It's expensive to be poor

While I'll agree with most, the housing is not always true. House values don't always go up and there are many fees associated with home ownership (insurance, taxes, HOA fees, maintenance, appliance repair/replacement, etc.) & tend to be outside of bus lines and things that make commuting without cars easier. W/ an apartment you don't have to worry about selling the house if you need to move locations. Yes houses can increase in value but that value can be wiped out due to a housing crashes, particular employers moving/going out of business, natural disasters, etc. and where you'd not be walking away w/o debt if you were a homeowner, if you were a renter it's a whole lot easier to get back to where you were. In West Virginia/Appalachia areas the coal industry collapsed, those well paying jobs are never coming back, everything else is moving/shutting down, houses are plummeting in price. If you still owed on a home it'll be a lot harder for you to move than a renter. Ditto for Detroit.

It’s less about house values, which can fluctuate wildly in a “short term” by real estate standards, but baring major changes of catastrophe (such as the economic disintegration in Detroit) tend to be relatively stable and only increase over the long term. It’s mpre about the place property ownership has on a system. In a weak housing market in an undesirable area, a home may actually be more expensive over a life time than a rental. Barring “pocket cases” though, people generally will benefit in wealth from house ownership. Simply owning a property gives a massive line of credit, a tax shelter, and additional properties may do this as well while providing rental income. A person who regularly moves may benefit from the flexibility of a rental, but in most markets a home is not much more (and often less) per month than a rental but has a mainly fixed cost over a lifetime and doesn’t carry many risks or restrictions of rentals. A home can be improved to increase its value and thus....

The owners wealth. If you buy at a bubble, or in a “boom” area that goes bust you may lose- but one must remember in this scenario that rental properties are owned by someone who is carrying that same burden, and must pass it on. Since owning rental property has its main bonuses in increasing ones total wealth on paper via credit lines, and profit from rental- any time you are renting you are most likely paying more money that the person who owns the property is to own it outright. So yes- any home rims the risk of potentially becoming valueless if the economy takes a nose dive- but compared in probability to the worst thing possible not happening- it’s a clear bet. When you look at people who are very wealthy you will find that while many rent, the majority own properties. They know a smart bet when they see it.

Just to be clear- I’m not the rogue down voter, I didn’t dv you, me (obviously), or anyone else. I agree the examples aren’t the best per se. many things suck for rich or poor alike (like cancer) but are generally less of a burden to the rich. The teeth- humans tended to have bad dental care through most of history. It’s one of the contributing factors to shorter average life spans, and modern dentistry is expensive and under covered or not covered by many work and government health plans. The mattress itself may not cause back problems, but a work environment hard on the body where production and cost cutting is valued over employee health can cause back problems, and a cheap mattress or even a hard surface like a floor or pallet can make them worse. It’s hard to really see poor tax until you experienced all the ways it works. In short- a “small” problem that is easily fixed for most, cannot be fixed, becomes a bigger problem, and snowballs with ever increasing fees and fines.