And this is what caused the 'bubble' in the first place. Those bad mortgages were actually just mortgages where you didn't have interest payments for the first few years. Because of the massive increase in house prices, the argument was that you could get the mortgage, pay a really low rate for a few years, then sell at a profit before you ever hit the really crippling payback phase. The problem is that a lot of people started taking out loans against their houses so they could buy nice stuff to go IN the house, and then when the repayment period came back up, everyone started to dump their houses at the same time. BAM, instant real estate glut, falling house prices, and bank crisis, because suddenly people can't pay back their loans at all (and they shouldn't have been given loans to begin with! They were ALWAYS a bad risk.) (The bank crisis also revolves around more complicated issues, like packaging up these bad loans and reselling them as something confusing to investment companies on the premise that these people would actually start paying up.)

Owning an expensive car is a different matter entirely; perhaps it's just a matter of priority. However, low interest rates don't make buying as cut and dry as you'd expect. People should really consider their options if for no other reason than the volatility in the market right now.

I stick to my original assertion: buy a place if you're going to LIVE in it. Don't think about selling it in 5 years, think about living in it for 20. Going 300k into debt is a huge decision and responsibility; treating it like it's the difference between coffee or tea in the morning doesn't do it justice. The original statement, "Renting is wasting money," is overly simplistic, all things considered. If you bought a house 2 years ago in Alberta or Vancouver or Toronto, you know that it's possible to make more money by sitting on it or investing it while renting than taking a gamble on the market.

I agree that buying is not for everyone, but for those who can and won't (out of laziness or whatever) its a complete waste of money.

The problem with the statement that renting is a waste of money is that it misunderstands the nature of the rental agreement. You're not paying for goods, you're paying for a SERVICE. You CAN fix your own car, but what if you don't know how? What if you have no desire to learn how? What if you just don't have the time?

A primary residence isn't an investment; it can't be unless you're planning to sell it. If you're planning to sell it, you have to contend with massive uncertainty going forward (look at the people that bought 2 years ago; think they feel good about their 'investment'? Will they be able to recoup their losses?), and you have to put money into the property to keep it viable for sale. When I owned a house, I spent at least $10k a year on average on upkeep, repairs and renovations. That doesn't factor in property taxes or the cost of my own time to do any maintenance.

Money that you save by not OWING someone at 3% (or 5%, or in 5 years, 8-12% — make sure you take into account the massive inflation that will almost certainly follow this stimulus spending) can be invested.

Buy property when you're ready to live in it or you want to MAKE money by being a landlord.

To many amateur investors entered the market, with no clue about RE investing and no clue to properly evaluate RE properties (e.g. CAP rates) bid up properties to unsustainable prices which sooner or later going to deflate. I have been a RE investor for several years and exited the market because I just could not achieve any decent CAP rates anymore. So did several other RE investors I know. Only the fools are still investing.