@@IRLSuperbsorry you live in a society. There are ways to go live on an island or in the forest and never pay anyone for anything. Taxes are payment for the things you take for granted, there should be more of those things but our country finds it better to pay ridiculous amounts for defense. Regardless, paying taxes isn’t the same as having debt.
We got a small amount of inheritance when my husband's granny passed away. And his brother attempted to persuade us to invest it in a retirement fund for our kids. I had to remind my husband that we were still paying off debt and it would be ridiculous to set our kids up for retirement when we were still in a hole.
A retirement fund for your children? That's highly bizzare. I could see a college fund for kids but a retirement fund? I am glad you guys didn't listen to him!
To be fair: life isn't all about money, and Dave has reiterated that many times. However, a financial advice podcast IS all about money, lol. Kinda like how lawyers are all obsessed with the law, and doctors are all obsessed with health, lol.
Pay the house off. Once you have the mortgage gone you can invest THAT. Then you have a win win. You are no longer paying interest and you are collecting interest.
@@abrahamflores2566 especially when you’re sitting on a pile of fairly liquid investments you can utilize at any time. This money isn’t locked away in a 401k, it’s always available
No amount of "investing your mortgage payment" would make up for the compound growth of investing $300k into mutual funds at age 32. If the mortgage payment is $1500/month, it would take over 16 years to equal $300k, and most of that would not have been invested for those 16 years. That's the issue with Dave's argument. The compound interest from investing early is too powerful to squander
One thing about Dave's formula: whoever sends you the check may have already taken a percentage out for taxes. If that is the case than he is withholding well over 50% or 60% for taxes.
This question always comes up. Personally I’d invest it. But I get why Dave doesn’t budge on this, as his clientele are generally people who are terrible with money, so becoming debt free is crucial. Realistically though, they could easily do both and it’d be a good compromise IMO. Invest half, put half on mortgage. Then they’re both happy.
Agreed with you 100%. Investing it would be the route I'd go but understand why Dave would say no as majority of his listeners/clientele are bad with money. It's the safe route to pay off the mortgage.
it is not that Daves listeners are bad with money, though many start with Dave that way, it is that Dave is teaching financial peace, and there is no peace with debt. sure, ones head can be above water with debt, but only debt free equals financial peace "they could easily do both and it’d be a good compromise IMO. Invest half, put half on mortgage." i disagree. as Dave says "you win at what you focus on." another way to put it is the old Chinese saying "whoever chases two rabbits catches neither." best move is to pay off the mortgage then invest what used to be the mortgage payment
@@eatpigsnot Yeh it's a shame that people online seem to lose all decency sometimes over an opinion lol. Regarding the topic - I completely get it about financial peace. I see it with my parents, who prioritised the mortgage even when they could have invested. Even though they know they would have had more in their retirement now, they always say that being debt free is priceless.
A part of what you earn is yours to keep. Get debt free. Retire with rental properties bought with cash one rental at a time. I am retiring into my paid for rentals. It takes time there is no get rich way to get the FI financial Independence.
Risk is the key, when mutual funds go down can be the same time people loose jobs and inflation hits. Sorta like now. Then they have to withdraw from their accounts when they are at a low to pay their debts.
I would pretend that the inheritance never happened and continue with the steps as they were going. I also have gone thru a divorce and would never comingle inheritance, life happens and you never know what when divorce may happen.
@@blazethebeat7392 maybe you should read it again, nothing sneaky or deceitful about my statement. Keeping inheritance separate and continuing with the original plan is what I would do, I'm not hiding anything
@@blazethebeat7392 please enlighten me on how I'm being dishonest. Inheritance isn't usually co-mingiled funds. Trust me I life by Christian beliefs, with tithing and community volunteering thru my church regularly
Do both. Pay down the mortgage and recast it to lower your monthly payment by $300-$600. You can do this without refinancing and you get to keep your interest rate. This way you don't feel overleveged
@@lvluptoaverage52 because no risk is also a form of risk in today's inflationary times. It's also called opportunity risk. If you could get your mortgage down to a $1000 payment a month you can easily have enough reserves to cover the payment for months and months even if you lose your job. If $1000 is too much get your mortgage down to $600 a month and keep investing without worrying about a $120k mortgage.
I make entertaining videos as well.. i ate a whopper from burger King inside Target on my RU-vid channel because I’m trying to get out the hood.. anything to make it out🦅
I’m curious as to who is receiving the check? Most inherited money can be kept separate if a divorce eventually occurred. The interest gained might be divided. I wonder if that’s in the back of the guy’s mind?
"Sharon doesn't question the budget" Well when you're making many millions per year, why would your spouse ever question if you can afford groceries next week?
They didn’t start like this though. They started literally bankrupt and worked their way to where they are today. And stayed married through it all. Imagine that
It would be insane not to pay the mortgage off, imagine having a new baby and no mortgage, or if someone lost their job and no mortgage it would just be amazing
If you want to invest that badly, then make that your boring, auto-pilot, cost-averaging move instead of the debt repayment. Second, the inflation-favours-debt-to-the-gills argument also sounds math-smort, but I'd rather have more money on hand for rising costs than to keep make payments that are feel less painful.
The co host seems uncomfortable at his irritability. I guess he has done this for so long and he knows some callers know the answer so he can't be bothered.
🤦♂️Dave what are you saying. Risk? How much risk is there in a home with about 200k equity. Smh. This is why dave is goofy to me. His rules are stiff. The husband has a very good point on this one.
Mathematically, maybe. Ramsey isn’t just about math; he’s about behaviors and getting out of debt to maximize returns on money. In the long run, he’s about financial peace; peace is best found ehen you owe no one else.
Pay off the house and invest the rest. Now you can enjoy life by living off one paycheck and whatever you decide. There is no guarantee you will live 10 or 20 years from now. To each his own.
99.5% of foreclosures are a result of people with a mortgage. The 0.5% are because of lender errors based on bank errors that result in a foreclosure attempt.
Very true. There are a lot of homeless people in Martha's Vineyard who are there because they inherited paid-for houses and lost them, simply because they couldn't afford the taxes.
I disagree with this part of Ramsey's philosophy. I would invest the money. The mortgage debt is worth less every year due to inflation and you will see more of a return when you invest a larger lump sum.
If you want to win with money, you learn from people that have already won with money not just anybody giving advice in the comment section. I’m sorry if I offended you, but that’s the reality!
If I get 300k. I will leave 50k as emergency fund, throw 100k toward the house and put 150k in a good growth mutual fund. In 7 years the 150k becomes 300k again and throw the profit toward the mortgage and I'm done with it and still have a big chunk of money.
Dave again cherry picking statistics. Yes, 100% of foreclosure are from home loans (duhhh). What he left out was that 98% of them had at least 10% equity. That does not sound so risky after all, does it?
If she’s the one who received the inheritance it’s hers to do with as she wishes. If she puts it into the house she’s choosing to make it part of their joint asset. If she invests it she could do so in her name only. It’s her call.
SRB If it did / I would follow mit / but really , / they were all trying to get money /... before getting money. And it .. also wouldn't work /. Because they'd still have to "investigated /
First off, the arrogance to say he came up with risk analysis is insane. Second, there is no wrong answer here. It is just a matter of risk tolerance. Depending on what other liquid assets, and other assets they have, they may be able to absorb the risk for a greater reward. A 3%-4% mortgage does not need to be urgently paid off, so long as you are behaving with the surplus. That said, I am choosing to pay off my 3% mortgage because I do not want to worry about my home if I lost my job at my age. That said, someone else might be ok with that risk, or be in an area where finding another job is easy, and choose to make more than the interest is costing
God in Heaven... This guy has loose screws Dave is going to cost these people thousands, if not millions in lifetime earnings with this BS advice Put the inheritance into a diverse portfolio of income-producing assets instead of going all-in on a low rate mortgage