipe for takeoff in a deflating world

    My take of the trend going forward is,

    As you say, most definitely prices will deflate over an extended period an maybe to a level of 25-30% from current levels.

    As someone said, pay commission rise put a lot of money into Govt employees pockers last year. But it is now clear that the Govt is at the end of its bailout rope and even holy cows like Oil are being freed simply because the Central and State Govt are basically broke.

    I also foresee the following scenaro ...

    When the Western Economic model collapses sometime in the next few years, leading to severe depressionary conditions, there will be a short period of a sharp negative effect on India due to following reasons...
    1. A sharp pullback of FII money back to originating countries leading to sharp drop in our FE balances
    2. A significant job-loss situation simply due to evaporation of work from the West which could manifest both as unemployment (jobs disappearing) as well as under-employment (salaries dropping and contract work increasing)

    This should result in reality hitting a lot of people who continue to be gung-ho about how we will soar when the rest of the world sinks. This should also see a sharp drop in prices for a short period as we adjust to new realities.

    I'm waiting with a growing cash pile just to take such a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. In any case, this pile is growing in other asset classes just as fast as (or even faster than) RE today, so no loss.

    To each his own strategy ...

    As far as farmland goes, the next decade should see big jumps in prices for prime, irrigated land as food inflation is expected to soar. In fact, other than a few commodities, food should be the only thing in inflation in the next decade; most other assets will be in deflation. Will this jump result in Urban prices going up? Where is the evidence in the current circumstances?

    cheers
    CommentQuote
  • Good points, Wiseman.

    Requires a lot of pondering to really get a grasp on what might happen.

    (After 3 hours of pondering)

    Wisdom, as usual is probably somewhere in between, Wiseman. Renting might consume more of the salary than currently, but perhaps not as bad as the 80s where it was atrociously high because of severe shortages. Times are different now, freedom already experienced might dictate herd behaviour. Rubbish, which we tolerated in 80s will probably not get tolerated now.

    Profit expectations in RE should also be somewhere in between - its neither a fantastic opportunity nor a painful crash waiting to destrou your finances.

    its probably going to match FD returns and no more.

    Statistically, a middle of the road prediction is likely to be right in a bear market, where negatives are getting weighed (unlike the irrational expectations of a bull market). We are definitely not in a bull market in RE (lets see about sens e x in next few days)

    Big crash in Euro area is unlikely, given already worried investors and the asset price deflation of 2008. Slow grinding recession is more likely. Similarly, US should also see a slow grinding recession, at best giving up the gains of 2009, but not going below 2008 nadir in stocks. In RE, definitely, slow deflation is expected in US and Euro, probably totalling 30% over many years. Japan is likely to stay in its place, going nowhere.

    India is also likely to go nowhere. I definitely agree that in IT, times are likely to get quite difficult, since none of the IT markets are likely to have growth. But this is probably going to be matched by growth in internal economy and salaries in non IT likely to grow and start matching IT.

    Net effect might be a stand still for a few years. Of course the recession will always be uneven, affecting different sectors, jobs in different sectors, different RE locations in a very local manner. So investing in RE might require a good knowledge of the local economy direction and will be a RE location pickers market.

    RajeshP, you are forgeting one class of investors - people already living in own flats and buying new ones for themselves or their children and keeping them locked for future use.

    China is full of them. Delhi (Dwarka) and Gurgaon (Sohna Road) is full of them.

    They dont rent them out (fearing dispossession).

    So it does not add to the rental property.

    And it does not add to the property for sale.

    It serves only to suck flats out of the system, making it more difficult for genuine users, because the floating stock is rendered too low for efficient price discovery. Rather like Wipro shares which used to command a premium once upon a time.
    CommentQuote
  • Good justification.

    I will share a real life example which happened couple of days back. my neighbour/friend (family of 4) bought an empty plot across the road (in the same locality where i stay). he would have bought it for atleast 3.5 crores(400 sq yrd plot) and would have paid additional 20% to Noida authority:). i asked him what will u do with this , he said "bhai cash jyada ho raha tha isliye maine yeh plot kharida hai, ghar pe cash rakhne se acha hai property mein invest karloon". he already has a hostel in gr noida, an industrial plot in noida, 1 flat in eway and couple of houses in sector 27.

    These are the guys who keep properties in demand (bubble)and hike prices but block the property for actual users. we have plenty of them in our country.
    CommentQuote
  • makes perfect sense to me. Cash/ can easily be stolen however a properly fenced plot will last long enough to generate him another 3.5 crores in the next 20 years.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by rameshyahoo
    makes perfect sense to me. Cash/ can easily be stolen however a properly fenced plot will last long enough to generate him another 3.5 crores in the next 20 years.


    20 yrs? he will be able to generate in 10 yrs. plus cash lying at home is a liability. a major point is that he would be able to convert most of his cash component into chq.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Munish Malhautra
    Good justification.

    I will share a real life example which happened couple of days back. my neighbour/friend (family of 4) bought an empty plot across the road (in the same locality where i stay). he would have bought it for atleast 3.5 crores(400 sq yrd plot) and would have paid additional 20% to Noida authority:). i asked him what will u do with this , he said "bhai cash jyada ho raha tha isliye maine yeh plot kharida hai, ghar pe cash rakhne se acha hai property mein invest karloon". he already has a hostel in gr noida, an industrial plot in noida, 1 flat in eway and couple of houses in sector 27.

    These are the guys who keep properties in demand (bubble)and hike prices but block the property for actual users. we have plenty of them in our country.




    How many such investors are there and how long will investors keep trading with each other?

    Some fine day common man has to consume this. If common man does not have money, what do you expect?
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by rameshyahoo
    makes perfect sense to me. Cash/ can easily be stolen however a properly fenced plot will last long enough to generate him another 3.5 crores in the next 20 years.



    Land can be eaten by Land Sharks and land prices may decline as well, making you loose the capital forget the profit. Cannot rule this out.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by RAJESHP
    How many such investors are there and how long will investors keep trading with each other?

    Some fine day common man has to consume this. If common man does not have money, what do you expect?


    logic is if i have made money in RE i will continue to invest further there, if i made money in stocks in will continue to invest there. It all depends on the correct balance.
    issue is the rich continue to get richer and poor getting poorer.
    hoping something for the common man.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Munish Malhautra
    logic is if i have made money in RE i will continue to invest further there, if i made money in stocks in will continue to invest there. It all depends on the correct balance.
    issue is the rich continue to get richer and poor getting poorer.
    hoping something for the common man.


    If big-ticket investment-decision like RE/Stock, goes BAD, a rich becomes poor

    I know few persons who has lost money in 2008 in Mumbai (RE), Ahmedabad (stocks).
    My friend would be renting for next 1 yr although he has ready-possession house, to pay remaining amount to builder as his bank sanctioned less loan. The worst part is his house-value has depreciated by 20% in last 2 yrs.

    A couples' (my relatives) stock investment-decision went bad in 2008. Now wife (with a baby) is working to pay off debts.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by hitmady
    If big-ticket investment-decision like RE/Stock, goes BAD, a rich becomes poor
    I know few persons who has lost money in 2008 in Mumbai (RE), Ahmedabad (stocks).
    RE:
    My friend would be renting for 2 years although he has ready-possession house, to pay remaining amount to builder as his bank sanctioned less loan. The worst part is his house-value has depreciated by 20% in last 2 years.

    Stock:
    A couples' (my relatives) stock investment-decision went bad in 2008. Now wife (with a baby) is working to pay off debts.


    thats bound to happen. i too lost heavily in stocks hence i have not increased my portfolio, i have balance with RE and debt investments.
    Sometimes u lose in stock some time u gain in RE, u normally gain in long term investments(very slow pace though) etc and vice versa. yes if u continue to lose in RE and stocks then kismat-no connection:)
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Munish Malhautra
    Good justification.

    I will share a real life example which happened couple of days back. my neighbour/friend (family of 4) bought an empty plot across the road (in the same locality where i stay). he would have bought it for atleast 3.5 crores(400 sq yrd plot) and would have paid additional 20% to Noida authority:). i asked him what will u do with this , he said "bhai cash jyada ho raha tha isliye maine yeh plot kharida hai, ghar pe cash rakhne se acha hai property mein invest karloon". he already has a hostel in gr noida, an industrial plot in noida, 1 flat in eway and couple of houses in sector 27.

    These are the guys who keep properties in demand (bubble)and hike prices but block the property for actual users. we have plenty of them in our country.

    Fact is he has lot of B-money, hence these things. You should though also see how Unitech, Omaxe, DLF & others in Delhi-NCR were asked to make additional collateral as the so called LAND BANKS value fell by whopping 55%.

    Ofcourse, comparing cash with RE is of no use coz you just wanted to put that cash somewhere, that's it. I bet, if he had loads of white money, he would have invested elsewhere. But as said before, the investor makes money only after selling to end users & not investor.

    Originally Posted by hitmady
    A couples' (my relatives) stock investment-decision went bad in 2008. Now wife (with a baby) is working to pay off debts.

    Really disgusting to see this. If it was a joint decision of wife & husband, then it is a classic case of over-leveraging oneself & this is not done to make profit but greed of wanting more & more with minimal efforts:bab (45)::o. However, if it is the husbands decision to do this, then he should be:bab (58):.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by Venkytalks
    Profit expectations in RE should also be somewhere in between - its neither a fantastic opportunity nor a painful crash waiting to destrou your finances.

    its probably going to match FD returns and no more.

    The US economic indicators are not looking good. Majority of the current Americans have credit rating of less than 599, all thanks to over-spending on credit. This has made credit finance almost impossible to them & hence consumption gone down. These are the figs released last week.

    In India, the IIP has dipped by 5%, & is the lowest in this year. RBI has said that inflation will be 11% in short term & next round of interest rate hikes may take place at July 27.

    The current economic indicators are not good if you are overleveraging for making RE purchase.
    CommentQuote