Oh, you are talking about the present value of the principle.



所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛http://www.xys.org/cgi-bin/mainpage.pl

送交者: mangolasi 于 2005-3-22, 19:24:01:

回答: what? 由 skipper3 于 2005-3-22, 19:14:39:

That's true. Actually I am not very into what you are discussing.

But I am still worry. If the house's rent just cover the interest rather than the interest+principle, 50 years later, you are still have debt of that principle, and while your house worth something (the market price), this something is accumulated by your repayment of interest (i.e. how's the deal of not buying the house and rather, borrow money to invest in the stock market?).

Just no free lunch.



所有跟贴:


加跟贴

笔名: 密码(可选项): 注册笔名请按这里

标题:

内容(可选项):

URL(可选项):
URL标题(可选项):
图像(可选项):


所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛http://www.xys.org/cgi-bin/mainpage.pl