[dheera]

I have a rack for convenience, not education.

It got rid of all of my wiring mess since 90% of my networked stuff just lives together and now uses a single UPS. It's also relatively easy to move from place to place as I move apartments. Also, enterprise equipment just works better. After a few Comcast failures during meetings I now have a 5G failover; I also firewall corporate laptops from the rest of my home equipment to prevent any unwanted spying.

[burnt-resistor]

Buy a house now. It's usually cheaper since apartments (in expensive metro areas) are often tantamount to setting money on fire. :o)

Where I live now (in a house) is way, way cheaper and I get regional co-op 2.5 Gbps internet for $90/month.

[dheera]

> Buy a house now. It's usually cheaper since apartments (in expensive metro areas) are often tantamount to setting money on fire. :o)

Not really. I live in an expensive area. I pay $4K+/month in rent for a nice apartment, and livable, nice houses here cost $3M+ which is over 700 months worth of rent.

1. The math doesn't work.

2. I don't have 3 million dollars.

3. I'm not going to fall into the stupid American trap of borrowing money to buy shit I can't afford just to stay poor and handcuffed to some bank. If I'm going to buy something that costs 3 million dollars I better have 3 million dollars in cash. That's how I roll. That's how I buy my car, computers, and my groceries. Make money -> spend money. Fuck borrowing. I don't do that shit.

[burnt-resistor]

I played that game in my 20's spending $8k/month on rent, but only for a short time. That's crazy rent. There are probably much cheaper areas nearby. There are plenty of areas where very nice homes are $200-400k.

Except you're paying a landlord money that could be going towards property that you own, and that equity is portable.

You won't have any wealth when you become very old and cannot work. You and your family will end up with nothing.

Borrowing has to be sensible for income ratio.

YMMV, but middle-/lower-income people spending an unreasonable % on rent to live in Manhattan or SF are fighting a losing battle they cannot afford to play.

[dheera]

> You won't have any wealth when you become very old and cannot work. You and your family will end up with nothing.

What do you propose? Borrow money and buy a house for millions that I can't afford? Sounds like a faster way to go broke.

Also, we all saw how the LA fires went. You'd better have $6 million in cash if you want a $3 million house. $3 million for the house, $3 million for a backup house when the first one burns down and insurance decides not to pay for it. You do not have "equity" in anything that is flammable. Flammable == disposable. Try gold bars instead.

If I could buy a house for $300K that was livable, not moldy, and not look like it was going to come crashing down during the next big earthquake, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

> There are plenty of areas where very nice homes are $200-400k

Yeah, I know there are houses for $300K in the middle of Arkansas. But there are no jobs there, I'm not going to live on burgers and fries, and all the goddamn tech bro CEOs in the valley have decided on RTO. At least there is real food here.

My real plan though: Work and save up enough money that I can live the rest of my life in Asia on my savings.

> unreasonable % on rent

I don't spend a big % of my income on rent.

I DO spend a big % of my income on taxes. That's the real problem.

[burnt-resistor]

Been There, Done That, Bought The T-Shirt. There's cheaper housing in the East Bay right across the bridge.

Tax accountant/financial planner? A good one might be able to find a minimization strategy.

[queenkjuul]

I've got the fastest Internet available in my neighborhood at 1.5gbps for $90 and i wouldn't give up my apartment or my neighborhood for an extra gigabit.

And after seeing all the unbelievably expensive surprise repair bills my homeowner friends have had to deal with, I'm not convinced I'm lighting money on fire, either.