I'm not proposing malpractice. I'm defending strategy.
Discussion
It isn’t malpractice, people get fired or simply can’t afford the adjusted rates.
All I’m trying to say is that you can’t own real estate because it isn’t yours even after you pay it. You are renting from the city at a fee until you pass it forward to somebody else or they decide to simply take from you.
Shitcoin.
I understand you point and i agree. But your point has nothing to do with my piece. Nobody was ever forced to buy a house they couldn't afford the rate adjustments for. Those who did took unnecessary risk.
The justification for adding interest to a loan is to offset the potential risk of a borrower not being able to repay.
The risk of a loan should fall on the lender, not the borrower. If a lender gives a loan to someone who cannot service that loan, that’s their own failure.
The risk profile has been turned on it’s head. Society blames the borrower for default. It considers that people who cannot repay debts to be sub-moral. And we allow lenders an alternative to accepting the risk inherent in the lending process. Public bailouts? Student loans that are impossible to shed?
Lenders have learned to take the interest from those who can pay, and to subsidize the interest for those who cannot using public funds and public laws