13 ms·

Yeah, I guess that's the logical conclusion. I'd naively expect that the decreased profitability of an asset would decrease its market value, but the owner, ban

Yeah, I guess that's the logical conclusion. I'd naively expect that the decreased profitability of an asset would decrease its market value, but the owner, banks and government are all interested in keeping the prices high, so instead of offloading less lucrative properties at cheaper prices, the rents get increased :/ I've rented most of my adult life, never did the landlords not be assholes. There must be a better way.

InvertedRhodium 6y ago
> I'd naively expect that the decreased profitability of an asset would decrease its market value It actually does (kind of), the problem is that the gap between "not profitable" and "affordable" is a chasm. Someone who is currently paying $350/week rent with minimal savings behind them (which statistically is an optimistic assumption) is not going to be able to find a 10% (or maybe higher) deposit on a $500,000+ property. The other issue is that right now we're experiencing massive inflation of house prices. Median house value in NZ increased 24% in March - that means you'd need to save around $2000/week just to not lose ground. It's madness, I'm glad I bought at what I thought was the top of the market in March 2000.