Jun 29, 2026 · 25 min · 11 segments
In this episode I'm joined again by Tash Etschmann from Tash Invests to dissect a particularly eye opening mortgage misconception I found on Reddit. A true lesson in why financial literacy and…
Somebody wrote, "At what point is tightening the belt no longer possible? Over the last three years I have managed to scrupulously," great word, "save a deposit, 65,000, and purchase my first home, a tiny apartment, for 650,000.
The amount hitting my account weekly is $1,450," so after tax, "and my payments were originally 770 a week.
With these new interest rate hikes," so this was posted when we had this first round of re-hiking.
"With these interest rate hikes, I'm now up to $960 a week, which is 66% of my income.
If there was three more interest rate hikes this year," which is what everyone's predicting, "I'm guessing that would take me to somewhere in the region of $1,230, or 84% of my income.
I feel like spending 66% of my income is already a dangerous financial position, and that 84% would be near impossible.
Is this a situation where I just have to weather the storm, or is the reality that I've already been priced out of the market and I shouldn't have tried to get into it?" So I read this surface level, skimmed it, and was like, God, like, how have we got here? Alarm bells were going off, 'cause I was thinking, "How has this person ever been written a loan-
... where 60, with one more interest rate hike, 66%?" So as did many other people commenting on this thread, I don't know if anybody listening has already picked up the glaring error.
[laughs] Um, effectively this person misunderstood what an interest rate rise looks like.
Whether they pay to the bank weekly or they set aside the money weekly, I don't know, but they know their weekly repayment amount is 770.
Somebody wrote, "At what point is tightening the belt no longer possible? Over the last three years I have managed to scrupulously," great word, "save a deposit, 65,000, and purchase my first home, a tiny apartment, for 650,000.
The amount hitting my account weekly is $1,450," so after tax, "and my payments were originally 770 a week.
With these new interest rate hikes," so this was posted when we had this first round of re-hiking.
"With these interest rate hikes, I'm now up to $960 a week, which is 66% of my income.
If there was three more interest rate hikes this year," which is what everyone's predicting, "I'm guessing that would take me to somewhere in the region of $1,230, or 84% of my income.
I feel like spending 66% of my income is already a dangerous financial position, and that 84% would be near impossible.
Is this a situation where I just have to weather the storm, or is the reality that I've already been priced out of the market and I shouldn't have tried to get into it?" So I read this surface level, skimmed it, and was like, God, like, how have we got here? Alarm bells were going off, 'cause I was thinking, "How has this person ever been written a loan-
... where 60, with one more interest rate hike, 66%?" So as did many other people commenting on this thread, I don't know if anybody listening has already picked up the glaring error.
[laughs] Um, effectively this person misunderstood what an interest rate rise looks like.
Whether they pay to the bank weekly or they set aside the money weekly, I don't know, but they know their weekly repayment amount is 770.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.