All of my points in the threads context are irrefutable. The differences are only in values. You think people in a relationship shouldn't pay their fair share. Multiple other people disagree. It's a preference, not a matter of right or wrong.

Less moral wording: you think people shouldn't split the cost of living in a premarital arrangement

I'd venture a guess that missy grew up without a lot of money and you were well off. But that's just a guess it could be 100 other things

Ah so the abused is now the abuser.

Makes 3x more than you.
Trips out because he has to pay less than half of mortgageand no other costs.

Sorry chica, but your situation is a lose/lose right now. Probably should talk it out with him and come to equal terms. Maybe move in together in a different place like Katya said and keep your personal properties separate?Huh? Dude, I think you're making chit up now to get a rise out of people. Goodbye.

In my experience said roommate wasn’t willing to pay more so I booted him and sold the house lol.
Perks of being too nice and renting to “friends.”

Lol if you think I'm rereading any of that. You don't make arguments you just blither. I know that you understand that cost of living doesn't change with a change in mortgage term, so honestly who cares about your posturing on morality. I'm not making any false assertions.

Anachron isn't going to be smiling at me at the pearly gates

As if you could even name the argument. You just asserted ad hominem against something that was clearly not an argument lol

Ad hominem! Lmao

(Also not an ad hominem for reference)

@Littlemissy: I get where you're coming from and if this was a business or you were a lender I'd be right with you. The lines get weird because of the relationship.

I understand why he might be a bit salty at you, after all, you may not realize this but your decisions may imply to him that you aren't seeing a future together

I get why you might not want to commingle funds but you already got money involved in your relationship by doing it like this.

Also why let dudes ITT refer to your man as a Simp?I just want to put it out there that he did ask to purchase a hometogetherbefore OP decided to go at it alone.

There's a lot of goings on here.

I don't think either of them made good decisions.

Right but you admitted yourself that's a bad idea

I guarantee you the quoted is not how he views this story.
Probably from his POV it was more or less “pay for my house or don’t live with me”. Of course I’m speculating, but if working as essentially a part time associate while in law school has taught me anything, it’s that there’s always always always two sides to a story.

Part of your story seems a bit off, as well, like him supposedly “not caring” about buying a house, yet wanting to purchase. a huge house with you and that you wanted to buy a house on your own, and he was supposedly more than okay with this... However; if he had not interest in owning a house with you, why did you even have to discuss it to such lenght, using (imo terrible) analogies to a hypothetical daughter etc.

Better idea than paying into something for zero equityI think here she says she wouldn't have kept it to herself because she knew it'd bother him

Looks like she actually understood that'd be a fukt thing to do here

One thing that does bother me is the justification for the train of thought using "he's not your husband"

Yeah but he fukkin' could be one day.

I think she kinda said that but with more words honestly

Honestly after re-reading the original post the tenant should pay $500 regardless. When they agreed to pay "half the mortgage" it was under the assumption that these payments were static. ie) you wouldn't refinance to pay off earlier. Completely unfair to charge them more, and you shouldn't have let your business partner know that you refinanced and lowered your payments.

but why would she? She is obviously very financially apt and marrying him would automatically make her lose 50% of her equity. It is a terrible financial decision for her to marry him. Not only the house but her whip is pretty fancy too. He kind of did Simp himself into his position.

I mean of course there is always a prenup but god damn he would be a simp overlord if he signed a prenup that the assets they had prior to marriage remained theirs considering he paid the same in equity to the house.

I don't even want to break this down

Not life

its simple, littlemissy is a real alpha female and made the right decisions

honestly she should just charge him whatever financially benefits her the best because its worked so far

Too much truth. Such is life i guess.

B & C split rent like Opie

The should pay equal.... If they're in a committed relationship ..hell if the person in better footing could help the other person get to where they are then do that too.. A real relationship is a partnership. I'm sorry for miscers that dont see that..

THIS. I would never NEVER move in with someone and be in that situation unless I was certain of a long term future together.

He’s taking a risk too you know. He’s not just simply reaping a benefit. Again, you are BOTH benefiting. Not JUST him, but YOU as well. Regardless if your payment is lowered, you’re still paying less...you’re only paying 50% of the mortgage. I’m not understanding why you don’t see this. You act as though this doesn’t benefit you at all. If you were paying 100% and he was freeloading off you, I’d see your point. Would you rather him get an apartment...one that he could easily afford with his X3 salary while you revert back to paying 100% of your mortgage? Who would want that? What financially sensible person thinks that’s a good idea? Especially if it were a serious relationship...

The house is an investment and it is yours as the deed is in your name. You could be in a relationship with this man for a few years with him paying the majority of your mortgage only for you to kick him to the curb. Why would anyone pay a bigger share on a mortgage on a home that’s not theirs and may never be theirs? You could sell it and any equity from your home would go back in your pocket no? Or would you offer him his money back?

It seems simple to me. You see him as renter...one that will lose his investment if he leaves. Now, he sees you as a landlord trying to stave off financial loss because of market comparison. It sounds like you want in the rental business. This isn’t a relationship. This sounds like a financial agreement completely devoid of sentiment or the other’s feelings.

On a side note...I remember seeing this one woman get crucified on the internet for turning her and her husband’s marriage in to a transactional relationship. He had to do dishes to earn a kiss, he had to put the toilet seat down to get a hug, he had to wash the clothes to get intimate. Everything had a price...everything was transactional. I hope there’s more to your relationships than transactions...that woman was scorned by men and women alike for her treatment of her spouse. It doesn’t sound healthy. Hope you two figure it out

probably because SHE owns the house and its in her name, and its not in his name. Rentcel mentality is not the same thing as being a homeowner.

Shes technically the landlord and hes a tenant. She wants to make a decision about her personal finances with the property that SHE owns and he does not, so its not so simple as a 50/50 split when he doesnt have the same ownership of the property

Yeah yeah it’s always “equal” in the extremely rare circumstance where the female has more assets/income than the male

Otherwise it’s the routine of the female expecting the male to find her lifestyle

I didn't go through the whole ****ing thread.. If the relationship is going nowhere then yeah think logically and put finances above it all.. If you're in a relationship and you are on equal footing then **** like this isn't a question.. I know people who have equally worked to pay off each others debts..they moved on to have children and its an equal partnership.. That's the part about relationships where I feel bad people dont see how they can be done.. If you're not in a relationship for a partnership than why are you in one..might as well just have short stints of being with people you like having sex with.. The latter is what I do

lmao its cause your'e fn retarded with zero financial skills

Mortgage payment = Interest + principal

Interest = cost of borrowing
Principle = paying back the loan, in effect gaining equity.

When you refinance the main thing that happens is you change the rate at which you pay off the principle.

The 100% fair thing is to split 50/50 the interest cost.

If its the full mortgage payment, they are also splitting the principle payments and have bought some of your house for you.


lmao misc doesn't even know what makes up a mortgage payment and hence confuses itself

This thread has been so fascinating to read. Love hearing both sides, I have to say I side with Muzzie/Dizzy/missy/don though, I see things from the business/accounting/transactional point of view.

Ya'll on the opposite side that are willing to "just keep it simple" or bring feelings and the relationship in to it (e.g. take the less financially beneficial option for yourself as an individual) are too kind hearted lol . There's something good to be said about that kind of personality for sure (srs). As always Anachron's post's are absolutely insufferable to read, congrats on making me low key rage, you troll.

paying off debts in a relationship is a cuck move, in a marriage then its a different story.

That'll be the day anyone lets me live somewhere for just the interest cost. BRB cheapest housing in America

By this logic, houses that are paid off are free to live in. Lol...

This.

The OP doesn't even know how a mortgage works lol and is asking a question. 95% of the morons replying don't know either.

Mortgage payment = interest + principle

Principe = paying back the loan, gain equity
Interest = cost of borrowing

Fair split is 50% of interest + property expenses. As your said, a full mortgage payment would include slowly gaining ownership.