I believe that would be a good question for economists. 

You do not need to be an economist to understand this...

...enough said. 💥😎

Some - few but some - strategically should rent. Example, a doctor doing a year or longer residency in a town where they will not set up their practice. 

I would imagine economists would say what we know - real estate is durable, stable and holds its value. 

Is having $500,000 equity in your home a bad thing?

Like Ivory soap, 99.4% should buy, but there are some exceptions. 

Its always been a race between the two. there are times when people renting are well-off only to have Real Estate leap at them saying: you can own! 

If they are good economists, they would say that it is much better for someone to own a home than to rent a home.

I don't know. But I bet they would say, in the long run, owning is far better than renting.

Case by case. Depends on how long a person is going to stay in one area, their age, retirement, family, health, etc. Renting makes more sense for many people.

Generally, renting is cheaper on  a short-term basis. 

I am sure that it depends on the situation, and the individual.

In most cases if does make sense to buy, if you buy right.

You do not need the advice of an economist.

Do an internet search for "What is the difference in net worth between a renter and a homeowner".

I would think most economists would think buying was better, if possible.  If one has a steady job, a mortgage that has tax deductible features and the absence of a landlord wh9o wants to raise your monthly housing cost and property tax deduction, and historical hedge against inflation with rising appreciation and equity, that might be why I suspect most Economists refer to buy.

This economist loves the fact that there are these people to rent my properties.