Serious White Suburban Americans Remind me of Foids

[Intellectual]

Ok


Nah, urban homes are infinitely more expensive.


Admitted what? I said they are correlated, not negatively correlated.

You know when I'm suggesting to live in the city I'm not saying to buy a home, I'm saying to rent.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

You know when I'm suggesting to live in the city I'm not saying to buy a home, I'm saying to rent.

“You will own nothing, and you will be happy” -German Totalitarian trying to control the world

(Ignore the fact the elites will own everything)

 

[Intellectual]

“You will own nothing, and you will be happy” -German Totalitarian trying to control the world

You'll own far more, all the money going towards owning a home can be used to buy stock in the most profitable and cash generating companies in the world, META, Apple, Bank of America, etc.

(Ignore the fact the elites will own everything)

They already do, Suburban elites hold more wealth as a group than any other.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

You'll own far more, all the money going towards owning a home can be used to buy stock in the most profitable and cash generating companies in the world, META, Apple, Bank of America, etc.

Or you can buy food, SHELTER, and clothing. Aka, your basic needs.

They already do, Suburban elites hold more wealth as a group than any other.

Suburban are not elites, they’re literally the definition of middle class. Too poor to live in city with their own hime, but rich enough to work in city though.

 

[Intellectual]

Or you can buy food, SHELTER, and clothing. Aka, your basic needs.

You are, rent is purchasing shelter for temporary durations. Also, if FOOD is a basic need, then you shouldn't buy a house, use that money to buy stock in the big grocers and farm stocks.

Suburban are not elites, they’re literally the definition of middle class. Too poor to live in city with their own hime, but rich enough to work in city though.

Upper middle class people can't even afford to live in the suburbs. I know tons of people who live in the city because they can't afford to buy a house in the suburbs.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

You are, rent is purchasing shelter for temporary durations.

Mortgage is literally cheaper than rent.

Also, if FOOD is a basic need, then you shouldn't buy a house, use that money to buy stock in the big grocers and farm stocks.

Housing is a basic need though

Upper middle class people can't even afford to live in the suburbs. I know tons of people who live in the city because they can't afford to buy a house in the suburbs.

I don’t know where you live, but here if you live in the suburbs you are literally the definition of middle class.

 

[Intellectual]

Mortgage is literally cheaper than rent.

1) No it isn't. Rent is much cheaper, investors who bought real estate are cash flow negative right now.

2) Banks will only extent mortgages to extremely wealthy individuals.

Housing is a basic need though

Food is an even more basic need, so I'd buy stock in grocery stores before I bought a house.

I don’t know where you live, but here if you live in the suburbs you are literally the definition of middle class.

In the GTA you need an income of $240k a year to be APPROVED for a mortgage, that's the minimum income needed for the smallest place.

Earning 250k a year puts you in the top 1% earners in Canada.

You literally need to basically be in the 1% to get a mortgage.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

1) No it isn't. Rent is much cheaper, investors who bought real estate are cash flow negative right now.

I’m a house owner lol, I know what the rates were. Although it’s paid off now.

2) Banks will only extent mortgages to extremely wealthy individuals.

You mean to pay who can pay a down payment. Middle class (what you need these days) in your definition is extremely wealthy jfl.

Food is an even more basic need, so I'd buy stock in grocery stores before I bought a house.

Stocks is not a basic need jfl.

In the GTA you need an income of $240k a year to be APPROVED for a mortgage, that's the minimum income needed for the smallest place.

Canada’s housing market is completely broken compared to the rest of North America, especially GTA and Vancouver. In a normal market, if people couldn’t afford the housing the prices would drop to where they could. However, the politicians are so corrupt they keep the prices artificially high by having foreign investors buy up all the remaining properties, and they do not even live there. The foreign investors are buying everything up.

Normal people are forced to rent, not because it is morally superior to do so as you claim, but because they don’t have any other option. They are abused dogs.

Add on top they bring in a huge amount of foreign workers who are willing to live with 6 other people in a 2 bedroom rental, and they are the ones that end up saving any actual money. Pack everyone like drone bots, while the rich own everything.

Making the housing smaller and smaller won’t change anything. It will just give space for more people to rent from tinier areas, and then those prices will get artificially inflated just like it did before.

In other words, it’s over for Canadians. Nothing is going to get done. No expansion (as I suggested) cause politicians don’t want their property values to go down. Rather have everyone pack into tighter spaces and become an inhospitable shithole like New York City or something.

 

[Intellectual]

I’m a house owner lol, I know what the rates were. Although it’s paid off now.

And my friend who works in retail banking is telling me about how many home owners are underwater right now because rates were jacked up. Meanwhile my rent is still what it was a year and a half ago.

You mean to pay who can pay a down payment. Middle class (what you need these days) in your definition is extremely wealthy jfl.

You don't just need a down payment, you need to prove your income is $240k a year, which puts you just over the top 1% income bracket.

Stocks is not a basic need jfl.

And a piece of paper that says you own a house is not a basic need. I've never once owned a home in my life and I've been fine.

Canada’s housing market is completely broken compared to the rest of North America, especially GTA and Vancouver. In a normal market, if people couldn’t afford the housing the prices would drop to where they could. However, the politicians are so corrupt they keep the prices artificially high by having foreign investors buy up all the remaining properties, and they do not even live there. The foreign investors are buying everything up.

Ok, if an asset is overvalued, it will eventually come down,

Normal people are forced to rent, not because it is morally superior to do so as you claim, but because they don’t have any other option. They are abused dogs.

Not in Canada, renters are the most privileged people on the planet. Homeowners are as I said, so rich they're getting mental health examinations because they feel so guilty over it. Canada is now high on anti-depressants, it's truly sick and inhumane for the state to have made these people so disgustingly rich because now they feel guilty.

Add on top they bring in a huge amount of foreign workers who are willing to live with 6 other people in a 2 bedroom rental, and they are the ones that end up saving any actual money. Pack everyone like drone bots, while the rich own everything.

In Canada the rich own nothing, they're taxed to death and single mother foids on welfare take it. They spend it on companies that are diversly owned by white suburbanites.

Making the housing smaller and smaller won’t change anything. It will just give space for more people to rent from tinier areas, and then those prices will get artificially inflated just like it did before.

In other words, it’s over for Canadians. Nothing is going to get done. No expansion (as I suggested) cause politicians don’t want their property values to go down. Rather have everyone pack into tighter spaces and become an inhospitable shithole like New York City or something.

Rather that then have a huge group of people live in giant mansions and collectively commit suicide on a massive guilt trip.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

And my friend who works in retail banking is telling me about how many home owners are underwater right now because rates were jacked up. Meanwhile my rent is still what it was a year and a half ago.

What’s the interest rate rn?

You don't just need a down payment, you need to prove your income is $240k a year, which puts you just over the top 1% income bracket.

This is actually a newer policy. Back in the day, you just had to have down payment money and enough to pay the mortgage. https://www.bankofcanada.ca/2018/11/staff-analytical-note-2018-35/

And a piece of paper that says you own a house is not a basic need. I've never once owned a home in my life and I've been fine.

Housing is a basic need. Renting from a rich person us poverty cope.

Ok, if an asset is overvalued, it will eventually come down,

Not if you flood the market with foreign investors and create regulations to prevent building more housing based on demand.

Not in Canada, renters are the most privileged people on the planet. Homeowners are as I said, so rich they're getting mental health examinations because they feel so guilty over it. Canada is now high on anti-depressants, it's truly sick and inhumane for the state to have made these people so disgustingly rich because now they feel guilty.

No one is getting mental health issues from being too rich, this is actually the stupidest cope I’ve ever read.

In Canada the rich own nothing, they're taxed to death and single mother foids on welfare take it. They spend it on companies that are diversly owned by white suburbanites.

-Rich
-own nothing

Dude, the best investments in Canada aren’t for some amazing new corporations innovating things, it’s literally the housing market. I know a dude who literally owns 500 houses, and real estate agents are making more much more money than doctors and engineers from flipping houses. Although not rn, cause people aren’t buying at this price, which is hopefully a good sign. But I highly doubt it.

Rather that then have a huge group of people live in giant mansions and collectively commit suicide on a massive guilt trip.

 

[Intellectual]

What’s the interest rate rn?

6.95%

This is actually a newer policy. Back in the day, you just had to have down payment money and enough to pay the mortgage. https://www.bankofcanada.ca/2018/11/staff-analytical-note-2018-35/

Interesting, I'm looking at it from a modern point of view.

Housing is a basic need. Renting from a rich person us poverty cope.

Food is a basic need, buying from a grocery store that you don't own is poverty cope. I'd rather put that down payment money to buy stock and options in Sobeys to SIMULATE myself owning $1,000,000 in the company. That way I won't have to make food expenses from my paycheck, my dividends from Sobeys will pay for my food bill.

Not if you flood the market with foreign investors and create regulations to prevent building more housing based on demand.

Yes you will, because of opportunity cost. If Sobeys is yielding 10%, but a house is yielding 1.5% after taxes, the market will continously reward holders of Sobeys stock, and punish homeowners, with lower returns. Betting on prices going up and down is gambling, an asset is worth the cashflow it generates.

No one is getting mental health issues from being too rich, this is actually the stupidest cope I’ve ever read.

"Suicide is a privilege of the rich" - Ben Shapiro

-Rich
-own nothing

What I meant is they do own shit but the government taxes them so much it's like they don't own it. The government gets all the profit.

Dude, the best investments in Canada aren’t for some amazing new corporations innovating things, it’s literally the housing market. I know a dude who literally owns 500 houses, and real estate agents are making more much more money than doctors and engineers from flipping houses. Although not rn, cause people aren’t buying at this price, which is hopefully a good sign. But I highly doubt it.

That's literally the sign of a bubble, that's the worst possible investment you can make. A real investment isn't bet on the price changing, but based on cash flow generation of the asset. I buy assets that will return me more money in cash flow, not assets I think a greater fool will buy for a higher price.

View attachment 789909

I'm not coping.

 

[Darkday]

1) Feel victimized but receive all the privileges

2) Think the system is slanted against them when they are the biggest and most privileged benefactors of the system

3) Believe they are economically disadvantaged (foid wage gap myth) when they are actually the most economically privileged group (Western law favors workers over employers 1000x)

4) Attempt to censor any criticism of them

5) Demand other people be sacrificed for their comfort and lifestyle

Elaborate since all their complains seem valid nowadays in 'murica.

 

[Intellectual]

Elaborate since all their complains seem valid nowadays in 'murica.

Most of the wealth of America, which is the richest country, is held by Suburbanite Americans. If you aggregate the value of all their homes, their stocks, pensions, it is a vast array of wealth. Suburbanites also have more power per person over the political arena since politicians pander to them the most.

 

[Darkday]

Most of the wealth of America, which is the richest country, is held by Suburbanite Americans. If you aggregate the value of all their homes, their stocks, pensions, it is a vast array of wealth. Suburbanites also have more power per person over the political arena since politicians pander to them the most.

That's obvious, it's the wealth they've building for years. The system however is doing what it can to remove those privileges.

 

[Intellectual]

That's obvious, it's the wealth they've building for years. The system however is doing what it can to remove those privileges.

They didn't really build the privilege, they used their political influence to enslave others underneith them. They taxed the banks and hedge funds for capital financing and they worked the poor.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e68CoE70Mk8&t=218s

 

[Darkday]

They didn't really build the privilege, they used their political influence to enslave others underneith them. They taxed the banks and hedge funds for capital financing and they worked the poor.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e68CoE70Mk8&t=218s

So, their concerns are valid for those that weren't there oppressing the poooooor victims. Now that the system is doing what it can to oppress the oppressors.

 

[Intellectual]

So, their concerns are valid for those that weren't there oppressing the poooooor victims. Now that the system is doing what it can to oppress the oppressors.

And who's concerns are these you're talking about?

There are Americans who have legitimate concerns, black and hispanic people namely.

 

[Darkday]

There are Americans who have legitimate concerns, black and hispanic people namely.

Why? The system is in their favor now.

 

[Intellectual]

Why? The system is in their favor now.

It's becoming more equitable but still very much white supremacist. White Surbanites still are blocking housing development and public transit.

 

[Darkday]

It's becoming more equitable but still very much white supremacist. White Surbanites still are blocking housing development and public transit.

If the system is in their favor, then it isn't equitable.

 

[Intellectual]

If the system is in their favor, then it isn't equitable.

And that's why I said MORE equitable, it's not 100% equitable.

 

[Darkday]

And that's why I said MORE equitable, it's not 100% equitable.

So their concerns are valid, since they don't know if the system are going to remove all their rights.

 

[Intellectual]

So their concerns are valid, since they don't know if the system are going to remove all their rights.

When you're privileged, equality seems like oppression

 

[Darkday]

When you're privileged, equality seems like oppression

That's also possible, but when there is full display of oppression against you, you also feel oppressed. Aren't you an incel?

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

Interesting, I'm looking at it from a modern point of view.

The way they did this is exactly the opposite of what was done before 2008, where they were making it easier for people to get a mortgage. That led to an eventual collapse of the housing market due to so many people not being to pay off their mortgages, but now they are trying to bullet proof it so the market won’t crash. However, to do this they essentially blocked out huge numbers of people from being able to buy homes.

Food is a basic need, buying from a grocery store that you don't own is poverty cope. I'd rather put that down payment money to buy stock and options in Sobeys to SIMULATE myself owning $1,000,000 in the company. That way I won't have to make food expenses from my paycheck, my dividends from Sobeys will pay for my food bill.

Retarded non-equivalency. Stores are just distributors, they are not the source of the food. If you had said owning a farm, that would be one thing, but I bet you would complain about people doing that as well. People in every society on Earth want to own their own home, but not everyone wants to own a farm (although the doomsday preppers would disagree). All this van-life rental life shit we’ve seen in the past decade is just poverty cope. Literally no one wants to live like that anywhere else in the world, cause it’s stupid.

Yes you will, because of opportunity cost. If Sobeys is yielding 10%, but a house is yielding 1.5% after taxes, the market will continously reward holders of Sobeys stock, and punish homeowners, with lower returns. Betting on prices going up and down is gambling, an asset is worth the cashflow it generates.

Many see property as a long term investment, which is what it is.

"Suicide is a privilege of the rich" - Ben Shapiro

Still waiting for the evidence suburbanites kill themselves more than urban dwellers.

What I meant is they do own shit but the government taxes them so much it's like they don't own it. The government gets all the profit.

Most urban homes are owned by the ultra-wealthy, so they know how to invest their money. Then they have puppets like you telling them “renting is life” to make these people richer.

That's literally the sign of a bubble, that's the worst possible investment you can make. A real investment isn't bet on the price changing, but based on cash flow generation of the asset. I buy assets that will return me more money in cash flow, not assets I think a greater fool will buy for a higher price.

We can only hope the bubble’s going to pop. But we saw in 2008, it was only a small dip and it went right back up in the long term. Your point would make sense if you were saying to wait until the bubble pops, but you’re straight up saying stupid shit like calling suburban housing as white supremacist control tool jfl. It’s not just whites, ethnics also want to live in the suburbs and only preppy rich white leftist youth in their 20s want to eliminate the suburbs altogether to expand urban areas and squeeze everyone together and force them to rent out from the super-rich.

 

[Serpents reign]

1) Feel victimized but receive all the privileges

2) Think the system is slanted against them when they are the biggest and most privileged benefactors of the system

3) Believe they are economically disadvantaged (foid wage gap myth) when they are actually the most economically privileged group (Western law favors workers over employers 1000x)

4) Attempt to censor any criticism of them

5) Demand other people be sacrificed for their comfort and lifestyle

This does not include all white people that live in suburbs. I hope you take note of that this is really for baby boomers who own everything and left their future generation descendants with nothing but a dying world

 

[Intellectual]

That's also possible, but when there is full display of oppression against you, you also feel oppressed. Aren't you an incel?

Yes, so I see anti-incel oppression, I feel privileged to the extent that I am white.

 

[Intellectual]

The way they did this is exactly the opposite of what was done before 2008, where they were making it easier for people to get a mortgage. That led to an eventual collapse of the housing market due to so many people not being to pay off their mortgages, but now they are trying to bullet proof it so the market won’t crash. However, to do this they essentially blocked out huge numbers of people from being able to buy homes.

The reason why an asset price crashes is because it doesn't yield anything relative to the price. If houses are $1,000,000 but you can only get $30,000 in rent from it, and then $15,000 of that rent goes to maintenance and tax, then you're only collecting 1.5% return after tax on that. Eventually, people who hold that shitty asset will sell it for assets that are yielding 10% like Goldman Sachs.

Retarded non-equivalency. Stores are just distributors, they are not the source of the food. If you had said owning a farm, that would be one thing, but I bet you would complain about people doing that as well. People in every society on Earth want to own their own home, but not everyone wants to own a farm (although the doomsday preppers would disagree). All this van-life rental life shit we’ve seen in the past decade is just poverty cope. Literally no one wants to live like that anywhere else in the world, cause it’s stupid.

The idea of home ownership has always been viewed with disgust and aristocracy. In Europe many people go their whole lives renting and they don't view home ownership as this essential need. It's only amongst the terra-privileged that they view home ownership as essential. Throughout history, most humans didn't own their homes.

Many see property as a long term investment, which is what it is.

So is this about investments or not? Because if your goal is a "long term investments" I can show you much better ones than property.

Still waiting for the evidence suburbanites kill themselves more than urban dwellers.


Most urban homes are owned by the ultra-wealthy, so they know how to invest their money. Then they have puppets like you telling them “renting is life” to make these people richer.

If they really knew how to invest thier money, they would have owned Apple stock, Apple stock 5xed over the past 6 years while houses have gone up 35% gross.

We can only hope the bubble’s going to pop. But we saw in 2008, it was only a small dip and it went right back up in the long term. Your point would make sense if you were saying to wait until the bubble pops, but you’re straight up saying stupid shit like calling suburban housing as white supremacist control tool jfl. It’s not just whites, ethnics also want to live in the suburbs and only preppy rich white leftist youth in their 20s want to eliminate the suburbs altogether to expand urban areas and squeeze everyone together and force them to rent out from the super-rich.

Very wealthy ethnics yes, the ethnics I've spoken with just want enough money to eat, they want food, not ownership of mansions.

 

[NonNTsubhuman]

All of this guys threads belong on Reddit and not here.

Mods are cucked but we really need a permanent ban on all jews and sjw white cuckolds.
Its so tiresome

 

[Darkday]

Yes, so I see anti-incel oppression, I feel privileged to the extent that I am white.

Jbw is a thing in the dating market. Good that you acknowledge that.

 

[Intellectual]

Jbw is a thing in the dating market. Good that you acknowledge that.

It's true but not to the full extent.

being white 100% helps you all things being equal, but white incels certainly exist.

 

[Darkday]

It's true but not to the full extent.

being white 100% helps you all things being equal, but white incels certainly exist.

I agree. You have it more easier than ethnics in the dating market.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

The reason why an asset price crashes is because it doesn't yield anything relative to the price. If houses are $1,000,000 but you can only get $30,000 in rent from it, and then $15,000 of that rent goes to maintenance and tax, then you're only collecting 1.5% return after tax on that. Eventually, people who hold that shitty asset will sell it for assets that are yielding 10% like Goldman Sachs.

It’s also artificially inflating or deflating prices due to government regulations and corrupt practices like investment firms do.

The idea of home ownership has always been viewed with disgust and aristocracy. In Europe many people go their whole lives renting and they don't view home ownership as this essential need. It's only amongst the terra-privileged that they view home ownership as essential. Throughout history, most humans didn't own their homes.

This is such a brain dead take that I think you are actually just trolling now. Literally no one thinks hone ownership is disgusting, everyone wants to own their own home. Renting has always been thought of for the poor, and not owning your own home is the equivalent of being a slave. Tell me outside of mentally ill white nations where anyone thinks renting is an ideal while home ownership is looked down upon in comparison (that isn’t some nomadic tribe that has no choice).

So is this about investments or not? Because if your goal is a "long term investments" I can show you much better ones than property.

Housing is the best investment in Canada, and yields more than almost anything in the market. But even if housing prices didn’t grow at all, almost everyone would still want a house if they had the ability.

If they really knew how to invest thier money, they would have owned Apple stock, Apple stock 5xed over the past 6 years while houses have gone up 35% gross.

Apple is not a Canadian asset. Tech stock maxxing is considered high risk high reward, although Apple is considered a safer option with even people like Warren Buffet famously endorsing it (although recently he’s moving away from it apparently).

Very wealthy ethnics yes, the ethnics I've spoken with just want enough money to eat, they want food, not ownership of mansions.

Maybe being able to buy a new house you need to be very rich, but most the people who own homes are not. They just got into the market earlier when it was more affordable and the mortgages were not as tied to your income as they have been since 2018 due to changes in regulations.

Ethnics could afford food in their own shit hole countries as well. Go find a single ethnic that says they don’t want to own a home and would prefer to permanently rent. You won’t find a single one jfl.

 

[Intellectual]

It’s also artificially inflating or deflating prices due to government regulations and corrupt practices like investment firms do.

I'm honestly done, I've written you off as a troll. No one in 2023 has this little understanding on economics. The Covid lockdowns showed us the relationship between earnings, money supply, and asset values.

This is such a brain dead take that I think you are actually just trolling now. Literally no one thinks hone ownership is disgusting, everyone wants to own their own home. Renting has always been thought of for the poor, and not owning your own home is the equivalent of being a slave. Tell me outside of mentally ill white nations where anyone thinks renting is an ideal while home ownership is looked down upon in comparison (that isn’t some nomadic tribe that has no choice).

Again, home ownership has always been for the super rich, in every society ever. In feudal europe you needed to be literal royal or royal adjacent to own property. Property owners were always seen as disgusting, that's the epitome of Marxism, an ideology that over 1/3 of the world ascribed to.

Housing is the best investment in Canada, and yields more than almost anything in the market. But even if housing prices didn’t grow at all, almost everyone would still want a house if they had the ability.

They yield 1.5% on average after taxes. Bank of Nova Scotia is yielding over 10%

Apple is not a Canadian asset. Tech stock maxxing is considered high risk high reward, although Apple is considered a safer option with even people like Warren Buffet famously endorsing it (although recently he’s moving away from it apparently).

I don't care if it's considered high risk, the tech market in the U.S is objectively more stable and higher yielding than Canadian RE

Maybe being able to buy a new house you need to be very rich, but most the people who own homes are not. They just got into the market earlier when it was more affordable and the mortgages were not as tied to your income as they have been since 2018 due to changes in regulations.

Maybe that was the case, I'd have to look into it.

Ethnics could afford food in their own shit hole countries as well. Go find a single ethnic that says they don’t want to own a home and would prefer to permanently rent. You won’t find a single one jfl.

They couldn't afford shit in their old country, thats why they came here.

Buffet openly said he didn't even want to own his current home, he only bought it because of his wife.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

I'm honestly done, I've written you off as a troll. No one in 2023 has this little understanding on economics. The Covid lockdowns showed us the relationship between earnings, money supply, and asset values.

So after I called you a troll, you are just trying to call me one now cause that made you mad. Jfl at the cope. 2008 was perfect example of how unintended increase of housing market values through government programs to make them more affordable led to a crash. Covid lockdowns didn’t show us anything new, the science of economics has been around for a long time.

Again, home ownership has always been for the super rich, in every society ever. In feudal europe you needed to be literal royal or royal adjacent to own property. Property owners were always seen as disgusting, that's the epitome of Marxism, an ideology that over 1/3 of the world ascribed to.

Feudalism is what people don’t want, where the wealthy own all the property and everyone else is pretty much renting. That’s what you are advocating, as owning urban housing is even less affordable to anyone so you are forced to rent.

Marxism is not a good measure for people around the world believe, as most those numbers are coming from China and people didn’t “vote” them in jfl. And their so called marxism isn’t actual communism, as their totalitarian social system and mixed economic system reflects a fascist system much better. So even China does not believe in Marxist theory of economics because it was a complete failure, and led to the famous reforms under Deng Xiaoping.

70% of all personal wealth in China is in housing, but they are not allowed to own the land underneath their homes. Many get decade long leases, which is essentially a way for you to be able to “own” a home without being able to pass it on to your kids.

If they wanted to rent so badly, why would they get these decade long leases from the government? The answer is because they don’t, and they actually want to be able to own a home and be able to pass it own to their kids.

They yield 1.5% on average after taxes. Bank of Nova Scotia is yielding over 10%

What is the long term average?

According to Ratehub, the average Canadian home price doubled, returning a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of approximately 8.8%, over the last seven years.

Real Estate Investing vs. Stock Investing in the Last 7 Years

Real estate investing and stock investing provide different benefits and complement each other. It's a good idea to invest in both. The post Real Estate Investing vs. Stock Investing in the Last 7 Years appeared first on The Motley Fool Canada.

ca.finance.yahoo.com

What about investing in scotia bank?

Bank Of Nova Scotia - 24 Year Stock Price History | BNS

Historical daily share price chart and data for Bank Of Nova Scotia since 2002 adjusted for splits and dividends. The latest closing stock price for Bank Of Nova Scotia as of February 09, 2026 is <strong>77.63</strong>. <ul style='margin-top:10px;'> <li>The all-time high Bank Of...

www.macrotrends.net

Based on this analysis, in the last 10 years there is a 60% increase in stock price. I’m guessing maybe you mean the dividends they pay.

I’m not saying it’s a bad investment, but if you have to pay rent anyways, why would you not have that count towards owning the home? Meanwhile you don’t have to invest in the banking industry like this by force.

I don't care if it's considered high risk, the tech market in the U.S is objectively more stable and higher yielding than Canadian RE

Not more stable, but definitely higher yielding. But if you want to use TFSA and such, you have to buy Canadian stock. Plus tech stocks don’t pay out dividends, but it’s still a good place to invest.

As I said before though, if you have to pay rent no matter what, why not have that money go to buying your own house instead? It’s the smartest decision if you have the choice, just don’t leave in the GTA and move. Personally that would be my advice. If you have extra cash after then, then investment in these tech stocks and canadian companies is the way to go once that is done.

They couldn't afford shit in their old country, thats why they came here.

They can afford their basic needs including housing but things like technology, entertainment, luxury items, etx is much more unaffordable there.

Buffet openly said he didn't even want to own his current home, he only bought it because of his wife.

He literally says home ownership is a good investment for most Americans financially and emotionally

Buying a home enables you to create stability for yourself and your loved ones, as well as to hopefully build wealth over time when you pay down your loan and your property appreciates in value.

Because of both the financial and emotional benefits, Buffett made clear that "Home ownership makes sense for most Americans, particularly at today’s lower prices and bargain interest rates."

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/why-warren-buffett-considers-his-home-his-third-best-investment

The reason he says he didn’t want to buy a house like he did is because he would have made more money if he invested in his tech stocks. But as I said, he doesn’t have to pay rent and nowhere does he say he would rather pay rent jfl.

Housing is an appreciating asset while rent is not an asset at all. Since everyone has to live in housing, the first choice makes infinitely more sense given the choice.

 

[Intellectual]

So after I called you a troll, you are just trying to call me one now cause that made you mad. Jfl at the cope. 2008 was perfect example of how unintended increase of housing market values through government programs to make them more affordable led to a crash. Covid lockdowns didn’t show us anything new, the science of economics has been around for a long time.

It showed us that when asset values rise beyond the underlying cash flow, they are OVERVALUED, and they go down in value when the mare

Feudalism is what people don’t want, where the wealthy own all the property and everyone else is pretty much renting. That’s what you are advocating, as owning urban housing is even less affordable to anyone so you are forced to rent.

I'm advocating for people generating real wealth, not buying overvalued cardboard boxes and then losing their life savings in a housing crash.

Marxism is not a good measure for people around the world believe, as most those numbers are coming from China and people didn’t “vote” them in jfl. And their so called marxism isn’t actual communism, as their totalitarian social system and mixed economic system reflects a fascist system much better. So even China does not believe in Marxist theory of economics because it was a complete failure, and led to the famous reforms under Deng Xiaoping.

China is still very much a communist State, even their "free economic zones" follow the principles and plancks of the communist manifesto.

70% of all personal wealth in China is in housing, but they are not allowed to own the land underneath their homes. Many get decade long leases, which is essentially a way for you to be able to “own” a home without being able to pass it on to your kids.

In China you don't own anything, even their "private companies" are all owned by the State, when you buy a stock in China, you're basically renting it from the State.

If they wanted to rent so badly, why would they get these decade long leases from the government? The answer is because they don’t, and they actually want to be able to own a home and be able to pass it own to their kids.

Because they are financially illiterate and don't have access to information that could help them invest better.

What is the long term average?

Real Estate Investing vs. Stock Investing in the Last 7 Years

Real estate investing and stock investing provide different benefits and complement each other. It's a good idea to invest in both. The post Real Estate Investing vs. Stock Investing in the Last 7 Years appeared first on The Motley Fool Canada.

ca.finance.yahoo.com

Long term average for real estate is 3%.

What about investing in scotia bank?

Bank Of Nova Scotia - 24 Year Stock Price History | BNS

Historical daily share price chart and data for Bank Of Nova Scotia since 2002 adjusted for splits and dividends. The latest closing stock price for Bank Of Nova Scotia as of February 09, 2026 is <strong>77.63</strong>. <ul style='margin-top:10px;'> <li>The all-time high Bank Of...

www.macrotrends.net

Based on this analysis, in the last 10 years there is a 60% increase in stock price. I’m guessing maybe you mean the dividends they pay.

Their earnings yield right now is 10.4%, inversing their P/E ratio, they earn right now 1/10th of their market cap.

I’m not saying it’s a bad investment, but if you have to pay rent anyways, why would you not have that count towards owning the home? Meanwhile you don’t have to invest in the banking industry like this by force.

Because it's a waste of money, I'd rather pay cheap rent and then use my extra cash to buy bank stocks, rather than take on a mortgage and 3x my monthly payments, I won't have the cash to buy back stocks.

Not more stable, but definitely higher yielding. But if you want to use TFSA and such, you have to buy Canadian stock. Plus tech stocks don’t pay out dividends, but it’s still a good place to invest.

Dividends don't matter, when a stock pays dividends, the company drops by the respective amount.

As I said before though, if you have to pay rent no matter what, why not have that money go to buying your own house instead? It’s the smartest decision if you have the choice, just don’t leave in the GTA and move.

There's no jobs outside of the GTA in Canada. The only people who live outside are people on welfare or people so rich they live on passive income.

Personally that would be my advice. If you have extra cash after then, then investment in these tech stocks and canadian companies is the way to go once that is done.

But that's the problem, you'll have less extra cash afterwards.

They can afford their basic needs including housing but things like technology, entertainment, luxury items, etx is much more unaffordable there.


He literally says home ownership is a good investment for most Americans financially and emotionally

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/why-warren-buffett-considers-his-home-his-third-best-investment

If you listen to Buffet, when he recommends something, he's recommending it for those with low intellgience. The reason he says "most Americans" is because he thinks most Americans are stupid.

The reason he says he didn’t want to buy a house like he did is because he would have made more money if he invested in his tech stocks. But as I said, he doesn’t have to pay rent and nowhere does he say he would rather pay rent jfl.

he implied it, if he never bought a house, he would have more money for stocks.

Housing is an appreciating asset while rent is not an asset at all. Since everyone has to live in housing, the first choice makes infinitely more sense given the choice.

I just explained it to you, when you rent you have more cash flow left over.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

I'm advocating for people generating real wealth, not buying overvalued cardboard boxes and then losing their life savings in a housing crash.

you’re advocation doesn’t mean much when almost all investors agree buying your house is the right financial decision, including warren buffet. You literally have to pay rent anyways, so best to use that to own an asset.

China is still very much a communist State, even their "free economic zones" follow the principles and plancks of the communist manifesto.

Literally having money is anti-communist, so how are these free economic zones following the communist manifesto?

In China you don't own anything, even their "private companies" are all owned by the State, when you buy a stock in China, you're basically renting it from the State.

“You will own nothing and you will be happy”. Ignore the fact the elites will own everything.

Because they are financially illiterate and don't have access to information that could help them invest better.

Warren Buffet should listen to your investment strategies then.

Long term average for real estate is 3%.

Their earnings yield right now is 10.4%, inversing their P/E ratio, they earn right now 1/10th of their market cap.

In the last 7 year average, real estate has a much higher ROI. Even in a much longer time scale, real estate is higher.

Because it's a waste of money, I'd rather pay cheap rent and then use my extra cash to buy bank stocks, rather than take on a mortgage and 3x my monthly payments, I won't have the cash to buy back stocks.

Tell me how that works out, cause no one would advocate paying rent.

Dividends don't matter, when a stock pays dividends, the company drops by the respective amount.

Dividends are useful if you want to live off your investments and not have to sell. That’s what I plan on doing eventually.

There's no jobs outside of the GTA in Canada. The only people who live outside are people on welfare or people so rich they live on passive income.

I’m outside the GTA, this is just a stupid statement. In fact, this is actually the stupidest shit I’ve heard you say. The other parts I can just say is financial ignorance or difference in opinion, but this is just plain retarded.

If you listen to Buffet, when he recommends something, he's recommending it for those with low intellgience. The reason he says "most Americans" is because he thinks most Americans are stupid. he implied it, if he never bought a house, he would have more money for stocks. I just explained it to you, when you rent you have more cash flow left over.

The problem with your statement is that you aren’t Warren Buffet. And even trained investment bankers who went to the most prestigious universities can’t defeat the market.

Mutual Funds That Consistently Beat the Market? Not One of 2,132.

No actively managed stock or bond funds outperformed the market convincingly and regularly over the last five years. Index funds have generally been better.

www.nytimes.com

So if you want to invest and rent, go for this with a return of 10% per year.

However, you have to calculate that compared to rent vs how much you would have with mortgage plus the asset of the house. Personally, if I didn’t make so much money I would invest in the sandp500 and pull out when I could afford a house in order to not pay rent.

This would allow me to have all my rent money go towards the house (and not some landlord) in some place I could afford, and then buy invest in sandp500 again. After I get enough, I would pull out half and invest in dividend stocks tfsa and use the other half to stay in the market.

 

[Intellectual]

you’re advocation doesn’t mean much when almost all investors agree buying your house is the right financial decision, including warren buffet. You literally have to pay rent anyways, so best to use that to own an asset.

Because it's a waste of money as I explained. You have to eat anyway, may as well buy agriculture stocks.

Literally having money is anti-communist, so how are these free economic zones following the communist manifesto?

Marx wasn't anti-money, one of his Plancks was to have a strong central bank and monopoly on currency.

“You will own nothing and you will be happy”. Ignore the fact the elites will own everything.

That's already the case, Suburban elites own most of America's wealth through pension funds and housing value.

Warren Buffet should listen to your investment strategies then.

He's cucked to his wife, he openly said buying a house is a shit investment for an intelligent investor, he said it's only for Americans who know nothing about finance, he said he would sell his house and buy stock if his wife would let him.

In the last 7 year average, real estate has a much higher ROI. Even in a much longer time scale, real estate is higher.

Exactly, that's why it's a bad investment now, it's at its peak whereas stocks still have a run.

Tell me how that works out, cause no one would advocate paying rent.

Literally every financial guru advocates paying rent, no one except boomer Grandmas are still telling people to buy properties. Intelligent money is out.

Dividends are useful if you want to live off your investments and not have to sell. That’s what I plan on doing eventually.

I have all my money in accounts that are tax free, if I pull them out, it's taxable, I can't use dividends anyway, would rather just borrow against my assets.

I’m outside the GTA, this is just a stupid statement. In fact, this is actually the stupidest shit I’ve heard you say. The other parts I can just say is financial ignorance or difference in opinion, but this is just plain retarded.

Show me high-finance jobs hiring that are outside of GTA, that's all I'm trained in.

The problem with your statement is that you aren’t Warren Buffet. And even trained investment bankers who went to the most prestigious universities can’t defeat the market.

Mutual Funds That Consistently Beat the Market? Not One of 2,132.

No actively managed stock or bond funds outperformed the market convincingly and regularly over the last five years. Index funds have generally been better.

www.nytimes.com

The market out returns real estate long term.

So if you want to invest and rent, go for this with a return of 10% per year.

However, you have to calculate that compared to rent vs how much you would have with mortgage plus the asset of the house. Personally, if I didn’t make so much money I would invest in the sandp500 and pull out when I could afford a house in order to not pay rent.

This would allow me to have all my rent money go towards the house (and not some landlord) in some place I could afford, and then buy invest in sandp500 again. After I get enough, I would pull out half and invest in dividend stocks tfsa and use the other half to stay in the market.

You would be spending way more of your after-tax take home income on mortgage payments.

If mortgage payments were cheaper than rent, then banks would be more than willing to loan me money right now since i should be easily able to pay them.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

Because it's a waste of money as I explained. You have to eat anyway, may as well buy agriculture stocks.

Huge difference between having a stock and the physical product. You can use a house while stocks are just like gambling chips.

Marx wasn't anti-money, one of his Plancks was to have a strong central bank and monopoly on currency.

You do know central banks are present in most countries right? They are what allow institutions like the federal reserve to devalue the currency through inflation, which increases the price of people with assets but made the poor poorer.

As for Marx, you are missing the context as he was anti-money. The plancks are what he thought would happen as capitalist countries would transition towards socialism and eventually communism. Communist societies would be moneyless, and retroactively becoming more capitalist and creating freer economic zones and having currency aren’t what he saw of his communist utopia jfl.

That's already the case, Suburban elites own most of America's wealth through pension funds and housing value.

Pension funds are literally a pyramid scheme made by the government in order to get money from workers now in order to pay them when they’re older (hoping they died before). But since population growth is stalling, the government pyramid scheme is about to crash.

And as for housing value, you do know most Americans are middle class right? If most of them own homes and that’s their most major investment then obviously it’s going to be a big part of the country’s wealth. This trend is going to continue into the future, as 45% of millennials expect to buy housing in the suburbs.

Remote work is turning America into a 'suburban nation,' a massive millennial survey by BofA finds | Fortune

To aging millennials, the suburbs are the good place.

fortune.com

And I looked up numbers where most of Canada’s wealth is, and it seems the largest is in the banking institutions and the finance sector. Natural resources is the second largest source of wealth. Third is real estate.

He's cucked to his wife, he openly said buying a house is a shit investment for an intelligent investor, he said it's only for Americans who know nothing about finance, he said he would sell his house and buy stock if his wife would let him.

Where did he say he would sell his house jfl?

Exactly, that's why it's a bad investment now, it's at its peak whereas stocks still have a run.

If there is a bubble about to burst, then kf makes sense. But thinking renting is superior overall is still cope.

Literally every financial guru advocates paying rent, no one except boomer Grandmas are still telling people to buy properties. Intelligent money is out.

No they do not jfl. If they did, I wouldn’t be pushing the idea of people getting a house if they can to live instead of renting. I didn’t come up with the advice out of my ass, I heard it from many friends who are investment bankers and lots of research. But as you say, you seen “every” guru claim the opposite because this isn’t so black and white. But personally I agree with the first option cause idk a single person who rents that’s making it big due to stocks and having no house.

I have all my money in accounts that are tax free, if I pull them out, it's taxable, I can't use dividends anyway, would rather just borrow against my assets.

Rrsp I’m guessing

Show me high-finance jobs hiring that are outside of GTA, that's all I'm trained in.

Finance sector is pretty much going to be there then or maybe Vancouver. That’s the result of your industry.

The market out returns real estate long term.

Yes, but you’ll be able to invest less of it due to it going to rent.

You would be spending way more of your after-tax take home income on mortgage payments.

Yes, but you keep the house and it’ has use to you even after all your mortgage is paid.

If mortgage payments were cheaper than rent, then banks would be more than willing to loan me money right now since i should be easily able to pay them.

Wait till the economy is better tbh, this isn’t a good time to get into the market. Although based on the recent rule changes with mortgages, idk how I would navigate the space tbh. I would have rather lived with my parents than ever rent with the old rules, but now even that won’t help anymore tbh.

 

[Intellectual]

Huge difference between having a stock and the physical product. You can use a house while stocks are just like gambling chips.

And you can use a property you rent.

You do know central banks are present in most countries right? They are what allow institutions like the federal reserve to devalue the currency through inflation, which increases the price of people with assets but made the poor poorer.

Yes, so buy stocks and option contracts, they will go up in value, don't waste it on a house.

As for Marx, you are missing the context as he was anti-money. The plancks are what he thought would happen as capitalist countries would transition towards socialism and eventually communism. Communist societies would be moneyless, and retroactively becoming more capitalist and creating freer economic zones and having currency aren’t what he saw of his communist utopia jfl.


Pension funds are literally a pyramid scheme made by the government in order to get money from workers now in order to pay them when they’re older (hoping they died before). But since population growth is stalling, the government pyramid scheme is about to crash.

What does it have to do with government? Pensions are private entities

And as for housing value, you do know most Americans are middle class right? If most of them own homes and that’s their most major investment then obviously it’s going to be a big part of the country’s wealth. This trend is going to continue into the future, as 45% of millennials expect to buy housing in the suburbs.

Remote work is turning America into a 'suburban nation,' a massive millennial survey by BofA finds | Fortune

To aging millennials, the suburbs are the good place.

fortune.com

45% of millennials are delusional. I don't know how they'll ever expect to afford that.

And I looked up numbers where most of Canada’s wealth is, and it seems the largest is in the banking institutions and the finance sector. Natural resources is the second largest source of wealth. Third is real estate.

Who owns the Canadian banks? Suburbanites.

Where did he say he would sell his house jfl?

He said he didn't want to own a house, his wife demanded he buy one.

If there is a bubble about to burst, then kf makes sense. But thinking renting is superior overall is still cope.

It may not burst, but housing will remain flat for a long time.

No they do not jfl. If they did, I wouldn’t be pushing the idea of people getting a house if they can to live instead of renting. I didn’t come up with the advice out of my ass, I heard it from many friends who are investment bankers and lots of research. But as you say, you seen “every” guru claim the opposite because this isn’t so black and white. But personally I agree with the first option cause idk a single person who rents that’s making it big due to stocks and having no house.

My friend who works at a hedge fund says he won't buy a house until they yield 5%.

Rrsp I’m guessing

Yup

Finance sector is pretty much going to be there then or maybe Vancouver. That’s the result of your industry.

There's no finance jobs at Toronto and Vancouver

Yes, but you’ll be able to invest less of it due to it going to rent.

Your stock dividends will cover the rent plus more, the stocks you won't have if you spent that money on a cost.

Yes, but you keep the house and it’ has use to you even after all your mortgage is paid.

Just waste your whole life paying a mortgage theory.

Wait till the economy is better tbh, this isn’t a good time to get into the market. Although based on the recent rule changes with mortgages, idk how I would navigate the space tbh. I would have rather lived with my parents than ever rent with the old rules, but now even that won’t help anymore tbh.