[nottathrowaway3]

>If you bring home 6k a month after taxes, and after rent you're left with 4.5k, I'd also argue that's not "barely making ends meet". That leaves a very comfortable breathing room that is unimaginable luxury for most of the world.

Another aspect of this issue is that, when you take out a typical mortgage, you take a 4-5x leveraged long position on real estate. Rent for a nice 1br in Seattle area is $2K, but the hidden aspect is the landlord is holding the RE risk on your behalf.

Even if mortgage was $1K/mo, I would rather rent (which I do) to avoid this risk in volatile, tech-dependent area like Seattle.

[pertymcpert]

That's true about the risk, however before the recent spike in rates, that leverage was ultra-cheap.

[nottathrowaway3]

>however leverage was ultra-cheap

In nominal dollars yes... but the downside risk was the true cost.

Get in at a low rate and comfortably afford it, then you're doing great despite maybe being underwater for now. But default while underwater and lose whatever you put down plus the difference in price.

TINFA but, exposure to real estate is generally/historically a good hedge to keep pace with wage inflation. I disagree with OP; getting in before rate hikes wasn't necessarily a mistake. But mortgages work the same way that ESPPs and RSU grants work, banks/companies/governments hedge downside risk by convincing a whole bunch of people to be long on a stock (or real estate).