Quantcast
Downpayment or Investments? - Page 3 - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 72

Thread: Downpayment or Investments?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    calgary
    Posts
    1,749
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Originally posted by ercchry
    What? Owner occupied=5% down
    Read my following comment in brackets. Why would you want to start over and again be paying a premium for CMHC insurance?

    The person in the example has just hemmoraged cash by selling at a loss. Why would they then plan to hemmorage further because they didn't account for a 20%+ down payment on their next house. Yea obviously they are downgrading so they wouldn't need the full 20% of the house they're selling assuming they sell and then buy houses that both track the trend, I'm being conservative. Say 15% then.
    Last edited by J-hop; 05-22-2017 at 09:58 AM.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Because gambler investors would rather finance the cmhc fees than pay the additional $100k down, so they can invest the down payment, and dream of those 20% returns.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    97
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Mosy beyonders think they are warren buffett when it comes to investing and returns.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    calgary
    Posts
    1,749
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Originally posted by Gestalt
    Because gambler investors would rather finance the cmhc fees than pay the additional $100k down, so they can invest the down payment, and dream of those 20% returns.
    Haha, I guess if you think you can invest that 15% and beat the cmhc insurance premium then sure go for it.

    I haven't really run the numbers in any detail but my back of the envelope calc says you'd have to be gaurunteed a 5% yearly return on that 15% just to break even each year. Which for some savvy investors would be doable but the average person is lucky to beat that by much over the long term. That is assuming that you have that 15% in cash and aren't taking out a loan to invest.

    Sounds like a horrible idea, very little upside and potentially even further downside but maybe I'm missing something.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Red Deer, Alberta
    My Ride
    1995 WRX STi
    Posts
    1,560
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by KappaSigma
    Mosy beyonders think they are warren buffett when it comes to investing and returns.
    I do always like it when Buster gives investment advice, considering he admitted to having less than a mil in assets and he's 42 (all info he provided).

    In fact, the number he said he himself had was $300k. So either he reads a lot of investment blogs and knows how to talk the talk but not walk the walk, or something else is going on.

    Either way, Beyond is not remotely close to who the average person should be going to for investment advice. Not because Beyond isn't smart, but because most of what is talked about is not applicable for your average schmuck.

    Zhao, quit humble bragging. You're 36 dude. Give me 8 years and a crazy rebound in the market from the recession and I too will be budget baller rich like you (but still racing). F*&k, you're old

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    ute
    Posts
    4,937
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    Originally posted by HiTempguy1


    I do always like it when Buster gives investment advice, considering he admitted to having less than a mil in assets and he's 42 (all info he provided).

    In fact, the number he said he himself had was $300k. So either he reads a lot of investment blogs and knows how to talk the talk but not walk the walk, or something else is going on.

    Either way, Beyond is not remotely close to who the average person should be going to for investment advice. Not because Beyond isn't smart, but because most of what is talked about is not applicable for your average schmuck.

    Zhao, quit humble bragging. You're 36 dude. Give me 8 years and a crazy rebound in the market from the recession and I too will be budget baller rich like you (but still racing). F*&k, you're old
    huh?

    You must be thinking someone else?

    Also, quit adding years to my age. lol
    Last edited by Buster; 05-22-2017 at 02:47 PM.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    170
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by HiTempguy1


    I do always like it when Buster gives investment advice, considering he admitted to having less than a mil in assets and he's 42 (all info he provided).

    In fact, the number he said he himself had was $300k. So either he reads a lot of investment blogs and knows how to talk the talk but not walk the walk, or something else is going on.

    Either way, Beyond is not remotely close to who the average person should be going to for investment advice. Not because Beyond isn't smart, but because most of what is talked about is not applicable for your average schmuck.

    Zhao, quit humble bragging. You're 36 dude. Give me 8 years and a crazy rebound in the market from the recession and I too will be budget baller rich like you (but still racing). F*&k, you're old
    Well, go do it then? No reason you can't, you even make more than me so it should be easy, but dont count your chickens until they hatch is my advice.

    You dont need a rebound in the market either. A significant portion of my money came from the recession. IMO for everyone that loses a dollar there is someone that makes a dollar. I was lucky enough to be making decent money in the last few years and was able to have disposable income to buy when others had to sell. I'm not doing that great either by beyond standards; you dont see me shopping for G-wagons and million dollar condos like that's chump change.

    And it's not humble bragging, it's stating a fact to disprove a guy who thinks investing is a scam. And unlike lap times, I couldn't care less about comparing myself to others when it comes to investments. It's not a competition, but to see a guy try and discourage people from investing, which is pretty much the only way anyone is probably going to be able to retire comfortably in the future, is frankly a pretty big piss off.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Red Deer, Alberta
    My Ride
    1995 WRX STi
    Posts
    1,560
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by zhao


    And it's not humble bragging, it's stating a fact to disprove a guy who thinks investing is a scam. And unlike lap times, I couldn't care less about comparing myself to others when it comes to investments. It's not a competition, but to see a guy try and discourage people from investing, which is pretty much the only way anyone is probably going to be able to retire comfortably in the future, is frankly a pretty big piss off.
    To act like investing isn't informed gambling is giving investing too much credit. A lot of us have seen friends and family decimated by the stock market. And you know who always came out ahead, up or down? Random lucky people and the rich ones.

    Your measly $1mil pales in comparison to the billions of dollars at others finger tips that can legitimately move whole markets, let alone just a single stock. Look at home capital, there is ONE individual who really f"*ked them over. Bloomberg has an article, its pretty fascinating.

    So yes, typical schmucks should run the couch potato method or the like and keep slowly investing while being diversified. But dont act like investing is the be-all-end-all. I'm investing in real estate and my business. With those, plus pension (at least until the business is going full steam, then pension will become investments) I'm pretty happy with where things are.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Exactly. Gambling as no one has a crystal ball, and the big Billionaires​ make things happen and manipulate markets, politicians laws and policy.

    Doing well for the most part for anyone else means you got lucky. But human nature takes over and you think you were skilled.

    As zhao said, for every dollar made, there is a dollar lost, and for the most part the system is rigged against us.

    Like gamblesrs sitting at slot machines, you only hear stories of when they won. Even they forget all the losing, or they would not.continue to sit at the machine.

    Paying your debt off is the only strategy that's a sure thing, and is the most liberating one. In financial system that is designed on being a spender or consumer, you only win by saving.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    ute
    Posts
    4,937
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    IMO for everyone that loses a dollar there is someone that makes a dollar.
    Actually, this is untrue.

    Wealth can grow, and not just nominally, in real terms. Capitalism allows for two people to put a dollar each into a pot, create one dollar and take out 3 between the two of them. It's a beautiful thing.

    On a large scale, the economy is not a zero sum game, and investment (ie the capital markets), are the reason why.

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by Buster


    . Capitalism allows for two people to put a dollar each into a pot, create one dollar and take out 3 between the two of them. It's a beautiful thing. y.
    That's counterfitting.

    Capitalism is getting together making a product. If your product has a buyer with money, there is a transfer of wealth.

    They can also use credit obtained through capitlaisms fantasy of fractional reserve lending, but those benefits are mainly for the billionaire class who makes the rules.

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    ute
    Posts
    4,937
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    Wrong.

    If I give you $10, but get back something that allows me to produce $12 worth of goods, then we have increased the overall wealth by $2.

    The world gets richer every year.

    It's not a zero sum game.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    It's only worth $12 if there is a buyer with money. You don't get the $12 out of thin air. It already exists, someone hands it over in exchange for your good.

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    170
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    buster is correct. In the grand scheme of things we are generating wealth.

    I was talking more in a 1 on 1 short term transaction mentality. When a stock or the entire market crashes, and 'everyone' is losing their shirts, people are still buying everything that gets sold, and fortunes can be born that way. One mans loss is another mans gain in that case.

    As far as the world goes, as long as we are growing shit, pulling shit out of the ground, and turning worthless crap in to stuff of value, we are generating wealth.

    The world is basically trading time for wealth. Dont believe that? Go back 10000 years and compare wealth then to now.

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    The money supply is finite at a e given time
    Only a central bank can create more.

    If you polish turds, and convince people they are valuable, you can increase your own personal welth, by having someone give you some of theirs. Don't confuse polishing turds with creating wealth. It's simply a transfer of waelth.

    In a finite money supply system like ours, wealth is simply relativity. If you have more than the next person, you might be wealthy.

    Wealth is not everyone having a TV, or a plow or a cicle.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    ute
    Posts
    4,937
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    If you have two people working independently, their labour is worth X. If they can manage to cooperate and work together, their labour is no longer worth 2X. It is worth 2X plus the efficiency of their cooperation. You are thinking too much about "money" and not enough about "capital". The more efficiently an economy or social system can allow those two people to work together, the greater that additional factor is. After all, when people exchange their labour for money/capital/a good, they are simply cooperating by dividing their duties/specialties.

    I like that you are thinking about these things, but you need to dig deeper into the concepts.

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Don't backtrack becaus you are wrong.

    Zhao siad clearly IMO for everyone that loses a dollar there is someone that makes a dollar.

    This is about dollars. Money. Not whimsy.
    You yourself cannot create it, it can only be transferred. For you to have more, someone must have less. Pretty simple.
    Last edited by Gestalt; 05-24-2017 at 01:01 AM.

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    ute
    Posts
    4,937
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    You're not thinking deep enough into the concept behind money. Money is simply a proxy for a claim on future labour.

    Retreating into semantics like that is not useful, and won't help you understand the concepts better. Investment of capital does not require a winner and a loser. It can create two winners. That's the failure of reasoning that is going on here. Frequently there ARE losers. But it is not a requirement.

  19. #59
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I understand the concept fine, you are now just getting into weirdo mumbo jumbo.

    I am retreating into accuracy. You are drifiting of into fantasy.

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    ute
    Posts
    4,937
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    I actually like that you are thinking about these things. Most people don't even bother. Some of these concepts are not immediately intuitive, though...and take some thinking (or reading) to understand properly. How capitalism can create wealth without there being "losers" as part of the process is, I guess, one of those concepts.

    But if you can wrap your head around that idea, it's actually a pretty important foundation to separating the signal from the noise when talking about some of the other issues - like stock market crashes and bubbles, and who benefits from them, etc.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Downpayment scenarios

    By BMS in forum Real Estate / Finance
    Replies: 7
    Latest Threads: 08-20-2011, 05:29 PM
  2. RRSP first time home buyer downpayment question

    By bubbley in forum Real Estate / Finance
    Replies: 13
    Latest Threads: 06-02-2011, 10:29 PM
  3. Replies: 33
    Latest Threads: 05-30-2007, 04:22 PM
  4. Woman trades infant for downpayment on a Dodge Intrepid

    By tentacles in forum General Car/Bike Talk
    Replies: 10
    Latest Threads: 03-02-2007, 12:27 AM
  5. Lease downpayment

    By civic_rida in forum General Car/Bike Talk
    Replies: 2
    Latest Threads: 10-15-2003, 01:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •