The recent currency increase affected the rent, my roommate doesn't understand

If they say "I don't understand," perhaps it's not about the raise but rather a reaction to the way you're explaining it. How are you communicating the issue? Is it more like "Dude, the rent went up, there's nothing we can do," or is it coming from a more complex angle like "The currency is at this level, the market is like this, so we have no choice"? Have you ever tried talking directly about the outcome?

Is it something like saying "I don't understand" and completely disengaging, or are they truly trying to solve the issue but just can't grasp it? Because one is a lack of information, the other is an evasion of responsibility. If you've received a clear "Yes or No" so far, please let me know, because dealing with this dilemma is a waste of time.

Maybe it's not "I don't understand," but rather "I don't care"? When it comes to talking about foreign exchange, the market, etc., it can sound overly technical. It becomes clearer when you ask a more straightforward question like "Are you going to pay, or are we looking for a new house?".

Maybe it's not that they "don't understand," but rather that they think "nothing has changed for me"? In other words, the exchange rate has increased, the rent has gone up; but if there’s no difference in their income or budget, they may not see this as an issue. Have you ever asked, "What’s your plan with the current situation?" Maybe they have another solution in mind.

Perhaps before going into this much detail, it's important to understand whether he is truly feeling the burden of this increase. Maybe your expenses aren't equal, or the rise in rent affects him less than he anticipated. Starting from a simple question like "Do you think this increase is fair?" could provide a clue.

"I don't understand," they say, but don't they react at all to something that is a direct result of the rent increase? For instance, didn't they care when they saw the difference in their spending share last month? If they are not noticing it, either they are not fully sharing their financial situation or it seems to them that it is not an issue.

Maybe it's not as technical or results-oriented as it seems, but rather approached from a more personal perspective. How you presented this situation to them may have had an effect as well. For instance, did you try to engage them directly with a question like, "How do we share this increase with you?" Because if it turns into a completely "right/wrong" debate, it could get stuck.

Maybe they really don't want to start a discussion by saying "I don't understand"? I mean, it could be a passive response to prevent the topic from escalating. In such cases, instead of focusing on who is right or wrong, it's better to ask something straightforward like, "Will you be able to solve this as it is?" It shouldn't be something that would push them away, but it should be enough to keep them engaged.

It might also be a possibility that they say, "I don't understand," and want to shift the solution onto you. The rent issue is generally a shared space but filtered through each individual’s perspective. You can also ask, "Can this budget be calculated?" Maybe they think in numbers, not currencies, etc.

Or what if they just say "I don't understand" and keep you waiting? Because even if they don't fully grasp the chart showing rent increases due to foreign exchange, they can still feel the money coming out of their pocket. Have you ever bluntly asked, "Do you still see this house as sustainable with this expense?" Maybe the issue isn't in the big picture, but in the daily adjustments.

If they say "I don’t understand" and brush off the financial burden without affecting their pocket, it means that habits have already formed in certain matters. If you look closely at the expenses, are you making more sacrifices? Or do they have a solution they already know but haven’t mentioned? If the rent increase is not "our problem," you need to clarify who is responsible for what.

So is "I don't understand" actually "I don't want to understand"? Because in the connection of currency-rent-expenses, you don't really have to understand much; what's clear is the money leaving your pocket. Maybe they were already skimming off expenses a bit, and this increase just became an excuse. Have you ever gone through the previous posts? Maybe there was always a gap there.

I found the "I don't understand" story to be too superficial. If they really thought about it, at the very least they would have said something like "Why is this happening?" or "How can we solve this?" Otherwise, could they just be stuck in neutral mode to keep you occupied?

Maybe they are just avoiding the issue by saying "I don't understand," wanting to steer clear of any other tension or problem. Rent increase is one thing, but is there similar avoidance when it comes to other divisions of labor in the home? If habits or burden-sharing are irregular outside of the budget, this may just be a symptom.

They might be avoiding certain things with the excuse of "I don’t understand", but maybe they really cannot grasp how the exchange rate-rent relationship reflects in their daily life. Have you tried looking at shopping receipts, bills, etc. together? I mean, it provides an opportunity to see where the increase is felt and talk from a concrete point. Instead of assuming they "don't want to understand" from the start, it might be useful to help clarify the confusion in their mind.

Maybe they’re just checking your pulse by saying "I don’t understand"? I mean, if they openly talk about the increase, then they’re either expected to say "okay" and take on the burden or they end up looking like a bad person. They might be managing the situation with this silence. Has there been any previous attempts at such "subtle management"?

But could it be that you’re taking this "I don’t understand" line too personally? Maybe the issue isn't with you, but with the rent. Could it be that you’ve gotten stuck in a feeling like "They don’t take me seriously"?

Someone who says "I don't understand" usually sends the message "there's no need to come up with a solution, you handle it." But even if this matter is only related to currency, it takes quite a bit of awareness to act as if it's not about currency. I'm curious, do they leave things alone by saying "I don't know, I don't understand" in other topics as well? Or is this a new strategy?

"I don't understand" could indeed mean "I really don't understand," but you can't build anything on that alone. The main emphasis is this: Was there any additional solution proposal or effort later? If not, it means there is a comfort in continuing to "not understand." That is where we question.

It seems like too much focus has been placed on the "I don't understand" part, but I think this is more important: Despite the rent increase, has there been any cutback in daily expenses or an effort to adapt? In other words, is there an actionable counterpart to this sentence, or not? That's the real problem.

If they say "I don't understand" and are not cutting back on expenses or making any suggestions, there is already an attitude of excluding you from the process. Does this rent increase not affect them, or do they act as if it doesn't bother them even if it does? A raise that doesn't touch someone else affects you; this imbalance seems strange to me.

If they say "I don't understand," do a simple test, for example: "How much do you think the rent should be?" If they can't even express that, it means they are avoiding responsibility rather than being in control of the topic. Because it doesn't matter if it's an increase in currency or something else; when pressured, a person at least makes a guess of a "fair limit." If they can't do that, it smells like an excuse.

Saying "I don’t understand" is already a sufficiently politicized statement. The claim of "not understanding" such an obvious issue like currency fluctuations indicates either a retreat from class tension or a direct sign of escalation in passivity. The question is: Where does this person find the luxury of this "not understanding"? Is the knife at the bone, or are they still in their comfort zone? This is the perspective to consider.

So, after you said "I don’t understand," did they realize you were carrying the burden alone? I mean, when you took action, could they have thought, "Hmm, so the problem has been solved, let’s continue"? Because if the other party is used to being inactive, your finding a solution doesn’t disturb their comfort.

After saying "I don't understand," has he added anything on his part after seeing your solution suggestion or action, for example, "Okay, let me handle this part too"? Or is it just you solving it while he watches? Because passiveness deepens if you're stepping in. Where does this balance get disrupted, can you dig into that a bit?

I think even asking someone who says "I don’t understand" and pulls back "how much do you think it should be?" is a luxury. This is a situation that touches your pocket and your burden; if they don’t make a sound and look for a solution, then they have no intention of taking on this responsibility anyway. The real question is this: Despite this "I don’t understand" issue, why are you still trying to act in concert with them?

Okay, but while it's one thing to say "I don’t understand" and step aside, why are you taking on all this burden alone? If the increase in rent is a common problem, why continue down the same path with someone who isn't taking any steps to find a solution? Maybe that person is just saying "I don’t understand" and riding on your back without looking for a solution, are you aware of that?

Saying "I don't understand" and using evasive tactics is one thing, but maybe financial stress is affecting him in a different way? I mean, he might not be cutting back on spending, but sometimes this is a kind of stubbornness or an effort to "handle stress with minimal impact." Have you ever observed whether he's compromising on something outside of money, like his social life or habits? Because there could be an effort to "maintain balance" outside of budgeting as well.

When someone says "I don't understand," I think we should consider this: Could it be that this person hasn't developed a practice to manage such issues? Not everyone has the same level of detail-orientedness or reactive problem-solving approach. Perhaps they've become accustomed to problems that get "solved arbitrarily" rather than discussing the division of labor. If you've always been the one providing solutions in similar past situations, this could have become a habit. Have you ever looked back at how things were handled in the past?

Or is this "I don't understand" just a game? A person might be fully aware of everything but is making things difficult. Maybe it's a tactic of "I don't understand, you handle it." Just pause for a moment and see if they really don't understand or if it's just convenient for them.

On the issue of "I don't understand": Perhaps this person has not fully felt how much the increase in foreign exchange rates, rent, etc. affects their life yet. In other words, could your call to share the burden be conflicting with their perception of "we're managing for now, don’t exaggerate"? Are they really in a situation that only reacts when it touches their wallet or directly disrupts their standard of living? Just a thought.

Maybe the issue is less about not understanding and more about what they prioritize at that moment? In other words, the increase in currency exchange rates and rent might still be an abstract concept for them. For example, where do they actually spend their money more comfortably, or which expenses do they overlook? Perhaps what really needs to be discussed here is whether there is a way to bring you onto the same "priority list."

Maybe the "I don't understand" part is just a defense mechanism, meaning the issue isn't really a lack of interest or knowledge, but rather a complete lack of effort. The problem is, in such a situation, you can't get past the question "why don't you understand?" If you continue without thinking about it, at some point, you might find yourself paying the entire rent, unknowingly. I think you need to sit down and dig into that "not understanding" part; you won't be able to make progress without directly asking somewhere, "how can we solve this?" or "so what are you contributing?".

You will try to engage someone who says "I don't understand" and pulls away, but consider this: Maybe the person really doesn't know how to manage a budget or do calculations? I mean, this could feel like a math problem to them. Have you ever tried sitting down once and clearly presenting the situation with numbers? Perhaps it’s not about the workload, but the mental load feels too heavy for them.

This just came to my mind: As this person keeps saying "I don’t understand," you take on the task, could it be that this situation has become a way for them to "manage the situation"? In other words, accepting the lack of a solution, knowing that in the end, you will take care of it? Because there is a crisis, but in their world, this crisis might seem resolved because you are involved. Have you ever tried asking them, "What if it doesn’t get resolved?"

Could it be that this person doesn't fully understand the extent of their spending? I mean, by the end of the month, they might not even realize where their money is going or how much is going where. Instead of sitting down with you to account for every penny, they might be falling into a void, because the money in their hands flows like a river, but they don't see where it came from or where it's going. Have you ever suggested discussing the statements? Because without understanding their spending habits from the start, they may not know how to react when they say, "the rent has increased."

But there's also this: the person saying "I don't understand" might have a different expectation regarding the duration of this situation. If they see the currency increase, rent rise, etc. as just a temporary fluctuation, and you perceive this as a permanent, serious burden, there could be a disconnect arising from that. Have you ever approached it from a perspective like "How long do you think this will last?" Maybe their perception of the agenda is different.

The basic reflex of someone who says "I don't understand" and withdraws is often "avoidance." However, I think you should also question this: In what situations does this person generally take responsibility, or do they take it at all? Are they someone who usually shirks their responsibilities in work distribution, or is it just in this specific case? Because if it's chronic, excuses like foreign currency or financing will follow.

Maybe it's more about "I don't care" than "I don't understand." Sometimes people only take action after they decide that an issue has to disrupt their comfort zone, even if they are aware of the problems. So it might be more a matter of "don't touch me" rather than "not understanding."

Maybe the issue isn't "I don't understand," but "don't let it come from me." In other words, as long as that rent increase is resolved not from his pocket but from yours, it will remain a "problem of someone else" rather than an action issue for him. Clearly, without asking "are we carrying the same burden?" this ambiguity won't be resolved.

Here, the issue of "I don't understand" is constantly treated as an individual weakness, but why is it always up to the "understanding" person? Rents have skyrocketed, foreign currency has gone out of control, and just living in a house has turned into a situation where even two salaries are not enough. The problem is not your inability to explain rent sharing, but that the system needs to be adjusted so that rents can be shared. Why is no one discussing, "Why is this burden on the backs of two people living in one apartment?"

I have a question: how much does the rent increase mean as a burden in relation to this friend's income? Maybe what you referred to as "it needs to be shared" is already perceived as fairly distributed in his eyes? Everyone has a different perception of their budget; have you ever asked him, "What does this mean as a burden for you?"

Rather than looking at it in terms of income, it could be asked: What other habits has this increase affected? For example, is there a change in monthly entertainment spending, or ordering takeout? Because if these remain the same, it might not be a matter of burden, but rather a matter of priorities.

I don't think we need to read too innocently into this "I don't understand" issue. Let's say a person doesn't know their budget; that's already not a healthy thing. You're living in the same house every month, and rent is a fixed expense; how can one say "I don't understand"? A person who can't establish their own system generally becomes a burden to the other in a mutual living situation. If they don't make an effort to get themselves organized, it's time to be a bit clearer.

One aspect of "I don't understand" here could be the general disconnect people have with the economy. For instance, the currency has increased, rents have risen, but how this chain operates, why it is happening, and whether it is really that bad—someone who doesn't follow these issues may resort to saying "I don't understand." Do you think living with such fundamental ignorance is common, or is it just an excuse?

It felt to me like I mixed whites and colors while doing laundry. So if they say, "I don't understand," they're either colorblind or they just don't care. Being unaware of such basic things in an economy like this, or pretending to be, will always result in you constantly being the one buying detergent at home. You need to speak clearly: are we going to share this burden, or will one hang while the other watches?

Perhaps his saying "I don't understand" is due to wanting to avoid prolonging the discussion about the topic. In other words, it might be easier for him to act as if he "doesn't care" instead of facing the problem. When you look at it, is there any effort to seek a solution at all? Or are you always the one taking responsibility?

Maybe "I don’t understand" is actually a more indirect way of saying "I’m fine like this"? I mean, perhaps there’s no search for equality in the rent in their mind; if the situation is currently in their favor, why would they want to change it? Here, a clear negotiation is needed; otherwise, you might get stuck with all these insinuations.

The issue of "I don’t understand" seems to smell a bit like unconscious comfort. I mean, okay, the exchange rates and all, the system is distorted, but if you don’t grasp this person's daily habits and spending patterns, we can’t just throw the blame on the system and ease ourselves. It's not proportional to their income; you need to see the overall flexibility in life. Could this state of "I’m fine like this" carry an underlying assumption of "you will manage it"?

This "I don't understand" seems a bit like avoiding responsibility. I mean, sure, the economy is complex, not everyone is an expert, but it's strange to live in the same house every month and not have an idea about basic expenses. Did you put this directly on the table? Did you clearly state the amount of the increase and how it created an imbalance in shared living?

This "I don't understand" part is going in a certain direction in my mind: Does it indicate a situation like "the weight of life is too much for me"? Is it more like a resistance to carrying that responsibility rather than a lack of knowledge about the economy? I sense an energy that exhibits passive resistance instead of directly sharing the work. I think you should reflect on what responsibilities you both have taken on and how.

This might be a system that is already set up to shift the responsibility for the work onto others by saying "I don’t understand." Because, look, the economy isn't just fundamental knowledge anymore, it's a basic everyday experience. Without even realizing it, you find yourself in a leadership position, and that places you there. So, is this relational dynamic suitable for you in the long run?

I think this "I don't understand" part is completely related to that person's intentions. Are they truly not understanding and open to learning, or do they prefer to feign ignorance to avoid the task? Even if you want to explain something to someone, if there's no sincerity, the other person will shut themselves off from listening anyway. In such a situation, no matter what you say, it would be a futile effort. Is there an intention to understand? Evaluate it from there.

So how was the emotional state when you said the phrase "I don't understand"? Was it real surprise, or was there an unaffected ease? Because the same phrase, depending on the tone, conveys either a genuine lack of knowledge or a message of "your problem doesn't concern me." Acting without knowing which one it is can be risky.

I skipped the part about "I don't understand," and I will ask something more fundamental: Why did the burden of this rent increase automatically fall on you? I mean, it's not about him understanding; did you agree on such a distribution from the beginning? Or was it like, "you'll quietly figure it out"?

It's good that we got stuck on the "I don't understand" part, but what about the concept of deliberately not understanding? The person might be fully aware, but they have chosen this path because it suits them. Has this been asked directly: "We need to share the new rent at this ratio; otherwise, the living expenses are becoming a burden for me"?

"I don’t understand," we said, but what's important is how he reacted to the solutions you proposed afterwards. For example, did you come up with a concrete budget calculation and present it to him? Does he respond the same way to that math? Because sometimes the state of not understanding is a way to avoid confronting the solution, like an escape ramp for excuses.

I think this "I don't understand" issue should be read not only with its literal meaning but also in the context of the behavior it receives. For example, after this rent increase, is he/she being mindful of his/her expenses, or making any extra sacrifices? Because even if someone doesn't understand the financial aspect, they could react this way; otherwise, it's simply a reflex of taking no responsibility at all. I’d suggest looking at it from that angle.

"I don’t understand," he says, fine; you’re thinking this much, doing detailed analyses. But is there anything concrete right now? If he can’t pay, what will you do? Will you move, is there another solution? Just clarify what will happen in the short term.

Could this "I don’t understand" sentence also create a power balance on one hand? In other words, by pushing you into a position that bears the economic burden, it seems to relinquish control. How feasible is it to manage a household with someone who is so passive, even preferring to stay outside in a matter that is their own responsibility?

Is this "I don't understand" attitude also present in other matters? For example, does it come forward in joint ventures or other payment items? Or is it only a situation related to rent? If it's generalized, that means the problem is even bigger.

Okay, let's assume this "I don't understand" situation is said with the worst intentions. What will you do in this case? I think you need to be prepared for the next step. For example, is there an option where you can say, "If he/she doesn't accept, then I'll move on to another plan"? Or will you stay stuck in an endless "I don't understand—I'm explaining" loop?

They may not have understood, fine, but is there an attitude after this "I don't understand" that suggests everything should just stay as it is? Because what they don't understand could also be a situation they don't care about at all. For example, have they not heard a clearer ultimatum like "either you pay, or we move out"?

This could also be: "I don't understand" is actually an answer they can't deny, meaning they use it to avoid making a mistake. Because when they say "I didn't understand," they haven't done anything wrong, and the ball is in your court. Have you thought about this?

When you get so hung up on the word "I don't understand," the real issue might be slipping away. Perhaps it's a passive defense mechanism, instead of directly saying "I’m not paying."

Have you ever tried having a more open conversation and asking, "What does 'I don't understand' mean? Do you have a solution suggestion?" Because right now, it seems like there's a breakdown in the problem definition.

"I don't understand," they say, but do they, for example, make a suggestion like, "Okay, should we look for a more suitable house?" Because if this state of "not understanding" is not combined with a search for a solution, it could have turned into an excuse not to share the burden directly. It may seem passive, but it could also be passive-aggressive. Be careful.

I think too much focus has been placed on the "I don’t understand" part. The real question is: Can they make the payment or not? Because in the end, numbers speak. Saying "I don’t understand" and stepping aside could also be a clear signal regarding their budget. It’s no longer just a discussion based on probabilities; you need to question their actual financial situation and get a clear answer.

"Doesn't it seem to you that when someone says 'I don't understand,' the discussion comes to an end? I mean, shouldn't they try to solve something if they don't understand it? If they're not seeking a solution on their own, they might not really not understand; they might just not want to understand.

"I don't understand," they say, but when exactly do they say that? Is it as soon as the topic is introduced, or when the explanation gets more detailed? Because some people might say "I don't understand" as soon as things get complicated, just to cut things short. Do you notice they hit a clear obstacle, or is it simply a case of avoiding the issue altogether?

So, is this person completely avoiding topics like bills and rental contracts by saying "I don’t understand," or do they only act this way when you bring it up? Because if they generally avoid financial matters but are quite interested in other topics, I think it could be a way of "escaping responsibility." And how do you approach these topics? Sometimes the way you present it can also make a difference.

If they say "I don't understand" and close the topic, and if they don't even engage in a discussion with you, it really comes down to intention. Are they genuinely not understanding, or are they saying this because they don't want to take responsibility? Because there seems to be a situation where they're not even trying to learn about something they don't understand. For instance, have they ever said, "let's look into the rent issue together" or "how can we solve this?"

Maybe they say "I don't understand" because they find these discussions boring or exhausting? So could the issue be a general avoidance of communication rather than a financial situation? Have you tried approaching the topic from a different angle?

So what do you do when you get that "I don't understand" response? Because maybe if you put forth a search for a solution, rather than leaving it entirely up to them, you might get a different reaction. In conversations where people just say "I don't understand" and leave it hanging, everyone might feel stuck.

I think we are evaluating the "I don't understand" part too individually. There is generally a problem of "understanding" regarding the increase in currency/rent in the country. People can't even comprehend the reasons for the increases; they just accept them and move on. Maybe your roommate turned this confusion into something personal? Instead of dealing with their own budget, they seem to have pushed the issue into an abstract chaos.

Could there be serious financial stress hiding behind "I don’t understand"? I mean, they might already be struggling economically due to rising rent and may not want to express this situation. Even if they can afford it, perhaps they are opting to brush it off because they are tired of constantly discussing this issue. Where is this mutual understanding coming from?

Maybe by saying "I don't understand," they might be leaving the door open for you to elaborate further, but you might not be giving them that chance? I mean, sometimes when people say they don't understand something, they might actually be expecting it to be explained in simpler terms or in a different way. Have you ever asked a clearer, more direct question like, "Which part exactly didn't you understand?"

Maybe they're trying to draw you into a discussion by saying "I don’t understand" so that they don’t have to take responsibility? So instead of offering a solution, they might just be waiting for your guidance. Have you ever directly asked them, "Okay, what do you think in this situation, how should we proceed?" Because if you're just explaining, that might only stay with the listener.

Have you ever thought that if someone says, "I don’t understand," they might really not understand? I mean, not everyone has the same aptitude for financial topics. Perhaps while discussing so much about "intent," you're overlooking the possibility that the person may have a fundamental lack of knowledge. You can’t resolve the confusion unless you directly ask, "Which part don’t you understand?"

"I don't understand" and just giving up seemed a bit lazy to me, honestly. Because everyone can see the connection between currency and rent to some degree. The real issue is who will take more initiative in this disagreement. Clearly, you are taking it, and he is backing down. How far can this balance go?

If they say "I don't understand," maybe they find the discussion itself unnecessary. Is the issue really the current energy rather than the exchange rate or rent? Because did you get a lot of backlash when you pressed hard? That could lead to a different kind of stress.

You mentioned something like "I don't understand" and then pulled away, but what is happening at that moment? For example, are they fiddling with their phone, heading to their room, or pretending to listen but actually focusing on something else? Could the issue be not misunderstanding but rather a lack of interest?

Maybe they're reacting in a kind of passive-aggressive way by saying "I don't understand?" I mean, the topic is bothering them, but since they can't object directly, they might have chosen this escape route. Especially if they completely withdraw instead of reacting while you’re speaking, it feels more like a quiet protest than indifference. Have you tried speaking calmly, as if you're not angry? Maybe then it will become clearer.

I think there might be a difference in lifestyle behind this "I don't understand" attitude. For you, discussing currency and rents is essential; for him, maybe such things aren't even part of daily conversation. Have you ever asked him how he generally approaches topics like this? Maybe he has a habit of not thinking about such things in his life.

You got hung up on them saying "I don't understand" and hanging up, but maybe they really don't want to understand? I mean, would knowing the impact of the currency on rent really help them? Perhaps they don't feel the need to care about these details as much as you do. When one doesn't want to understand/engage, saying "I don't understand" can be an easy way out.

If they say "I don't understand," shouldn't they at least make an effort to understand? I mean, sure, everyone may have different interests, but it’s not fair to leave everything to you when it comes to a common issue. Have you ever tried to hear their solution before explaining it yourself? Maybe they could offer a simple perspective on the solution. But if they’re not offering anything, they’re definitely not sharing the load.

You've become so fixated on the "I don't understand" part that you're missing whether they are taking responsibility for the issue. If you live in a shared home, it doesn't make sense to ponder such things alone. Even if they don't understand, a contribution like "so what are we doing" is expected. Is there any action like this? Or are they just leaning on you?

But at the same time, tying it all back to this routine of "I don't understand" seems a bit like taking the easy way out. Okay, you don't understand, but is it the same with other economic issues? If they don't understand when something material about their own life is discussed, that's one thing, but if it's only the shared issues, then it seems like there's a different kind of laziness at play. Did you notice that?

If they just say "I don't understand" and move on, they might be consciously avoiding being part of the resolution process. In other words, when you calculate and discuss everything, could they also feel that they have no room for taking responsibility? Have you tried asking for their solution? Maybe they can break free from the excuse of "I don't understand."

He says "I don’t understand" and hangs up, but has he made any effort to solve the problem? If so, what has he done? Or is he just expecting you to plan everything and lay it out for him? If there’s a sense of "you’ll handle it anyway" in the background, how does he express this? Have you thought about it?

Maybe when they say "I don't understand," they really weren't listening to you at that moment? You know how sometimes people's minds wander, and what you've said hasn't even registered? Do they still react the same way when you sit down and explain in detail? Or has "I don't understand" become an automatic response? It needs to be clarified.

Maybe they aren't shutting the topic down by saying "I don't understand" but are trying to open up space without upsetting you or making themselves feel bad? In other words, could it be a passive surrender like "you understand this better than I do, you can explain and solve it"? If you've noticed this kind of approach, have you thought about how you will ask them to take responsibility in order to fully resolve the issue?

When the topic of "I don't understand" came up, what kind of tone did you use when you brought up this currency-rental issue? Was it a shared responsibility vibe like "Let's sit down and take a look at this situation," or did you behave as if you were solving it on your own, saying something like "Let me calculate this too"? Sometimes people don't realize that the other person is asking for a division of labor because it's not presented that way.

Does he say anything other than "I don't understand"? For example, does he make even a small attempt like "explain it to me" or "what do you think"? Because if he doesn't say anything, it seems like he doesn't want to understand the situation.

If they say "I don't understand" like this, but on the other hand, they're not tracking how much they're spending on their phone bill, kitchen expenses, etc., the situation is already clear. But if they are regularly paying their share but acting this way only regarding the rent, then they may really be acting as if they are confident you can handle it. I'd say to look for the traces left in other expenses and proceed from there.

You keep saying, "the currency increased, the rent increased," but maybe your roommate is thinking: "The rent is already fixed, there's a contract, what direct effect does the currency have on us?" Has there really been a rent increase, or is this just a planning concern? Perhaps they can't make that connection.

"I don't understand," he says, but I thought, if you're talking about the rent increase, have you properly compared your bills and grocery expenses? For example, if rent stays the same while everything else goes up, it might seem like there's no issue. He might also be confused about why the topic of rent is being exaggerated.

Actually, saying "I don't understand" looks like a corner defense. It's a way of avoiding responsibility by pretending not to know the issue. If he really doesn't understand, then when you ask, does he make any effort to resolve this state of "not understanding"? Is the issue just dumped on your shoulders, or does he consider his attitude?

If someone says "I don’t understand" and steps aside, I think the truth is this: there has to be a continuation to the "I don’t understand" part. For example, they might not understand and say "can you explain?" or they might not understand and say "tell me what I need to do." Is there really no continuation to this sentence? Are you talking to a wall or what?

Is there a facial expression that reacts when you say, "I don't understand," or body language, anything like that? I mean, is it really ambiguous or does this sentence totally conclude the communication? Because sometimes there could be an implicit message like "I don't want to get involved in this."

Maybe they think it would make more sense to talk about living expenses other than rent, not just foreign currency? Not everyone may evaluate the numbers from the same perspective; what they say "I don't understand" might actually be your point of view. How did you directly present the currency-rent connection to them? Could you expand a bit on this part?