Comments by "P M" (@pm2886) on "PROOF EVERYONE IS GOING BROKE!" video.

@broncobra Insurance is mostly a scam. A very expensive one. Get rid of it for everything except personal liability (third-party). We no longer insure our houses. Their value is 90% in the land, so it's a waste of money.
8
 @mssophietomko Exactly. So those of us who don't, make extra sure we can leave our kids property.
3
@kimberlymartin459 Just to be clear, the market value of a house is rarely predicted on size. A giant McMansion in the suburbs is going to be a lot cheaper than a tiny 2 bedder close to the city, for example.
3
@tyronejackson6593 Still cheap. In my country, we have close to the most expensive real estate in the world - some stats say the most expensive. It doesn't matter what you earn here, the cheapest house in any kind of useful town, is going to be over $350k. And that's the really cheap places. For example I can drive three solid hours from the city, and find regular family houses in rural towns selling for $1m. That's in a town with low average incomes. When I say you don't know how good you have, I'm using understatement. You really REALLY have no idea how lucky you are to have so much cheap property. You guys can still buy houses for less than $50k. That hasn't been possible in my country for a generation.
2
@tyronejackson6593 We have more land than we know what to do with. A HUGE country. The issue is we don't have a lot of towns, so most residential housing is confined to state capitals (which are all coastal). Our capitals house millions, but our scattered towns house barely any.
2
@SpinSatx There's some truth to that, even in our market (rated most expensive or second most expensive in the world .. just like yours, ironically). We CAN still buy places at $350k or less. The problem we have isn't so much that there are no cheap properties .. it's that the people whining about property prices expect to live in our very expensive capitals. They refuse to consider moving to cheaper areas, and they pay the price for that. The same appears to be true in America (mainland). Everyone wants to live in the city.
2
@SpinSatx And that's exactly the kinds of things people tell themselves to justify trying to live somewhere they can't afford. That comes from a perverse and unjustified expectation of easy access to the most and best jobs. It's an expectation which is wholly out of step with those who aren't likely to earn enough to live comfortably in a big city. As for smaller towns not having all the jobs and facilities of a big city .. obviously. But people have been finding a way to carve good lives out of such places, for generations. That's likely to remain the case for a few generations yet. It's a matter of will and determination. Besides, in a rural town you would have so much less money invested in housing, that you could afford to start a business, or produce food, or whatever. You actually have more options than you do in the city, in some ways.
2
In that case they're living beyond their means.
2
 @Gato_305 Renting with three kids, is madness though. You should have bought something cheap before you started a family.
1
 @LewisKindrick-r5n Not if you're rentvesting. Your rental properties (in other locations) pay your rent in your preferred location.
1
Not all wages. But if you're one of those whose income is stagnant, you need to adjust your lifestyle to fit. Continuing to live the same way you used to, them whining that can't afford it, is idiotic.
1
 @tyronejackson6593 That's so cheap! I don't think you Americans realize how good you have it.
1
@SpinSatx Once again, that $350k is in the middle of nowhere and falling down. A family house in the suburbs of a capital city is over $1m. In my capital it's $2m. And that can be a half hour commute from the city. Even an hour out, a three bedder is $1m.
1
@SpinSatx I agree .. however try to convince young people in the big cities that they have all those options, and see what happens. They'll tell you they can't possibly afford to own a house, because houses are all over $1m. What they REALLY mean is "I can't afford the world's most expensive city". The deliberately limit their options to one. Big city or nothing.
1
@jorgeenchilada Not free market capitalism. Free market capitalism would actually fix this. What we're experiencing is the deliberate disempowerment of the working and middle classes .. by those who wish to control us. The want us on UBI's, and living in individual pods in 15 minute cities. Owning nothing.
1
VROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM The rest of the world manages without "buyers agents", Americans can too!
1
@brianmatthews4149 Not a question that needs asking. What an individual chooses to do in response to not being able to afford something, is unknowable. It's entirely personal. Every person will have their own solution. As long as they're not on the street, the world is their oyster.
1
@101519e What more CAN they do?
1
@JKDVIPER Once again, each individual will have their own solution. Do you think it's reasonable or humane to dictate what they do or where they go? It's far more humane to allow people to solve things as they see fit. Wanting to dictate how they do it, is terrible. If I can't afford to buy meat (for example), do you think it's reasonable to demand that some arbitrary solution is forced on me? Like forcing me to eat insects or something? What if I prefer to become vegetarian, or hunt, or save my money to buy a chicken once a month?
1