[Christien]

Something just occurred to me, maybe food for thought. How is it worse financial planning to borrow against home equity for anything, including toys, than it is to hold an interest-only mortgage, or rent? I remember Wayne saying a while ago it made better financial sense for his family to rent than own, and in a crazy housing market, this can seem even more sensible. I understand that an interest-only mortgage only makes sense if you can otherwise put the money that would've been spent on principal to work earning more than the interest rate on the mortgage, but I would think rent would be close to the total amount of a mortgage payment (P & I portions), which would in effect have the same net financial effect as borrowing against equity for toys, would it not?