I would take advantage of the reduced monthly cost of a 50 year mortgage. In that kind of time, if shit doesn't go sideways for me, my income will have increased and the value of the dollar dropped due to inflation, meaning that 300k home is a lot easier to pay off. And if it's a fixed-rate loan, that's beneficial to me, especially in a collapse. It would also be better in case I lose my job as the minimum monthly payment would be lower than a 30 or 15 year loan making it easier for me to make ends meet. After examining the situation, if you don't get into the mortgage where the 50 year is barely manageable, it seems like a pretty good deal, especially if it's fixed-rate.
A 200K house on a 30 year mort. is 992, with a total paid of 594K if paid to term.
The same 200K on a 50 year mort is 880, with a total paid of 923K if paid to term.
The tradeoff is paying $112 per month less, to then pay 330K more over the term of the loan. That makes no sense. Please don't do this. For a large loan where you can prepay, send an extra $50 per month at the start of the loan, when the interest costs are largest, because the principal balance is the largest.
my income will have increased and the value of the dollar dropped due to inflation
The sad part about inflation is wages don't rise in proportion to the loss of the value of money. The idea that wages will rise to make the debt paid with less valuable money doesn't work for wage earners. If you have 200K in investments, like index funds, there's a reasonable chance the loan can be repaid with cheaper money over 10/15 years, but that's still a risky bet.
Same rate for both loans, the longer-term loan should be higher interest, to price in the risk of a devaluing currency. This would result in a slightly higher monthly payment for the 50 year loan and higher total paid, but the numbers are good enough for comparison.
I would take advantage of the reduced monthly cost of a 50 year mortgage. In that kind of time, if shit doesn't go sideways for me, my income will have increased and the value of the dollar dropped due to inflation, meaning that 300k home is a lot easier to pay off. And if it's a fixed-rate loan, that's beneficial to me, especially in a collapse. It would also be better in case I lose my job as the minimum monthly payment would be lower than a 30 or 15 year loan making it easier for me to make ends meet. After examining the situation, if you don't get into the mortgage where the 50 year is barely manageable, it seems like a pretty good deal, especially if it's fixed-rate.
A 200K house on a 30 year mort. is 992, with a total paid of 594K if paid to term.
The same 200K on a 50 year mort is 880, with a total paid of 923K if paid to term.
The tradeoff is paying $112 per month less, to then pay 330K more over the term of the loan. That makes no sense. Please don't do this. For a large loan where you can prepay, send an extra $50 per month at the start of the loan, when the interest costs are largest, because the principal balance is the largest.
The sad part about inflation is wages don't rise in proportion to the loss of the value of money. The idea that wages will rise to make the debt paid with less valuable money doesn't work for wage earners. If you have 200K in investments, like index funds, there's a reasonable chance the loan can be repaid with cheaper money over 10/15 years, but that's still a risky bet.
What interest rate are you assuming?
Used the default (6ish) here: https://www.calculator.net/mortgage-calculator.html.
Same rate for both loans, the longer-term loan should be higher interest, to price in the risk of a devaluing currency. This would result in a slightly higher monthly payment for the 50 year loan and higher total paid, but the numbers are good enough for comparison.