I always plan and budget for a purchase the most I ever owed in interest total $35.00 and I've been established since 2013 and have over 20+ accounts own a small business while continuing to build more relationships with banks over time.
Thanks. But I gratuated HS in 1983 so all that was a long time ago. And to me borrowing was worth it getting a degree. Best thing ever. Tip: Don't ever become a vacuum salesman, it's not fun ;-)
I'm on a bit of a tangent, but I do agree. If I could go back, I'd take out student loans and get a mortgage (or rent) rather than pay cash for some of those early purchases. It would have left even more money on the table to invest. Assuming nothing else changed, I'd be in a better position now if I had rented, taken student loans, and taken the same risks I took. I'd be in a slightly better position if I had a mortgage on my residential investments and rented another place (especially since I could have worked on the homes faster.) A mortgage on my primary home still would have done better than a cash purchase, but renting comes out ahead in my personal situation.
I always wondered about rent vs mortgage. I always thought, short term rent - long term mortgage. In my situations from previous house sales I was able to put a healthy amount down in my current house my mortage is at a reasonable $519. Rent I'd be paying much more. And my income is lower now that I'm 50 so lower monthy bills seem the way to go. Different situations for different people I guess.
Rent vs. buy calculations depend not just on a person's commitment to an area, but also on local behavior.
I'm likely to inherit rental property in an area near Los Angeles where people are consumption and appearance-focused. People drive new cars (they don't really need them with good weather and good roads) and bid up prices on homes despite having only moderate incomes. People think living within their means is boring.
It creates a scenario where most of the people who would make good tenants own homes, and landlords are stuck earning low returns (moderate rents, moderate property taxes, high asset values) from tenants who present elevated risk (bad credit, inconsistent income, etc.).
Even if I'm living in that area when the inheritance comes, I might sell and be a tenant. Why be a landlord and deal with high-risk tenants for a 2%-3% return? For that matter, why own a home and be tied to one area when as one of the few low-risk tenants I might even have a bit of leverage (and keep my money in productive assets)? Owning a home doesn't make as much sense when other people are willing to bid up prices so high.
For many people, his program works and any program that helps people get out of credit card debt is ok by me.
I know a lot of people who have followed his program to dig out of deep debt. That's not bad. But he says to close out all tradelines.
I just saw a bunch of people posting this today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzoOCbgO8CI
Apparently the only way to get an "880 FICO score" is to "buy nice furniture for the bank lobby"... He says "Screw FICO" and that everybody with a credit score is "stupid" or a "moron". Also any mortgage companies that use the FICO score is a "monkey".
In my case -- and see my siggy for scores -- I've not paid a single penny in interest. False information like this really ticks me off...
This is exactly the type of attitude some super wealthy folks have. They either forget where they came from and want to laud it over the average working class folks, or they want to spout their successes.
How dare DR insult the FICO scoring system with his idiotic mumble jumble. FICO never once said its system was based on one's investments, portfolio, or riches.
And, even if one did win $10M tomorrow, or a rich aunt died and left them a fortune, or even if an employer gave an unsuspecting employee a million dollar raise--how does that affect one's credit worthiness? These same folks--prior to a windfall--could owe Uncle Sam a zillion dollars, possibly filed BK 2-3 times, and could have defaulted on tons of obligations. I, as a potential lender, would want to have all the facts.
And, that's why FICO is in place--to gauge a borrower's credit worthiness!
And like grasshopper, I haven't paid interest in over a year. All my cards are 0% interest and I still PIF the majority. And when they expire, I'll still PIF all of them and/or apply for more 0% cards.
It's sad that DR is spouting this nonsense instead of coming from a stance that FICO scoring is extremely important because the 99% doesn't have the ability to buy a building just because he/she couldn't rent the apartment.
Sometimes the super wealthy just needs to come down off their high horses.
I hate t come off sounding like I am defending DR's logic, but there is lots of good truth/advice between the peaks of vitriol.
1. Live within your means
2. Only buy what you can actually pay for right then
4. Always find the best deal, and resist the urge to buy on impulse
When you chip away the harsh delivery of his words, truly, most of us agree with the core message(s). We just don't like being told our persuit a stellar credit rating is "stupid".
I personally dont care for DR because he treats callers to his show like idiots, and berates them on the air. Not for me. Someone mentioned Clark Howard, he is the softer, and MUCH squeakier (he is so cheap, he squeaks when he walks). I have personally met Clark a few times and am always remided of the VERY NICE person he is.
And I have never heard him berate callers the way DR does.
OTOH, knowing what I know about them both, you have to look at their audiences, and who they THINK they are talking to. Dave treats his audience that way because he thinks they are stupid, and need to be talked to like they are children, Clark treats his audience as though they are uninformed, or ignorant (I am not using that the way most people do- but as in not willing to go finid out).
I used DR's snowball method to pay off LOADS of debt and it worked, very well. But I didnt buy any of his books, or subscribe to his methods 100%. I used the logical parts of 1. stop spending, 2. Start saving, 3. Pay off debt by paying what makes the most sense financially (snowball)
So there is my overly long take on the DR situation.
By the way, there are people that go through life and dont borrow, but their lives look a lot different that yours and mine...it is possible, but most of us arent willing to make those types of lifestyle changes.
DMP programs used the snowball payment plan as well. It really does work from my experience.
If every one followed D R they would drive beaters and live with their parents in Tar paper shacks which they either own or rent. DR has made a lot of money selling info not by doing. DW and I have fianced some houses and paid cash for others it just depended on what we were doing at the time. Our present house is a 5,000 sq foot fiixer up As I have posted ealier on other topics we paid cash and made some basic repairs before we moved in and then each year upgrade/repair another room with cash.
The only part I can see of value from his program is live within your means.
I believe in education but the costs are out of hand DW and I went to tier I colleges but back then costs were much better my tution was $500 per YEAR and hers, an IVY school was $2,000 per YEAR. Now that would pay for for not even 1 course much less one year. I really feel for the youth of today.
The ONLY 3 things DR says that actually make sense:
1) Have an EF that works for you
2) Pay off your debt using snowball (although avalanche is a better method)
3) Keep track of your money in a budget (I personally always suggest YNAB)
Everythings else he says is pretty much garbage.