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.
I mean, you can continue to rent for the rest of your life, paying money to a corporation every month, if that’s your prerogative. Isn’t very smart, though.
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 one intends to use education as an investment (as in, for the realistic purpose of increasing the market value of your labour), it might be the case that taking debt for that is a good economic decision as well.
I mean, that really depends on a lot of variables whether it’s worth it or not. You should definitely explore any opportunity where you avoid taking on debt (community college, learn a trade, getting the debt forgiven with volunteering programs, studying abroad, studying in your own state,…).
You’re kinds muddling three related but distinct concepts here: “what do I want to do with my life?”, “What can be done to minimize the cost of education”, and"does it make sense to go into debt to obtain the thing".
Someone could (and should) brainstorm all kinds of options, but at the end of the day, (for most of us working class), we’re still faced with the proposition of either taking on some amount of debt, or deferring to save money to pay outright for the thing.
It’s not my place to tell people what they should do with their lives, but given the general question of “should I borrow money to do X”, it just comes down to “does the value over the time of ownership exceed the cost of servicing the debt”.
Removed by mod
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.
Removed by mod
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.
Removed by mod
I mean, you can continue to rent for the rest of your life, paying money to a corporation every month, if that’s your prerogative. Isn’t very smart, though.
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?
Removed by mod
The only thing you should realistically go into debt for is a house. The other stuff should really only be a last resort.
If one intends to use education as an investment (as in, for the realistic purpose of increasing the market value of your labour), it might be the case that taking debt for that is a good economic decision as well.
I mean, that really depends on a lot of variables whether it’s worth it or not. You should definitely explore any opportunity where you avoid taking on debt (community college, learn a trade, getting the debt forgiven with volunteering programs, studying abroad, studying in your own state,…).
You’re kinds muddling three related but distinct concepts here: “what do I want to do with my life?”, “What can be done to minimize the cost of education”, and"does it make sense to go into debt to obtain the thing".
Someone could (and should) brainstorm all kinds of options, but at the end of the day, (for most of us working class), we’re still faced with the proposition of either taking on some amount of debt, or deferring to save money to pay outright for the thing.
It’s not my place to tell people what they should do with their lives, but given the general question of “should I borrow money to do X”, it just comes down to “does the value over the time of ownership exceed the cost of servicing the debt”.