You asked for an alternative and I gave you one. You just aren't happy at the idea that massive lenders can afford to make less.
And of course I'm motivated that it benefits me, and millions of ordinary people, what sort of psychopath wouldn't be?
Mortgages are not a scam, I'll give you that. But I'm pretty sure that anyone with a functional moral compass would recognise that usury is immoral.
Hardly. The market still exists, and lenders can still make a profit, just maybe not as much. It's not rocket science.
Then someone else will take that lender's place. Mortgage lending will, at whatever percentage, produce a stable rate of return. If anything, preventing exorbitant interest rates mitigates much of the risk involved in lending.
That's not free. That's just a less predatory rate of return.
I would further suggest that there is a hard cap on the interest which can be charged on any borrowing.
A mortgage where, for instance, 90% of each payment goes to repaying the capital of the mortgage, and 10% to the interest. There's no way it's fair that you should need to pay 2x the value of your house over 25 years.
That's a ridiculously photogenic dog
Any chance the state legislature could amend the rules before a sentence needed to be served?
My bad, I had no idea. I assumed it was a similar system to that in my country.
He's on bsky, if that helps @middleageriot.bsky.social
Not a doctor. She's a fucking osteopath, ie a masseuse with delusions of grandeur
I totally agree with you. What I want is pie in the sky. Without regulation, nothing will change.