In some countries, owning a house rather than renting one is very important for people. Why might this be the case? Do you think this is a positive or negative situation?

People in some areas consider it so significant to purchase a house in confront of hiring it. In my opinion,

such

an idea stemmed from an economical situation people face it. I am

also

convinced that

this

viewpoint causes a wide range of adverse effects. It is my view that when in an area there is traditional economic management something like buildings or fields receive the highest fee. Oppositely, in developed countries, the economy is planned to encourage production and development. Indeed, one of the crucial factors to evaluate the growth of a country represents the amount of production that they make annually to answer their internal consumption or even more to export.

As a result

of that the price of a building stays at the equivalent level for a long time.

However

, in undeveloped countries houses see a dramatic rise in expenditure yearly.

Consequently

, acquiring a house considers an investment.

Hence

, the public is more eager in purchasing a place rather than face an increase in rent every year. I

further

believe that possessing

such

an economic approach leads to economical collapse after decades.

For example

, in my country, people spend their stocks on the building industry. It involves a broad portion of flows of cash waste in an unproductive part of the country in which there is no benefit for development.

Therefore

, ruined industry bankrupted agriculture, and the poor market ended in a destroyed economy that nobody would be successful there, owner or renter. In conclusion, the economic situation in undeveloped countries devotes the most prominent figure to fields and buildings that make them popular to purchase. While, from my personal perspective,

this

kind of management leads to economic collapse for decades.