This is all from an investor point of view. Most people dont have the time or knowledge to dedicate to research for good investments. The reality is that most working class people do not invest their money or at least not in the real investment sense. They might put it into an investment portfoglio that is handled for them by the bank or another investment institution, most of the time in the low-risk portofoglios but in no way that downpayment can generate any meaningful income.
But I see now that things must be really different in the US because many people keep repeating (insurance, maintanance, property tx etc). Where i live in europe the the difference between rent and mortgage price is insignificant. let say for example 600Eur/mont rent vs 700Eur/month Mortgage. Insurance, property tax, maintencance are insignificant in comparison to the yearly cost of either rent or Mortgage.
> The reality is that most working class people do not invest their money
To the extent that this is true, it's not a good reason to subsidize mortgages. It would be much better policy to encourage people to invest in diversified and productive ways, rather than leverage themselves to the hilt and sacrifice their mobility for a risky bet on endless property appreciation in their local neighborhood.
> But I see now that things must be really different in the US
Well yes, the whole article is about the problems of the subsidized 30-year fixed mortgage. Europe doesn't subsidize 30-year fixed mortgages in the same way, so things are clearly quite different.
But I see now that things must be really different in the US because many people keep repeating (insurance, maintanance, property tx etc). Where i live in europe the the difference between rent and mortgage price is insignificant. let say for example 600Eur/mont rent vs 700Eur/month Mortgage. Insurance, property tax, maintencance are insignificant in comparison to the yearly cost of either rent or Mortgage.