Suck. Blow. FOMO.

We’ve just created two classes or people. One group is made up of social pariahs. Uninformed, secondary, vaguely inferior, with a dubious future. To the media and the political clique, their choices are suspect. Wong.  The other group are mainstream. They’ve taken actions they’re convinced will guarantee a good outcome, regardless of all potential risks along the way. And society agrees.

No, this is not about the vaxed and the unvaccinated. We’re talkin’ renters and owners.

Why would someone choose to be a tenant when all the world is house lusty? Many reasons. An aversion to debt might top the list. Canadians have been sleepwalking into historic levels of borrowing to buy real estate at the highest prices ever with mortgages whose rates can only rise in the future. That sounds unwise. Lots of risk. And some people want lives stripped of uncertainty.

Others who prefer to rent are picking freedom. Flexibility. Mobility. The capacity to change cities to take up a better career opportunity. The ability to change your life, experiences and surroundings, instead of being anchored to a mortgage and living Groundhog Day. The chance to follow your heart and pursue a person you love to the destination of his or her choosing. The understanding that the meaning of life is not to possess a pile of bricks and sticks, but rather to fill it with experiences and make the most of time.

Some renters just like liquidity rather than obligation. They’d rather fill tax shelters and investment accounts than spend two decades paying down a home loan. Some folks understand that in the last third of life what you really need is cash flow, not a paid-off house that drained most of your working paycheques. You can always rent a roof. You cannot lease income.

And, yes, many people simple can afford real estate no longer. At least not without a huge financial gamble, especially those who’ve also chosen to have families. It is wholly irresponsible to feed a mortgage, for example, when your kids’ education savings accounts go unfunded. And yet that is exactly what today’s housing mania has done. Priorities have become twisted beyond recognition.

In short, there’s zero shame being a renter rather than an owner. But shame on those who constantly seek to stigmatize, belittle and diminish the millions among us who have made a conscious or necessary choice to eschew the massive debt and physical entrapment of home ownership.

Like Karen Yolevski.

  K is the COO of Royal LePage which, despite the burden that ownership is placing on Canadians in a Covid world, just can’t stop humping houses. “Owning a property allows more freedom and stability than renting. As a homeowner, you do not have to worry about the landlord hiking up the rent or forcing you to move,” she says this week. “I believe most Canadians would agree that owning a home is as much about laying down roots in a community and making memories with family, as it is about financial security.”

Of course Karen doesn’t mention things like the couple profiled here who bought and leveraged a $1.8 million renovated house with a ceiling about to cave. Or the family that pours everything into a property only to find their neighbours smoke weed on the porch all day. Or the condo owner who gets a $30,000 special assessment because of salt damage to the parking garage. Or the thousands of new property owners in Ontario about to be shocked at assessments and property tax bills when MPAC reports next year.

But wait. Karen and her colleagues hired housing economist Will Dunning (who works principally for the Mortgage Professionals of Canada) to “prove” that owning beats renting when it comes to financial security. You can read it for yourself, here.

Their conclusion: In 91% of the cases Dunning weaseled into, owners are an average of $769 per month ahead of renters. Yup, there ya go. Regardless of whether you are single, have a family, are 25 or 70 years old, living in Cheticamp or Kitsilano, the proof is in. Feed that FOMO.

Is this the height of corporate irresponsibility in Canada? If not, it must be close. With the average property now costing almost $800,000 – over seven figures in many markets – and mortgage rates about to augment (the first bank increases come on Friday, I hear) people need guidance, not hype. Goading and guilting everyone into real estate debt is not what respected companies do. Especially when their numbers suck.

For example, here’s Dunning’s summary analysis, wherein the $769-per-month ownership advantage emanates. It assumes a 20% downpayment ($147,000) on a $733,000 property purchase, yet does not take into consideration a renter who would invest that same amount in a TFSA or RRSP instead of dumping it into a house. With a 7% return (this year it’s been closer to 12%) that alone would generate $857 a month. The last time I looked, that’s bigger than $769. Moreover the bulk of the mortgage payment, says the LePage report, is not considered a cost while 100% of rent is. Yet both come right out of after-tax income. K and Will can suck and blow with a vengeance. All in the interest of realtor commissions.

But what about runaway housing inflation? People who have taken on 20x leverage, choked down big mortgages, fed their lenders every month or bought property and stayed there for years and years have made a bundle, the humpers cry. And they’re right. Enjoy the windfall – which is only realized when a sale takes place.

But the point remains. There are a multitude of solid, responsible, personal and human – as well as financial – reasons why many among us shun owning. The housing hesitant. Show some respect. If you can’t manage that at least be honest.

About the picture: “Love your blog and never miss a chance to read it,” writes Ian, in Oshawa.  “This is ‘Tiger’. He grew into a 50lb Frenchie who is living his best life. Walking on the 11 acres he calls home, chasing every bunny that dares to cross his path, and snuggling on the sofa. I think he is trying to warn people to be careful dealing with this crazy housing market.”