I said they were inventing fantasy scenarios.

The actual numbers might be more like rent $1400 vs mortgage $1000. After property taxes, insurance, and maintenance there might be $50 left. A handsome 3.5% profit, rising to maybe 6-7% if you include principal paydown. This is hardly a money-printing machine. It's a steady return for taking on some risk.

Ah, I see, you wanted to split hairs on the numbers. Fair enough.

It isn't splitting hairs. The numbers actually matter.

It’s at risk of becoming a fractal of splitting hairs. Substituting your numbers in for theirs doesn’t change much. It’s still more expensive to rent.

Kind of an unhelpful tangent to the discussion, really.

> Substituting your numbers in for theirs doesn’t change much

You can buy a boat for $10 or rent one for $9. Assuming you really want a boat, would you buy or rent? Do my numbers reflect reality? Do they have a bearing on the choice you make?

It changes a TON whether you pay 2x for renting or whether you pay 1.05x.

Renting has annoyances but it also has flexibility. A flat "more expensive" is staring at one tree and missing the whole forest of tradeoffs. Way more people would choose to spend $50/month for that flexibility versus $700/month.

?? How in the world is it splitting hairs to point out that those numbers don't make sense. It is directly relevant to the question of how many Americans want to rent. You don't need to be like this :(