Okay then my apologies but maybe I am missing your answer. My question: what is your proposal for people who don't have cash on hand equal to the full value of the listed price?
We already have that system in place. The only thing I would change is either remove the banks ability to profit on home loans (since they’re not taking risk, the government is) or remove government protections of bank loans (healthier option overall, but good luck, banks won’t give up their golden egg). What we have now is socialist corporatism which is worse than either alternative.
Man, I'm not sure if you and me just communicate in very different ways. "We already have that system in place?" ... Are you referring to your ideal, proposed system?
Or Is your proposal that if banks loans are gov backed, that they merely take the principal divided by 360 (the number of months in thirty years) and voila that's your mortgage payment each month? EX: a $360,000 home, 30 year loan, 360 payments of $1,000 ?
Is that your proposal. No interest for the borrower, and no profit for the lender?
Again. Lenders take zero risk making home loans. That’s been repeatedly covered. It’s so government regulated that it would be cheaper to cut out the middle man either way, either on the government side or the bank side.
Buddy, with all respect, you are not an effective communicator.
Yeah you have said probably a dozen times that the lenders take no risk because it's government backed. I get that.
What I don't get what I have asked you numerous times is what is YOUR proposal.
How about this start your proposal with the words "My proposal is" and then go from there.
An example of a non-answer would be "my proposal is lenders currently take no risk" you see what I mean?
So is your proposal that the government gives loans directly to borrowers?
Is your proposal that banks continue to be the lenders but that they don't charge interest?
Are you in favor of some alternative profit mechanism to interest? Like a flat fee?
How would your proposal handle late payments? How would your proposal handle defaulting? Repossession?
I'm genuinely interested in hearing ANY alternative idea to the current system but so far you haven't provided one. You've only stated what you dislike about the current system.
Okay then my apologies but maybe I am missing your answer. My question: what is your proposal for people who don't have cash on hand equal to the full value of the listed price?
What exactly is your answer?
We already have that system in place. The only thing I would change is either remove the banks ability to profit on home loans (since they’re not taking risk, the government is) or remove government protections of bank loans (healthier option overall, but good luck, banks won’t give up their golden egg). What we have now is socialist corporatism which is worse than either alternative.
Man, I'm not sure if you and me just communicate in very different ways. "We already have that system in place?" ... Are you referring to your ideal, proposed system?
Or Is your proposal that if banks loans are gov backed, that they merely take the principal divided by 360 (the number of months in thirty years) and voila that's your mortgage payment each month? EX: a $360,000 home, 30 year loan, 360 payments of $1,000 ?
Is that your proposal. No interest for the borrower, and no profit for the lender?
Again. Lenders take zero risk making home loans. That’s been repeatedly covered. It’s so government regulated that it would be cheaper to cut out the middle man either way, either on the government side or the bank side.
Buddy, with all respect, you are not an effective communicator.
Yeah you have said probably a dozen times that the lenders take no risk because it's government backed. I get that.
What I don't get what I have asked you numerous times is what is YOUR proposal.
How about this start your proposal with the words "My proposal is" and then go from there.
An example of a non-answer would be "my proposal is lenders currently take no risk" you see what I mean?
So is your proposal that the government gives loans directly to borrowers? Is your proposal that banks continue to be the lenders but that they don't charge interest? Are you in favor of some alternative profit mechanism to interest? Like a flat fee? How would your proposal handle late payments? How would your proposal handle defaulting? Repossession?
I'm genuinely interested in hearing ANY alternative idea to the current system but so far you haven't provided one. You've only stated what you dislike about the current system.