General Discussion

Comparing 30 to 50 year mortgages at the same rate is disingenuous. Lenders tend to charge higher rates for longer terms to even the $200 plus monthly extra purchasing power I’ve seen in recent is inflated under most circumstances. A portion of that extra purchasing power will also inflate home values to a degree. This will further impact its positive effects on making homes ownership more affordable. The rent vs home ownership argument only works in markets where average rent is not substantially lower than the mortgage payment of the average home. A fifty year mortgage is probably two roofs, 4 water heaters, 2-4 hvac/heating solutions and many other repairs. Unless, you bank on ever increasing real estate values, many won’t have the equity to refi or get a home equity loan for these repairs and maintenance because amount that goes to principal is so small for the first 30 years. I think many would be surprised how little principal is being paid at the beginning of most mortgages. This is only amplified by the 30 year term.
That being said there are also many pluses. Unless one refinances or takes out home equity loans, the monthly cost of shelter in today’s dollar will most likely go down every year of ownership. If housing prices boom or even increase at just the CPI rate, the owner will have further increased equity to dip into if needed. or wanted. Around retirement age if one cannot afford to maintain their mortgage payments, there’s always reverse mortgages, often predatory but sometimes the only way someone can continue to live in their home.

Again, I am overall in favor of offering the option, but I don’t really think it’s open the market by the degree its proponents think.