Right, my question is more about how the average person can actually use that leverage. So you've got $80k in leverage, it grows (presumably), but how do you actually use it?
You have to sell the house, right? So you can only cash in on that leverage when you reverse mortgage or otherwise downsize, right?
Yes, but thanks to leverage you have effectively created higher returns for your retirement portfolio than you would have been able to without the leverage.
Higher returns than what though? It sure sounds like the only financial advantage to owning a home vs other investments is the leverage. Yet the S&P will return far more even considering the 80% leverage in most cases.
If you take all the money that you have spent on a down payment, closing and selling costs, taxes, and maintenance, subtract rent, and put the remainder in a market index fund, for the vast majority of situations you will have FAR more money by retirement. Like it's not even close.
I guess I'm just a bit tired of the messaging that real estate is such a great financial investment. Historically it's better than a lot of options but not even close to the best investment vehicle. Houses are homes first, not money makers, and if we continue to emphasize the latter, we will never solve the housing affordability crisis.
Let me put it to you another way: if homebuyers didn't have access to cheap leverage, then a stock market index fund would appear much more appealing than house as an investment. But when homebuyers have access to cheap leverage (and stock investors don't), the balance tips more in favor of home buying. And when I say "more in favor", I mean when compared to no leverage.
Perhaps you're making an argument that even with leverage, most people would be better off investing in the stock market rather than real estate. And perhaps that is true. But leverage does tip the balance in favor of real estate.
You have to sell the house, right? So you can only cash in on that leverage when you reverse mortgage or otherwise downsize, right?