ScarySpikes
tastes like burning
You have paraphrased Dave's advise mostly incorrectly.
His baby steps are triage, and they focus on fixing the biggest problem first: the person's behavior. Completing the first few baby steps -- becoming debt-free except for your mortgage -- should take you 6 months to 2 years, depending on your income and how much debt you have. That amount of time is insignificant in the grand scheme of things, so it's not the end of the world to drive whatever car you can afford to pay cash for and to miss out on investing for that amount of time, given the huge upside at the end of it, which is to use your whole disposable income for building wealth. Not to mention that in the process of learning to budget and stop borrowing, people improve themselves in other ways as well and often end up with better paying jobs by the time they're done becoming debt free.
A lot of presumptions here are just not based in reality. Paying off all loans in 6 months to 2 years? If you have enough income, not a problem. How exactly is, say, a teacher, with the student loans from getting a masters degree, and a starting salary at like 40-50k, supposed to do that. The only people this advice would help with are people with relatively small amounts of debt, and enough income that they are not basically living month to month.
Dave doesn't advocate renting forever. He wants people to get into a mortgage and effectively "lock in their rent" since rents always go up. He just doesn't want the mortgage to become an anchor around your neck. It should be something you can comfortably afford so you don't end up foreclosing if you lose your job for a few months. It should be something you can realistically pay off well within your lifetime so you don't have to sell your house to retire. Plus, what if it doesn't appreciate like you think it should? That's called putting all your eggs in one basket.
His advice was that a mortgage should be only 20% of net income, and also to go for shorter loan periods. It's fine advice for people that can afford it, but in many areas homes that would allow for that kind of a loan don't even exist. The cost has gone up. People are still better off going with a loan that is 33% of their net income, and/or a 30 year term. His advice is just completely unrealistic for most people.
This also could cause a lot of problems with the housing market. the supply of inexpensive homes is already very thin in many housing markets. Just as an example, up here in the greater Seattle area, last year I put a bid for a house that was marketed at $340k, and worth about that. My bid had an extension to $380k, 40k over asking. I was outbid by an additional 40k, meaning the house went for 80k, just under 24% over asking. A coworker of mine just saw a similarly lower cost house he bid on, which needed to be completely refloored and repainted (15k worth of work) go for 100k above asking.
Ramsey is basically saying everyone except the exceptionally rich ought to be going for what amounts to maybe 10% of available homes at the bottom of the market, and you end up with a situation where the prices get gauged up, and the people who can afford to escalate excessively pay about as much as they would have if they went up market a bit anyway.
Before you say that supply and demand for these less expensive homes will eventually even out, that doesn't happen, developers will not build new lower cost homes if they aren't forced to, the profit motives overwhelmingly favor selling more expensive 'luxury' homes. When people like Ramsey just blame individuals for not living within their means, it gives cover for developers to continue to ignore the shortage they are knowingly creating.
Dave has no problem with $70k luxury cars -- for people who can afford them. If reliable transportation is all you need, he tells people daily to buy a $12k used Camry with cash. And, you should be saving the money ahead of time for when it comes time to replacing that Camry, so you can buy another car wihtout borrowing. This all comes after the 6-24 months of driving a clunker that could break down at any time, and after you've saved enough cash that you can fix the car if it does (which is "baby step" number 1 BTW).
Paying $12k in cash for a car is still outside of the realm of possibility for many people, just as the mortgage at only 20% of net take home, and paying off all debts in only 6 months to 2 years is. Again, this goal only really fits with a small slice of people who already have good incomes, and are just really dumb with their money.
The main thing you got right in your assessment is that he tells people not to go into debt for college. Dave is not telling people, "College isn't worth it, don't do it unless you can pay cash for it." He is telling them, "Get a degree in something marketable, don't spend out the wazoo for the name on the front gate, and pay for it as you go by doing your breadth requirements at JC and transferring to a state school."
Again, even following that advice, it is no longer possible for people to pay for college with the part time, at or near minimum wage jobs they will probably be able to find as college students. Also, there is value to the country for having people educated in something other than the pretty narrow selection of options that are 'marketable'. That will lead to a lot of people getting educated in things they might not really feel any passion for, and a populace that is severely undereducated on a lot of topics that are not deemed 'marketable'. I think that the country is made better by having philosophers, historians, sociologists, and the like. Probably more so than we are made better by getting another MBA douche or lawyer.


