• livus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    the value is still the value. You want to live in that $500 a week house

    That doesn’t make any sense. 5 hours ago you were saying the rent had to reflect the cost of repaying borrowing on the asset.

    That cost is dependent on equity and mortgage rate.

    But now you’re suddenly saying living in the house is inherently “worth” a sum of money that isn’t tied to borrowing costs at all. Seems arbitrary.

    In reality, rentals cost what the market will bear, in some markets that’s well below the cost of a new mortgage so those investors have to top up for a few years. In other markets it’s not.

    • Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      No im replying to old mate saying that now there’s nothing owed so it should go down.

      Im saying the house is worth what the house is worth, mortgage rates go up rentals go up, mortgage rates go down the buy in cost goes downso rentals go down.

      But sure pick the definition of value to argue on the internet.

      The value is what its worth like i said. Misconstrue me however you want. No one will pay more then what its worth regardless

      • livus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’m not trying to misconstrue you, I was just pointing out that you seemed to be arguing two opposite points of view. This is the crux of it:

        mortgage rates go down the buy in cost goes down so rentals go down.

        @DarkDarkHouse was pointing out that in practice doesn’t really ever happen, and I would agree with them.