Home ownership is so overrated.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to own again when price becomes more reasonable, however, financial freedom above home ownership any day if you ask me.

I basically invested every cent I had toward a big ass detached to buy investment properties (commercial). If everything goes according to my plan, by the time kids go to college, I'd be able to become a global nomad where I'd rent an AirBNB or something all year round visiting anywhere I want. Sure it won't be anything luxurious or fancy, but the idea of never having to worry about money ever again and do what I truly want to do (visit and get to know all the places) beat the silly idea of "home" by a million miles. And while renting, I would still have a decent living standard.

This, comparing to some of my peers in the same age group where they work 9-5 jobs (and maybe some more) just to be able to make mortgage payments and live basically no life because mortgage takes away the vast majority of their income, is a no brainer to me.

^^ last time I checked commercial properties weren't cheap, if not more expensive than residential

I think Hehe's family are in-the-know with commercial properties and have been buying strategically for some time lol.

Buy low and sell high, type of strategy :nyan:

I'm not sure I follow this entirely, so you leveraged your equity in your residential home to speculate on commercial properties?

So you want your friends to uproot their lives to live your nomad lifestyle? Ok!

I think hehe meant he put the money he saved that he was going to use for a residential detached onto a commercial instead

Im wondering if he is renting, living at home or what.

I still dont get what this financial freedom is all about though. We own our property, we still fit in a vacation once or twice a year with the kids somewhere..kids still do activities. We still eat out (we cook at home as much as we can) sure, i might not have a fancy car or the latest fad of gadget or clothing but that is the sacrifice i can live with as i dont really care for those at this stage of my life. But then again, everyone is different.

I had posted it before about my story, but to make a quick recap, I had the opportunity to buy a place (or at least a significant downpayment) a while back with a windfall from family. Instead of buying a place, I bought an income-generating commercial property, which led to more purchases of similar properties in the past decade or so. And I rent my place to live.

I put every dime I make (both work and the positive cashflow generated) to pay off these properties (which should be some time in 15years or so) while renting. By the end of my mortgage (or loans) payment, I should have enough income to go global nomading for the rest of my life and never have to worry about money again. (probably not enough for luxury, but plenty to cover shelter, food and transport)

And coming back to what I said before, what I'm doing vs. what my friends who bought houses, we aren't doing things differently. We still work our ass off to pay for an asset. The dif is that I'm after financial freedom vs. a roof with 4 walls that they are getting.

The way I see it, I'd be financially free by the time my properties are paid off with no house vs. my friends who will own a place, but still have to rely on pensions and whatever investment they might have for their source of income.

Edit: I'm not suggesting that buying a home won't make you financially free, however, income generating assets do them so much better. The house I live in now is worth about 2M and I pay my LL 2700 a month. My properties are generating about 8.5% cap on average against the price I paid on NNN leases. So assuming I have 2M in properties, that gives $170,000 per year in income vs. roughly $33,000 of value I get from a house.

I think hehe meant he put the money he saved that he was going to use for a residential detached onto a commercial instead

I think hehe meant he put the money he saved that he was going to use for a residential detached onto a commercial instead

Im wondering if he

Just curious...if your properties are generating 170k a year with income. Why not buy a home or a condo to add to your assets? You can rent it out if you prefer renting yourself.

I was just comparing what the 2M can do with different strategies.

And the reason of not buying a place or a home is simple... home has too low of ROI.

Commercial gives me 8.5% return while the 2M house I live in gives me roughly 1.5%.

If prices stay the same and I am actually in the position of buying another asset worth 2M, I'd still go for the 8.5% commercial gives me vs. 1.5%.

I guess it all depends on how much you value "home". I value cold cash more than the sentimental value that a permanent home can give me.

Are you renting alone right now or have a family (small kids) i guess

Financial freedom = not having kids :chairdance:

You guys keep telling yourselves that. Can't say that financially my kid has presented any issues.

Now, the amount of free time available, that's a different story.

ehhh, But then you start making excuses for more $$$ hobbies.

Like guns, sledding, bikes, travel.

A kid might even make you grounded.

Why own actual property when you can just buy REITs? They do all the work collecting rent, managing the property, etc... some have a 10% yield. They own rental and commercial properties all around the globe so they're diversified and you don't have to worry about a local price crash.

Plus if shit hits the fan, you can sell it with a click of a button instead of waiting months to dump your property.

We make good money, no kids and we are still broke as fuck.
Financial freedom is getting in on a pyramid scheme early enough to make 500k a year or having rich parents.

Yup..how can a kid even be a burden finacially. I personally enjoy taking my 2 kids to activities and even talk to them if they want to do more. And as for free time, I dont even think of those as everyone close to me know id rather hang out with my little ones. But if we do want to so something, we have siblings that would watch them like how we would watch for them.

if BC's economy is the strongest then we live in a pretty pathetic country

I think you should probably revisit that statement after looking at the big picture.
Almost everyone on this website is in the worlds top 1% income earners, and top 1% net worth.
I know the irony in myself talking about how broke I am 2 posts above, but I don't think that things are that bleak.

Lol Thats what everyone with kids obviously has to say lol..I’m not searching out our friends with kids to hang out with that’s for sure..having the ability to do anything I want, when I want, is virtually invaluable.

There are obviously a good percentage of people who see their children as nothing but a financial burden when you see the news stories about families complaining about not being able to afford a 3/4/5 bedroom house with 2+ children.

As per westophers comment, I believe if you make more than 35k USD per year, you are in the top 1% of the entire worlds income earner. Things could be worse

mid-30s hitting their peak earning years?

are you sure it's not in your mid 40's to 50's? the average mid-30s are probably still carrying student debt, about to purchase a first home, about to purchase a business/practice, just started a new family (mat/pat leave, working p/t to take care of kids < 5, etc).

in the big picture they're probably poorer than the university students eating kraft dinner even if they have more luxuries

boohoo, i have to pay more taxes on a big lot sitting on a secluded island in the Indian Arm that rivals West Van/Bowen Isl

my point is, Belcarra is not rural BC

and that families making major sacrifices that are just doing slightly better than scraping by wouldn't mind getting a highly valuable property inherited to them and probably wouldn't complain to the news about it

-

Your point is retarded. No reasonable person would consider a property without utilities and road access to be an "Urban" property.

The intent of the "Speculation tax" was to incentivize, through monetary penalty, those holding vacant & usable housing to rent or sell to ordinary BC residents. If that housing holds no practical use for ordinary residents, as in this case, than that tax does not meet its intended purpose and those properties should be exempt. Period.
This was not intended as an "Asset Tax" on those that simply have more than you do. GTFO with that commie bullshit.

It's not. I don't know where you would even get that. Up until late 2018, it wasn't even as strong as Alberta's economy.