‘Designed to fleece...’: Reddit user calls buying flats a trap for middle class, says land is only real investment

A fiery debate has erupted online after a Reddit user called flats in India "one of the biggest financial traps ever designed for the middle class." The user argued that, unlike land, flats are engineered to drain buyers’ wealth while enriching developers, banks, and politicians. The post, structured like a manifesto, lays out why flats are a bad investment and why land is the only real asset.  

In a detailed breakdown, the user laid out multiple reasons why flats are a poor investment:  

1. You Never Truly Own Your Flat 

The post highlighted hidden costs like maintenance fees, sinking funds, parking charges, and property taxes. Additionally, society committees can impose arbitrary rules and restrictions. “After 50-60 years, your flat has no value — unlike land, which only appreciates. If redevelopment isn’t possible, your flat is just a depreciating box,” the user wrote.  

💡 Bottom Line: Buyers pay for "ownership" but face endless fees, restrictions, and the looming risk of demolition.  

2. Flat Prices Are Artificially Inflated  

The user alleged that builders manipulate supply to keep prices high while rental yields remain dismal. “In many cities, ₹3 Cr flats generate just ₹30K in rent, a pathetic 1% yield per year — less than fixed deposits.

💡 Bottom Line: Flats should be at least 50% cheaper than current market rates.  

3. The System is Rigged Against Buyers

Banks make it easy to get home loans for overpriced flats but restrict financing for land purchases. Meanwhile, builders influence policies to their advantage, and government-defined rates (DLC rates) keep rising. “DLC rates go up 10% every year, forcing new buyers to overpay,” the user claimed.  

💡 Bottom Line: The system locks buyers into debt while benefitting banks, builders, and the government.  

4. Land is the Only Real Asset  

Unlike flats, land is finite and always in demand. The user argued that a 50-year-old flat turns into junk, while a 50-year-old land parcel becomes a goldmine. “You control your land, unlike flats where society, builder, or govt dictate terms,” they wrote.  

💡 Bottom Line:  “The rich never buy flats — they buy land. The middle class buys flats and calls it an ‘investment’ while getting fleeced.”    

The post triggered a wave of responses, with some agreeing and others pushing back.  

One user acknowledged, “If you are looking purely from an investment point of view, then yes, land fetches far greater returns. But flats aren’t the right comparison — you should compare land with gold or capital markets.”  

Another added, “Flats should never be this expensive. They were meant as a solution for people in cities, but now even outskirts have overpriced flats.”  

Some users expressed doubts about land ownership. “Yes, but good land parcels are rare. There’s also the risk of encroachment. A flat in a gated society is safer.”  

Another wrote, “I can’t justify a huge loan and effectively doubling the price of an apartment through interest. I’d rather rent nice apartments, save money, and eventually buy land outside the city.”  

While the debate rages on, one thing is clear — many homebuyers are rethinking whether a flat is truly an investment or just a costly liability.