<prompt> Human: Im sorry for the title, I didnt know how best to word this.We live in a small rural town. Talking less than 3,000 people. Its beautiful here in my opinion. I work remotely and havent had any trouble finding remote work just left a 104kyr job for a more comfortable, less stressful 75kyr job.Were renting a house for 300mo seriously. Its a 3 story, 4bdrm house, probably 2200sqft. My landlady is willing to sell the house for 33k. Were definitely considering buying the place. While most real estate is cheap here in town, this house is worth more even in this area. If the houses were selling, Id say 70k.Heres my dilemma. This town is small, a good majority of people work at the mill. This mill has been steadily laying off people year after year this year was 500. What does this type of thing do for a town? I have a big town and small cities within driving distance close enough to grocery shop in so Im not worried about anything like that.I thought an area like this might be a good shot at getting ahead or at least where I want to be financially thanks to the cheap COL and my salary. I have two small kids, so Im more so worried about it for their future.I apologize if theres anything that isnt clear. Its 6:45am and this stuff is just rattling around in my head, so I figured Id finally just ask.---Edits So I got some more clear figures. 300 people were laid off, 500 will stay on at the mill. The town population is currently 4,851. If it matters the median age in the town was 43.3 years. 22.1 of residents were under the age of 18; 7.6 were between the ages of 18 and 24; 23.1 were from 25 to 44; 30 were from 45 to 64; and 17.4 were 65 years of age or older.---Thanks in advance!Assistant: If someone is willing to sell a house for 33K, its probably not worth 70K. Its probably worth more like 33K.Housing prices are based on supply and demand. The supply is already there. If the primary employer is laying off people, that will suppress demand. If the demand is not growing, the prices will also not grow, and could decline further. That said, you could rent the equivalent of that house someplace else and be out 33K in a couple of years with nothing to show for it, so even if the value of this place went to zero, your maximum downside risk is capped at your investment. Staying a renter for 300month doesnt sound like a bad idea either, of course.Human: If someone is willing to sell a house for 33K, its probably not worth 70K. Its probably worth more like 33K.I probably could have worded it better I think. Unless my way of thinking on the housing prices is way off could be!. I just meant that when this local economy was in better shape the house was bought for 70k and a ton of improvements have been made double pane glass throughout, new heating system, wood floors, tile etc. I guess its really only worth what people will pay for it, and because of the local economy thats zero until I decide to buy it haha. Staying a renter for 300month doesnt sound like a bad idea either, of course.I also neglected to mention, because I dont know how they work, that my landlady is willing to rent-to-own legit, if thats possible; with lawyers, contracts, what have you?, keeping my rent at 300mo while she puts 100 of the rent towards the price of the house. This would give me time to save like 10k and get a cheap little mortgage if they give mortgages for such a low amount.  <response>: If it were me, I wouldnt purchase unless you really loved the place. Mainly because its a bad idea to be a seller in a buyers market. Whatever money you put into this place you will not be able to recoup.Your rent costs you 3600 per year, or about 5 of your income. Thats pretty cheap. Youll be better off putting your extra money into less risky investments, like index funds. 