Sure, but you likely don’t have the cash to put down on a house you like. This is a pretty normal scenario if we look at human history. As soon as we invented cities, land in and around cities was expensive. It could take a lifetime to save up enough to buy a house. Hence a mortgage - the bank (which is mostly just the savings of other people around you) gives you the money right now to buy a house. Then you get to live in the house while you “save up” for it.
If in the current day, the bank will have digital backups of everything. Also cameras everywhere. You go to jail, and still have a mortgage.
If you manage to destroy all the banks records, then this creates a crisis around cybersecurity in the financial industry. This lack of trust collapses the housing market. 2008 again.
If in prohibition era western town, fdic insurance isnt a thing. You’ve just burned up the wealth of everyone in the town that kept money in thd bank.
If you just burn the mortgages, then the bank fails because their whole job is using peoples savings to make loans and then pay them back interest. With no ability to make money to pay the tellers or repair the roof, the bank goes under, and people have to hide their savings in their mattresses. Also, no one can get a mortgage anymore
What’s your point? We are always making choices between alternatives that are more or less appealing. I am drinking mediocre gas station coffee right now. The alternative is no coffee. Drinking the coffee is a good deal for me, because for me right now, mediocre coffee is better than no coffee.
If this worked, why didn’t more banks just burn down?
Because for most people, most of the time, mortgages are a good deal
This was true once, but not for a long time now. And that’s generally true across the board, at least in US, Canada, and most of Europe.
Idk, I got mine at 2.85%. Seems like a pretty good deal to me. Less than the rate of inflation, so the bank is essentially paying me to own a house
doubt
Proof: people keep getting mortgages
An even better deal is having a house and no mortgage
Sure, but you likely don’t have the cash to put down on a house you like. This is a pretty normal scenario if we look at human history. As soon as we invented cities, land in and around cities was expensive. It could take a lifetime to save up enough to buy a house. Hence a mortgage - the bank (which is mostly just the savings of other people around you) gives you the money right now to buy a house. Then you get to live in the house while you “save up” for it.
I think you misunderstand.
We need the bank to get the mortgage.
Then we burn down the bank and don’t have to pay the mortgage
Profit.
If in the current day, the bank will have digital backups of everything. Also cameras everywhere. You go to jail, and still have a mortgage.
If you manage to destroy all the banks records, then this creates a crisis around cybersecurity in the financial industry. This lack of trust collapses the housing market. 2008 again.
If in prohibition era western town, fdic insurance isnt a thing. You’ve just burned up the wealth of everyone in the town that kept money in thd bank.
If you just burn the mortgages, then the bank fails because their whole job is using peoples savings to make loans and then pay them back interest. With no ability to make money to pay the tellers or repair the roof, the bank goes under, and people have to hide their savings in their mattresses. Also, no one can get a mortgage anymore
Get out of here with your well reasoned logic
Counterpoint: The alternative is rent trap or homelessness
Jerking off a homeless dude for free is a good deal when he has a gun in your neck.
What’s your point? We are always making choices between alternatives that are more or less appealing. I am drinking mediocre gas station coffee right now. The alternative is no coffee. Drinking the coffee is a good deal for me, because for me right now, mediocre coffee is better than no coffee.
Hahahahaha
What a literally insane take