4 ms·
That's absolutely correct, my point was that once you've done the math - and assuming you are still paying a mortgage - it should give you a rent high enough su
by alex_duf 8y ago
That's absolutely correct, my point was that once you've done the math - and assuming you are still paying a mortgage - it should give you a rent high enough such that no-one would agree to take it, unless you are willing to keep paying for part of it. It would therefore push the owner to either sell or stay in their property.
That's my blue-sky-point-of-view of the property market which doesn't reflect the reality, but I believe with enough people treating property as an investment rather than a personal need you end up in our current situation.
My personal view is that tax systems should compensate by being more expensive to own more properties than you need. (where to put a limit, I'm not sure)
- brightball 8y agoThe rent is higher but people will still take it for a lot of reasons. Inability to get approved for a mortgage, not wanting to deal with the sales process if you expect to move around a lot, etc. I tried to sell my old house and despite being priced low just to get it sold, it sat on the market after we had already moved. We ended up deciding to see if we could rent it but weren’t sure how the process would go. In our area we didn’t see any home rentals listed except for a couple that were excessive (double what a mortgage would cost). After months of not selling, we listed it for rent at a price I thought nobody would pay and it rented in 1 day, sight unseen. The renters insisted on paying a deposit as soon as possible because they didn’t want to lose the property. For a first dip into the home rental market, I was shocked at how high the demand was.
- abtinf 8y agoWould you agree that when evaluating the housing market, we should take into account the full context of the decision to rent or buy, including the positives of renting and the negatives of ownership?