Refinance to ER?

[nun]

Try running those two sets of numbers through FIRECalc and see what it does to the ER portfolio's survivability...

Personally we're looking at our calendar and trying to figure how to time this so that the appraisal (if necessary) and the closing get done around our travel plans.

There's also an element of "Oh, crap, we're doing this again?!?" that's holding us back from picking up the phone. While we've been dithering, the loan we seek has dropped to 4% with only a 4.22% APR. Unfortunately the bank's website doesn't list the points for that APR, but it's probably less than two. I'm going to have to sit down with a calculator or find a website that'll let me back-calculate it before we make the phone call.

Both senarios work on Friecalc, but refinancing gives me a better results for min max and average portfolio.

 

[myself]

Try running those two sets of numbers through FIRECalc and see what it does to the ER portfolio's survivability...

Personally we're looking at our calendar and trying to figure how to time this so that the appraisal (if necessary) and the closing get done around our travel plans.

There's also an element of "Oh, crap, we're doing this again?!?" that's holding us back from picking up the phone. While we've been dithering, the loan we seek has dropped to 4% with only a 4.22% APR. Unfortunately the bank's website doesn't list the points for that APR, but it's probably less than two. I'm going to have to sit down with a calculator or find a website that'll let me back-calculate it before we make the phone call.

Nords,
It never gets old seeing you posting about having vacation plans, all the while you live on one of the Hawaiin Islands.

Haven't you tried the 40 year notes yet, or don't they offer them anymore?

 

[Andre1969]

I'm going to vote refinance. Look at it this way. Right now, if you have 5.5 years (66 months) left at $2500/mo, you're going to pay another $165,000.

If you do the refinance to the 15 year term, you do end up paying $198,000 (180 months * $1100 per month), but it's over such a long term that, accounting for inflation, you might come out ahead, as that $1100/mo will feel less and less painful as the years go by.

And especially, if doing this refinance gives you the freedom to retire, go for it! Time is the only thing they're not making any more of. Well, that and land, I guess.

And FWIW, even refinancing to the 30 year might be good. Over the course of 30 years you pay $277,200 (360 months * $770 per month), but think about it, that 770/mo is still a $330/mo savings over the $1100.

You'll also get a bigger tax writeoff with the 30 year mortgage, and the benefits of that writeoff will last longer than a 15. So take that into consideration if your financial situation allows you to benefit from the writeoff.

 

[Nords]

Nords,
It never gets old seeing you posting about having vacation plans, all the while you live on one of the Hawaiin Islands.

Yeah, we hear a lot of "All y'alls are from Ha-why-uh an' yer vacationin' hee-yer?!?"

It's mostly been travel with a purpose-- checking up on my aging father, college trips with our kid, mandatory family pilgrimages to Disney, hauling luggage for spouse's meetings at a non-profit.

Next month it's Rice U's "Family Weekend" to check up on our kid after her first month of college (assuming she's not on academic probation) and spouse's training session at a non-profit on the way home.

We were looking at a diving trip to the Marianas, but it's too close to the Rice weekend. We'll probably catch up with that next spring. However spouse made a totally frivolous encore trip to Bangkok with a shipmate last April.

Haven't you tried the 40 year notes yet, or don't they offer them anymore?

That's a prescient question. I think we're going to have to remember 40-year mortgages as "the good ol' days". They've disappeared from the websites I usually check (Territorial Savings Bank, PenFed, NFCU, USAA) but I found one. Fidelity used to offer mortgages secured by brokerage assets, but volatility produced a lot of margin calls that drove the customers nuts.

However Bankrate.com popped up a 40-year from AimLoan.com at 4.75%, and by paying points we could get down to 4.375%. That'd hammer our monthly P&I down by 15% and I'd pay it off when I'm 89 years old. I guess that effectively matches my mortgage debt to my realistic life expectancy. Tempting.

If anyone has trash to talk about AimLoan.com, we're listening.

 

[Andre1969]

Is there really much advantage to bumping out a mortgage beyond 30 years, though? My HELOC currently stands at a $160K balance, and the interest rate has been 3.5% for awhile now. I only have to pay the interest, but have been rounding the payments up to the next $100 (in this case, taking it to $500 mo). I should pay it down while it's lower, but instead I had been diverting the money to investing and other things.

Two months ago I did bump it up slightly, to $600/mo.

Well, I just ran a bunch of scenarios, and presuming it stays at 3.5% (which I know it won't, but for simplicity's sake), I came up with the following:

$500/mo: paid off in 77 years, 6 mo.
$565.12/mo: 50 years
$600/mo: 43 years, 1 mo.
$619.83/mo: 40 years
$718.47/mo: 30 years
$927.94/mo: 20 years
$1,143.81/mo: 15 years.

So, not really a huge amount.

I guess with bigger mortgages it would make more of a difference, though. But say, a $500K mortgage at 4.5%, the 30 year gives you a $2533/mo payment, while the 40 year makes it $2247/mo, a savings of less than $300/mo. I guess that's enough to make a difference for some people, though.

 

[Nords]

It's a niche product. Hawaii real estate is horribly expensive (even if Kilauea is adding dozens of acres per year), it appreciates no faster on average than the rest of the country, and I see no reason to race to the finish to become sole owner of a huge steamin' pile of dead equity. The state has a persistent stream of expats leaving each year in search of affordable family housing. The rest of us had to move in with multi-generation family, live in crappy neighborhoods, or stumble across an incredible bargain. Spouse and I chose options #2 & #3, aided by lots of sweat equity.

I'm already getting income from a life annuity with the U.S. govt, so it makes sense to me to stretch out and lower my mortgage payments as much as possible. It's as if a landlord offered a 40-year lease with no rent increases.

It might be irrelevant. Our mortgage broker couldn't get any 40-year mortgages from AimLoan.com at less than 5%, despite their website promise. 40-year loans were generally at rates of 1% higher than 30-year loans of similar points, and our P&I payment would only drop about 6%. That's a long payback.

Sigh. I'm going to have to start building a spreadsheet of interest rates between 4-5%, refi costs including zero to two points, and terms of 30 to 40 years, and then calculate the refi payback. At least it'll make me feel productive while I'm waiting for rates (or refi costs) to drop a little more.

 

[deserat]

Sigh. I'm going to have to start building a spreadsheet of interest rates between 4-5%, refi costs including zero to two points, and terms of 30 to 40 years, and then calculate the refi payback. At least it'll make me feel productive while I'm waiting for rates (or refi costs) to drop a little more.

So THAT's what you do all day if retired early ;-)

Yeah, trips to Houston in the summer and bag schlepping all over the US - sucks - just got back from a consulting gig in SoCal - place hasn't changed that much (except LAAFB - holy, moly, the 25 years since I've been there have really changed the place - and the commissary - uhhh, those people don't look like they had *anything* to do with the military - PACKED to the gills, though - so glad I don't live there anymore....) The airline system hasn't changed - still a bloody hassle wherever you go and you will undress at least twice for those TSA handlers. I won't do more than one stop anywhere from where I live - PITA.

As for refi - to me, if you end up paying less over the time of when you live in the house, it's a no-brainer, but yeah, this thread brought up the emotional versus money argument again.

Have fun on your trips - I'll wave to you all from over here

 

[aaronc879]

I guess i'm just not smart enough to comprehend why paying extra interest is a good thing. I'm allergic to paying interest and after paying my condo off at age 30 will never again make an interest payment. I feel sick thinking that I paid $3-4K in interest on my mortgage. I can't imagine some of you who likely paid hundreds of thousands extra for your homes. But hey, what ever works for you. This works for me, I wish the best for you as well.

 

[W2R]

I guess i'm just not smart enough to comprehend why paying extra interest is a good thing. I'm allergic to paying interest and after paying my condo off at age 30 will never again make an interest payment. I feel sick thinking that I paid $3-4K in interest on my mortgage. I can't imagine some of you who likely paid hundreds of thousands extra for your homes. But hey, what ever works for you. This works for me, I wish the best for you as well.

I couldn't agree more on this very contraversial issue. There are many valid arguments on both sides of the mortage-or-not contraversy, but one reason I am in the "pay off the mortgage" camp is my dislike of paying interest.

When I finished paying off my house in 2006, I determined that the total interest that I paid on it during those four years was $17,401.08 . If I had paid according to the original payment schedule, instead of adding extra payments and lump sums whenever I could, the total interest paid over 30 years would have been $159,478.00. So, I "gypped" Chase Mortgage out of $142,076.92 that they thought they would be getting from me though the years. What a victorious feeling to know that they didn't get it, and would never get one more penny of interest from me.

 

[myself]

I couldn't agree more on this very contraversial issue. There are many valid arguments on both sides of the mortage-or-not contraversy, but one reason I am in the "pay off the mortgage" camp is my dislike of paying interest.

When I finished paying off my house in 2006, I determined that the total interest that I paid on it during those four years was $17,401.08 . If I had paid according to the original payment schedule, instead of adding extra payments and lump sums whenever I could, the total interest paid over 30 years would have been $159,478.00. So, I "gypped" Chase Mortgage out of $142,076.92 that they thought they would be getting from me though the years. What a victorious feeling to know that they didn't get it, and would never get one more penny of interest from me.

W2R, I too have been in this same mindset. Thus the reason for our 15 year note. I guess it depends upon when one wants to retire, placed against the scale of how to minimize payments.
We recently started looking to refinance our current 15 year fixed (@4.625%) + HEL (6.54%) into another 15 year fixed (@4.25% or lower). One of my credit scores is 794, but on average between me and DW, it is 780.
Anyhow, I've examined the difference between the shorter term mortgage, and 30 year mortgage, and did an NPV on the difference (placing the difference into investments). What I found out in our case was that over the newer 15 year term (which would put me at 61), there would be $200/month less than needed to pay the mortgage itself at a withdrawal rate of 4.5% from those investments, for the other 15 years of a 30 year note.
While that is placing those specific items into a vaccuum unto themselves, I do have 9% of my paycheck going into retirement funds already, next year I'll bump it to 10%. In 15 years, there will be enough in these other investment accounts to pay for utilities, food, most medical expenses, and general transportation costs. At a safe withdrawal rate of 4%/yr.
I can soooo kick myself in the butt for not having started saving a lot more when I was younger (and quite a bit dumber ).
I think if my DW started working again (she stays at home with our brood now), I'd rather her put her entire paycheck into retirement savings and maybe a little bit towards having fun. She is, after all, 7 years younger than I am.

 

[myself]

I couldn't agree more on this very contraversial issue. There are many valid arguments on both sides of the mortage-or-not contraversy, but one reason I am in the "pay off the mortgage" camp is my dislike of paying interest.

When I finished paying off my house in 2006, I determined that the total interest that I paid on it during those four years was $17,401.08 . If I had paid according to the original payment schedule, instead of adding extra payments and lump sums whenever I could, the total interest paid over 30 years would have been $159,478.00. So, I "gypped" Chase Mortgage out of $142,076.92 that they thought they would be getting from me though the years. What a victorious feeling to know that they didn't get it, and would never get one more penny of interest from me.

Is there really much advantage to bumping out a mortgage beyond 30 years, though? My HELOC currently stands at a $160K balance, and the interest rate has been 3.5% for awhile now. I only have to pay the interest, but have been rounding the payments up to the next $100 (in this case, taking it to $500 mo). I should pay it down while it's lower, but instead I had been diverting the money to investing and other things.

Two months ago I did bump it up slightly, to $600/mo.

Well, I just ran a bunch of scenarios, and presuming it stays at 3.5% (which I know it won't, but for simplicity's sake), I came up with the following:

$500/mo: paid off in 77 years, 6 mo.
$565.12/mo: 50 years
$600/mo: 43 years, 1 mo.
$619.83/mo: 40 years
$718.47/mo: 30 years
$927.94/mo: 20 years
$1,143.81/mo: 15 years.

So, not really a huge amount.

I guess with bigger mortgages it would make more of a difference, though. But say, a $500K mortgage at 4.5%, the 30 year gives you a $2533/mo payment, while the 40 year makes it $2247/mo, a savings of less than $300/mo. I guess that's enough to make a difference for some people, though.

So, you're effectively paying down about $34-$134/month off the principle?
My personal "riskometer" would just be worried about what the rate would be in another 15-20 years when you still have $140k - $150k in principle to be paid. But I guess that's why they call it "Personal Finance", eh?

 

[rescueme]

I "gypped" Chase Mortgage out of $142,076.92 that they thought they would be getting from me though the years.

To make it look even better, compute what you would have had to make, in total income to pay that $142k in "foregone interest".

Depending on your personal taxing situation (local, state, federal, etc.) and assuming a total 33% tax rate (not even including SS & FICA), you would have had to "earn" almost $189k to pay that net interest amount to Chase.

How many years of income does that equate to, and did it impact your ability to retire earlier ...?

 

[Andre1969]

So, you're effectively paying down about $34-$134/month off the principle?
My personal "riskometer" would just be worried about what the rate would be in another 15-20 years when you still have $140k - $150k in principle to be paid. But I guess that's why they call it "Personal Finance", eh?

Yeah, I'll confess I'm not paying down the principle much at all right now. However, looking back at my records, I haven't been doing TOO bad. I ended up maxing my HELOC out back in October 2008. That was when the market was crashing, and there was talk about banks freezing HELOCs and such. I was afraid that mine would do the same, so I pulled the money out. At that point, the interest rate was 4.75% By Feb 2009 it was down to 3.5%, where it's been ever since. The interest portion was running just over $500/mo, and paying $600/mo wasn't knocking it down much, so for 5 months, I threw $1000/mo at it, but then once I got it just below $500/mo, I went back to $600/mo.

I had it paid down to around $170K, when my car got totaled. Instead of buying a new car and getting way into debt, I bought an $8K (with tax and everything) used Buick. Raided $4K from the HELOC, plus the $2K I got for my old car, and paid cash for the other $2K.

That extra $4K added $11.67/mo to the interest. Not a lot, but it got the interest back over the $500/mo mark, and almost maxed the HELOC back out ($175K limit).

So far this year, I've made the following payments:
Jan10: $600
Feb10: $600
Mar10: $9500 (I went through a phase where I wanted to build a new house in the near future, so I figured I'd better get this debt paid down quicker)
Apr10: $5000
May10: $500
Jun10: $500
Jul10: $600 (I think this was when I first ran the numbers and saw that $500/mo would mean it would never get paid off in my lifetime)
Aug10: $600

So, I guess I've been doing better on it than what my previous post had let on.

I am thinking about ramping up to $700/mo for my September payment. I'm supposed to get a raise that kicks in on September 1, so for the October payment, I might try taking it to $800/mo.

If the interest rate starts to shoot up too much, then I'll start paying it down quicker. FWIW, the highest it went was 8.5%. If it went back to that rate, if I wanted to pay off $160K in 30 years, the monthly payment would be $1230.26. That's less than the rent on most of the crack-house apartments around here, so still pretty cheap IMO. However, with any luck, before rates shoot up that high, I will have had the good sense to refinance to something that's fixed!

 

[nun]

I couldn't agree more on this very contraversial issue. There are many valid arguments on both sides of the mortage-or-not contraversy, but one reason I am in the "pay off the mortgage" camp is my dislike of paying interest.

While I'm working I'm very much in the "paying interest" hating camp and I've paid down my mortgage quickly over the past couple of years. However, having $150k remaining and with interest rates at 4% refinancing to a longer term would reduce my monthly expenses to a level that would allow me to ER right now. This refinance argument is really about reducing expenses and freeing up cash rather than if it will be cheaper in 15 or 30 years time.

 

[Nords]

I guess i'm just not smart enough to comprehend why paying extra interest is a good thing. I'm allergic to paying interest and after paying my condo off at age 30 will never again make an interest payment. I feel sick thinking that I paid $3-4K in interest on my mortgage. I can't imagine some of you who likely paid hundreds of thousands extra for your homes. But hey, what ever works for you. This works for me, I wish the best for you as well.

I couldn't agree more on this very contraversial issue. There are many valid arguments on both sides of the mortage-or-not contraversy, but one reason I am in the "pay off the mortgage" camp is my dislike of paying interest.
When I finished paying off my house in 2006, I determined that the total interest that I paid on it during those four years was $17,401.08 . If I had paid according to the original payment schedule, instead of adding extra payments and lump sums whenever I could, the total interest paid over 30 years would have been $159,478.00. So, I "gypped" Chase Mortgage out of $142,076.92 that they thought they would be getting from me though the years. What a victorious feeling to know that they didn't get it, and would never get one more penny of interest from me.

Hey guys, what is this, the Dave Ramsey show? Do I talk trash about whatever assets you choose to invest in?

There are both emotional and financial aspects to investing. For example, paying off the mortgage may enable you to sleep better at night. However, favoring the emotional aspect of the decision may deprive you of a financial opportunity that arises from the ability to do math. If you do the math and decide you'd rather sleep better, then great, that's what you should do. But if you ignore the financial side because of an emotional bias and don't do the math, then you may be poorer for it.

The point is, do the math before you decide whether it's going to be an emotional or a financial decision.

I've said this before, but in case it hasn't been said enough I'll say it again: this is a niche opportunity.

In my case your tax dollars are paying my inflation-adjusted pension. My future income is the equivalent of the dividend stream from I bonds or TIPS. From an asset-allocation perspective it makes no sense to invest the rest of my ER assets in bonds, especially if those bonds are yielding less than a mortgage. It makes all kinds of statistical sense to invest my ER assets in equities that may even yield more than a mortgage rate, let alone produce more profits than the carrying costs. Over 30 years I suspect that a 4-5% mortgage invested in equities will result in more money than was borrowed. Over 40 years I'm nearly certain of it.

In another case, Hawaii real estate is a huge paradise tax. If I paid down mortgage debt as quickly as I possibly could then my ER portfolio would be significantly smaller. That smaller portfolio would be more susceptible to a series of adverse withdrawals like 2000-2002 or 2008-2009. However a larger portfolio (by virtue of carrying a mortgage) is more survivable. That's why nun got the FIRECalc results.

I don't pay interest on credit cards. I don't pay interest on car loans. But when it makes sense to borrow cheap and invest long, then I'll take all I can get.

 

[aaronc879]

Hey guys, what is this, the Dave Ramsey show? Do I talk trash about whatever assets you choose to invest in?

I've never even seen(or heard?) Dave Ramsey and I wasn't trying to "talk trash" and am sure W2R wasn't either. As I said in my post, what ever works for you. I wish you the best.

 

[rescueme]

Hey guys, what is this, the Dave Ramsey show?

Yes

 

[rayvt]

What he said. Nords.

Except that I do pay interest on my car loan. 3.99%. Less than my mortgage rate. PenFed Credit Union. We also have a PenFed 7-year CD paying 5.25%.
So......wait......I'm borrowing my own money and making 1.26%.

 

[rayvt]

I also see a problem w/r/t asset allocation. I you have, for example, a $750,000 stock&bond portfolio and a $250,000 house free-and-clear, then 25% of your net worth is in real-estate. Worse, 25% is in a one (non-diversified) piece of illiquid, non-income producing real-estate.

I'd rather shift the risk over to the bank. They are in a better position to shoulder the risk. To me, it's 25% of my net worth. To them it's less than 0.1% of their real-estate portfolio.

I'd seriously consider having a paid-off house only when it represents less than 5% of my net worth. That would be $5 million net worth.
A $4.75M stock&bond portfolio would easily throw off enough income so that the mortgage payment would lost in the round-off.

 

[rescueme]

I also see a problem w/r/t asset allocation. I you have, for example, a $750,000 stock&bond portfolio and a $250,000 house free-and-clear, then 25% of your net worth is in real-estate. Worse, 25% is in a one (non-diversified) piece of illiquid, non-income producing real-estate.

I'm sure you also include other assets (example - cars) as part of your net worth; however they are not investable assets.

My DW/me have a "gross estate net worth" that is calculated by everything we own. That is what the "terminal life value" of everything we own (and if we had debt, would be subtracted) to come up with this "version" of net worth.

We include our home in this mix. We don't include it, the cars, furniture, bank accounts, etc. in what we consider our retirement investable assets.

A home is a home. Sure it has value and you can use it to trade up, trade down, and anything else you want to do with it. However, unless you sell it and move any part of that sales you are not going to use for further housing to your retirement portfolio, it is just that. If you have other investment properties (not where you live) and consider them as part of your retirement investment portfolio, that's another story. In that case, what you say should be considered.

It's not part of your portfolio, and it's not part of your AA, IMHO....

 

[nun]

I also see a problem w/r/t asset allocation. I you have, for example, a $750,000 stock&bond portfolio and a $250,000 house free-and-clear, then 25% of your net worth is in real-estate. Worse, 25% is in a one (non-diversified) piece of illiquid, non-income producing real-estate.

I'd rather shift the risk over to the bank. They are in a better position to shoulder the risk. To me, it's 25% of my net worth. To them it's less than 0.1% of their real-estate portfolio.

I'd seriously consider having a paid-off house only when it represents less than 5% of my net worth. That would be $5 million net worth.
A $4.75M stock&bond portfolio would easily throw off enough income so that the mortgage payment would lost in the round-off.

In my case I have a $600k 50/50 stock and bond portfolio and $150k to pay on a 2 family house worth $550k. So I'm over weighted as far as RE goes, however, it's a 2 family house so I rent one unit out at $2000 a month. It's like having $500k at 4%. If I refi to reduce my monthly mortgage payment from $2500 to $800 I can ER on the positive income stream from the house and a small 72t.

 

[rayvt]

As Nords said, it's very much an emotional issue, and different people will have different feelings about it. De gustibus non disputum.

As for me, I've been in many different financial situations, and have seen plenty of other people in them too. Including close relatives.
I can say this: Illiquidity sucks!
Having few options sucks.
"Cash is king."

I just went through a refi to a 4.25% 30 year mortgage. Had to pay down about $30K to get that rate. (Not points, just needed to get the new mortgage balance below a breakpoint.) Lender said, "Do you have the means to pay that much? You'll have to show us proof that you have the funds. Oh---no---wait. You already gave us your broker account statement that shows, um, hmmmm, you don't even need a mortgage."

Says me, "Right. As you can see, I could pay off the house tomorrow if I wanted to, with just one phone call to my stockbroker."

Oddly enough, my wife feels the same way. She said, "But our preferred stock account pays us more monthly dividends than the mortgage payment. So why would we pay off the mortgage?"

A close friend & neighbor (also retired) has a fully paid off house. They paid it off when they sold their previous house in Chicago. So, whoopie, no mortgage payment. Except that he just had to go out and get a part-time handy-man job. Better to have a large bank account and a small note than a zero bank account and no note.

 

[brewer12345]

What he said. Nords.

Except that I do pay interest on my car loan. 3.99%. Less than my mortgage rate. PenFed Credit Union. We also have a PenFed 7-year CD paying 5.25%.
So......wait......I'm borrowing my own money and making 1.26%.

Note that pen fed is offering car loans at 2.99% now. I suspect you could refinance.

 

[CCdaCE]

Note that pen fed is offering car loans at 2.99% now. I suspect you could refinance.

And, plus, take a min. of $5k cash out at 3%. You can pay it right back, but I backed up the truck. Load me up on that 3% debt.

-CC

 

[ERD50]

I didn't really want this to become a pay off mortgage thread.

Is anyone actually listening to the OP (nun, in case you lost track)?

I just re-read every post in this thread by nun. Not once did I see even a hint of any expression of the 'fear of debt' that some people have. It's a financial decision for nun, based on cash flow, and nun has already commented on the long term financial impact:

Both scenarios work on Firecalc, but refinancing gives me a better results for min max and average portfolio.

But since the line has been crossed....

Nords captured it pretty well. And one thing I really can't understand is why anyone would label this subject as 'controversial'? There are two elements, financial and emotional:

FINANCIAL: From everything I've seen, and from what others have reported, there may be a slight positive bias towards keeping the debt - but it depends on your assumptions. I've never seen it make a big difference.

EMOTIONAL: Some people seem to be able to sleep better at night after moving a chuck of money from a diversified portfolio of investments into a single piece of RE. So they should do that if they want, and they can also sleep easier knowing that if they look back at the financial side of things, it probably won't make much difference either way. One caveat (as mentioned by others) is that you want to make sure you maintain sufficient liquidity - that can indeed become a real-life problem.

How is any of that 'controversial'?

I've never even seen(or heard?) Dave Ramsey and I wasn't trying to "talk trash" and am sure W2R wasn't either. As I said in my post, what ever works for you. I wish you the best.

aaronc879, I'm sure you didn't mean to come across as 'talking trash' towards anyone, but think about this:

When people imply that 'not paying all that interest' is a smart thing to do, or celebrate moving money from a diversified portfolio to their home, they are also implying that holding the debt must be 'not smart', and that we should be sulking (the opposite of celebrating) over our poor decision. You really can't have one w/o the other. So consider how it sounds to those of us who have run the numbers and feel comfortable with our decision. I have never implied anyone was 'stupid' for paying off their mortgage (assuming liquidity is adequate), or 'celebrated' having a mortgage. It's just a choice I made.

And when someone says "I hate paying interest", w/o even making a passing reference to the opportunity cost of the the money used to pay down the debt, or the lack of liquidity that may result, they are (perhaps unintentionally) providing a very distorted view of the situation. And I don't see how anyone on this forum is served by one-sided views of any matter.

It would be like pointing to a managed fund, and saying it did better than an index, without acknowledging the loads or measuring it on a risk-adjusted basis. Or talking about great returns in Real Estate, w/o acknowledging that it is an active, not passive investment, and that there are risks to RE also. Those posts get brought back to reality in a second. How is this any different?

PS - I'm also re-thinking my lifelong stand on paying cash for cars. Those rates look attractive to me.

-ERD50