site banner
birb_cromble  4d ago (text post)   961 thread views

Qeekly Finance Thread - 2026-11-07

A weekly thread to discuss financial matters - from personal all the way up to global.

Ground Rules

  • Remember that we're all just Internet randos. Don't bet your life savings on a hot tip from this thread.
  • Keep culture war in the culture war thread. Yes, global events may impact our personal finances, but that does not mean we have to incessantly harp on culture war aspects here. If you are going to discuss it, please stick to the practical impacts of it on an individual level.
  • Be kind. Remember that everyone here comes from different circumstances. We all have different resources available and different risk tolerances.
  • Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Better is better. Celebrate people when they take a step up and work to move their finances in the right direction. Don't flame out because they haven't followed what you consider the optimal path. Everybody has to start somewhere.
2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Isnt this basically selling A for cash, buying B using that cash? If youre moving from owned house to owned house, or downsizing, theres no reason to take on debt.

Isnt this basically selling A for cash, buying B using that cash? If youre moving from owned house to owned house, or downsizing, theres no reason to take on debt.

I'm not sure I understand your point here. Are you suggesting that a lot of cash buyers for houses are getting the cash from the sale of their previous property?

I think so? A significant number of transactions are retired couples selling their expensive "growing family sized" house in a large city's suburbs to either move to a house better sized (and easier to take care of) for an aging couple, or moving to a nice place further away from the city to enjoy a quiet retirement. The second house is presumably more than covered in cash by the first one, since it's either smaller or further away from the city. The difference in price funds their retirement activities.

I think so? A significant number of transactions are retired couples selling their expensive "growing family sized" house in a large city's suburbs to either move to a house better sized (and easier to take care of) for an aging couple, or moving to a nice place further away from the city to enjoy a quiet retirement. The second house is presumably more than covered in cash by the first one, since it's either smaller or further away from the city. The difference in price funds their retirement activities.

Yeah, I would guess that's a pretty common scenario. And that's just the sort of segmenting I would like to see with respect to the 27% figure.

Yes.

Yes.

Ok, and how does that play into the affordability crisis, or whatever you want to call it?

For one thing I guess it means that there's a pool of buyers (current homeowners) who are not sensitive to interest rate or other affordability concerns when looking at houses -- so demand does not (necessarily) exceed supply?

No idea. I'm not OP, just an annoying guy with a theory about why 27% of sales being non-financed is reasonable.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats