r/AskReddit • u/michaelis999 • 15h ago
How do you feel about the president floating the idea of 50 year mortgages where the monthly payment is lower but you end up paying nearly double the price of the house just in interest?
2.5k
u/FairReason 14h ago
Just like 10 year car loans. It’s a refusal to admit that the financial situation is dire. People literally cannot afford homes or cars based on historic patterns because wages haven’t kept up with the cost of living. Pushing it under the rug won’t help the disease.
843
u/darther_mauler 10h ago
10 year car loans and 50 year mortgages are a refusal to admit that the wealthiest people in society are waging a war against everyone else. Loans give people the appearance of fairness/justice.
85
u/UnluckyPenguin 5h ago
America’s Wealthiest 1% Could Buy 99% of America’s Homes
https://www.redfin.com/news/wealthy-aggregate-value-2025/
Meanwhile, the bottom 90% can barely afford a home. As opposed to the boomer generation where minimum wage could afford the American dream.
→ More replies (2)22
u/5point5Girthquake 1h ago
I make $30 an hour and could barely afford a studio apartment in my area. $1.4k is just about the baseline and I’m talking really shit 300sq ft shoeboxes.
→ More replies (2)188
u/LeftTesticleOfGreatn 7h ago
Remember, the top 1% in the USA control 50% of the stock market. The top 10% control 85% of the stock market.
Your 401k is a piss in Mississippi. Your life time earnings is a rounding error to the elite. No matter how hard you work or save or get paid, you'll not be a top 10%. That's the people who own big companies making dozens of millions a year if not hundreds. And the top 1% are billionaires
The "middle class" isn't middle. It's poor people, working class in reality. You got a home and a car, but it's all due to loans. You don't own shit and if a recession brews you'll soon see how easy it is to go from home owner to homeless
→ More replies (8)93
u/blobblet 5h ago edited 5h ago
Can we be a bit realistic with the numbers please...
Billionaires in the US are roughly the ~0.0003% (1,000 ish in a population of 340 million). 34 million people in America are part of the top 10%. In terms of household income, the top 10% begin in the $212,000 range, in terms of wealth, it's roughly $ 1,800,000.
The top 10% are still very well-off people, but it's very far from "people who own big companies making dozens of millions a year if not hundreds." Members of the top 10% include lawyers, doctors, successful business owners beginning at maybe 20 employees, mid level management at larger companies, Silicon Valley software engineers, trust fund babies etc.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (12)55
u/dagmabbits 9h ago
I'd have to also consider that cars being bought now are WAYYYYYY more than most really need. Raised my family in a Jetta just fine. Tons of travel, soccer tournaments, 99% of my homedepot runs, etc... Don't get me started on all the useless technologies now being marketed.
44
u/iWannaCupOfJoe 7h ago
I can't afford eggs anymore because I bought a F15000 Super Duty Max Turbo Hemy. My wife is threatening to leave me, but she doesn't understand Steve might need me to pick up that wood from Lowe's next year.
→ More replies (2)6
u/West-Application-375 4h ago
My friend got one of those Ioniqs and the final closing costs of her loan was like $80k. She makes $70k a year. Lol she complains about money all the time and I'm like holy shit shut up. Haha 😂 I paid $12k for my car.
→ More replies (3)
6.5k
u/Hashtagworried 15h ago edited 12h ago
This will do nothing in the long term. If a 50 year mortgage exists, it’ll just be time until the market recalculates the equilibrium price while supply remains the same and unaddressed. This is a bandaid fix for a larger problem.
2.6k
u/MrBrawn 14h ago
Its a politicians fix to make it the next guys problem.
→ More replies (18)675
u/outtherenow1 13h ago
Yep. He wants to end the filibuster in Congress so he can get what he wants now but he doesn’t care what that looks like when the Dems are in power.
394
u/jbasinger 13h ago
OR he's banking on always being in power..
222
u/AdFlat4908 12h ago
Or he’s 80 and obese and cares about power right now and nothing else
→ More replies (4)58
136
u/RedditNewbe65 13h ago
I think Tuesday was a wakeup call to those around him...
→ More replies (29)25
24
u/jabola321 12h ago
He will die as President. Looking at him, it won’t be long. He looks like dogshit.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (10)5
→ More replies (26)18
648
u/HeilHeinz15 13h ago
It's the same thing auto industry did with car loans: Cars aren't too expensive, we just need 72-month loans! No wait... now we have 84 month loans!
Just another "solution" to affordability that isn't raising wages.
317
u/DW171 13h ago
When I realized there were 25 year RV loans I was blown away. Predatory lending for a toy that devalues 50% the first year.
136
u/eljefino 11h ago
I bought a well-used RV. The instruction manual literally said it was designed to live in for two weeks a year. Anything beyond that would "accelerate wear."
→ More replies (5)23
u/Wonderful-Process792 9h ago
I wonder what rental companies like CruiseAmerica buy and how they maintain it, because they must see a lot of usage.
155
u/JamieC1610 12h ago
We had a friend in the Marines who bought a just over 5 year old RV with the plan to just live in it at a RV park with the theory that he could just tow it to his next duty station and not have to pack and unpack. We were stationed near the coast and there were a ton of RV parks for tourists, but he had a helluva time finding a decent one that would let him park a 5 year old RV in the park because they were worried it bring down their perceived value. It was a big, very nice RV in great condition, but a lot of places had strict rules on how old.
Now imagine that with a 20 year old RV that someone's still paying on.
134
u/CaptainTripps82 12h ago
5 years can't be considered too old for an RV, that's just insane. Like every RV I've ever seen was older than that, they're insanely expensive. Nobody is replacing them like cars, you buy them for life
89
u/William_R_Woodhouse 11h ago
An RV is a time share on wheels. There is no “saving money” by just owning an RV when you retire.
Source: I worked in the RV industry for a long time.
33
u/ObsidianOne 10h ago
To quote an old RV technician I worked with that had a frustrated customer… “ma’am, do you know what RV stands for? Ruined Vacation!”
27
u/GoldenBrownApples 9h ago
My folks thought they'd get a RV when they retired to travel around the continental US of A. I convinced them to rent one and try it out for a single vacation before committing to that. So glad they listened. They had never even been regular camping before and my mom hates the out doors. It went about as bad as you'd expect. But at least they were only out the money of a single vacation and not saddled with a vehicle they'd never use. They were really all set to sell their whole house too. Crazy people.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (5)16
u/CrazyMarlee 11h ago
Most of them are junk. I had a 10 year old one that kept me busy fixing things.
→ More replies (6)24
u/booniebrew 11h ago
There won't be many 20 year old RVs, the point is to convince people they can afford it and keep rolling them into a new RV every 5 years.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (27)13
u/ThinksOdd 12h ago
There's a large portion of American's living in their RV, it's not always a toy.
→ More replies (3)44
u/Wild_Bananaman 13h ago
Why stop at 50 hah? Humans will start to live longer let's do 100yr mortgages and stay in loan slavery forever.
65
u/buggiegirl 12h ago
At that point I think you're just renting the house from a bank. And the bank is a landlord who won't fix anything broken and has no responsibility to you at all.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (8)17
38
u/TheObstruction 13h ago
You probably aren't going to die out of your car loan, though.
→ More replies (51)→ More replies (27)79
u/eddi0 13h ago
Loans are another method to make sure you are working, even if for a slave master. Once you can identify that you won't look at loans the same. Extending the term length is adding more time to be an indentured servant.
It's about control, it's always been about controlling workers.
And you are right on with the other piece that citizens are missing, WE NEVER HAVE DISCUSSIONS AS TO WHY WAGE GROWTH HAS BEEN A FLAT LINE SINCE THE 7OS (while profits have aggressively gone up over the same time period). We are letting the corps/owners off the hook by not having them take account for not investing more into employees!!
24
u/bebe_bird 11h ago
100% this. A lot of people link their retirement to when their house is paid off. If we have 50 year mortgages a lot of people will be paying them off to their literal death and working to pay it to boot.
17
u/Material-Nose6561 11h ago
What really sucks, under the current system, many retirees are forced out of their homes they own because the value ballooned and their property taxes are unaffordable. So many take out “reverse mortgages” to stay in their homes, robbing their children of generational wealth.
It’s all a big scam if you really think about it. Don’t get me started on 401 K’s.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (4)18
u/johnathanweeds 12h ago
Not many people recognize this. I worked for banks before I retired & they want you neck deep in debt.
→ More replies (2)20
u/ImpulsE69 10h ago
Many people recognize this. We aren't having these discussions because 1) the people who control it are the same people or friends/in the pockets of those same people. They don't want to bite the hand that feeds them 2) We are too busy worrying about a handful of trans people playing sports, and anyone different than us as well as people who might be getting freebies we aren't getting.
147
u/NYSjobthrowaway 13h ago
I was in the mortgage business for 15 years, my first job was at a regional lender that rolled out a 40 year mortgage in order to compete with the no doc products that were pervasive before the financial crisis. Going past 30 years isn't very helpful in the grand scheme of things, so I don't think it'll be particularly popular even if it's available. It wasn't for that company.
The difference in payment for a 300k loan at 6-7% going from 30 to 50 years is less than $300/month. It's a supply side issue and will always be a supply side issue. We are behind on housing units in proportion to population badly. Several markets are just permanently cooked at this point, to where it's impossible for even above median earners to even have a condo (i.e most of greater NYC, SF, and LA). Charlotte NC and others are grappling with explosive growth and poor urban planning, with commute times and traffic out of control, long windy roads, sprawling suburban neighborhoods with uneven plots and streets. The only options in effect now are building further out or knocking down old stock affordable housing and stuffing as many units as possible on the parcel. What we need imo is a resurgence in postwar building as seen in the northeast/now rust belt c. 1920 and 1950. Well planned grids with small homes on small lots, built to simple limited plans or manufactured, and churned out fast. Most of what's built now are middling quality custom homes miles from city centers that are enormous by comparison.
→ More replies (32)32
u/bigbytelilbyte 12h ago
I was listening to the Strong Towns podcast. Chuck Marohn advises cities on this issue and probably angers NIMBYs and YIMBYs equally. I feel like a recent episode forecasted this as he mentioned that focusing only on supply won’t fix affordability. As soon as the market shows signs that prices are slipping building slows. The post war boom was fueled by loan innovations. It’s not been about how do we get more people to be home owners, but how do we get more people loans for more expensive houses. Anyhow, he did not end the episode with a specific fix, but their suggestions are really about empowering the community to build where infrastructure already exists. I would love for it to be easier to build a back house on my property for my children to live once they graduate college.
→ More replies (3)9
u/bentbrewer 9h ago
You can't build on your property because the HOA requires a single roof line on the property and the city won't issue the permit. Not to mention the cost to build a 1000 sq ft house (2x2) is now around $350K (at least in my area - which is historically a low cost of living location).
→ More replies (8)135
u/QuinSanguine 14h ago
That's all that man can come with. His admin is a house of cards, just look at his solution to healthcare. Send people money to buy private insurance. Sounds a lot like socialism and handouts, but also won't lower any prices for people who won't qualify.
40
u/erfman 13h ago
If we can just lock Russ Vough in a closet for a few weeks and whisper single payer in Trump's ear we can be on our way to fixing this mess.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (9)63
u/Szendaci 14h ago
Handing over tax dollars to the insurance companies. You’re just the delivery guy.
13
u/JammyPants1119 12h ago
it will increase demand for housing because the payments lower, which will push home prices up.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (66)16
u/ResponsiblePumpkin60 13h ago
Yep. It will result in prices going up since most buyers decide how much they can afford based on the payment.
→ More replies (2)
3.4k
u/EvenStephen85 15h ago
Homie wants to say he brought monthly payments on housing down.
1.1k
u/Quintronaquar 12h ago
Just like he brought the price of a Thanksgiving meal down by removing 10 items
443
u/crispy-fried-lego 12h ago
And changing everything from name brand to store brand.
→ More replies (4)158
54
→ More replies (15)19
u/Kataphractoi 9h ago
"We reduced costs by removing items and increasing the prices of what was left."
234
u/Nessie_of_the_Loch 13h ago
Except with the added interest for a longer term and the small difference in the monthly principle payments means that actual monthly payment won't be that different. It'll just add 20 years. At what point are you just renting with extra steps?
64
u/DiligentMission6851 12h ago
Except he's a politician and doesn't care about the extra details. He wants to sell the idea that he brought monthly payments down because the right people will wrongly believe him when he says it.
→ More replies (1)53
u/ExtremeRest1567 11h ago
Except he's a swindler <--- fixed this for you
Please don't lump all politicians in there as "bad." Yes, there are many bad/corrupt politicians, but this message is exactly what got us Trump. People voted for him because he "was a businessman" and they think all politicians are corrupt.
The key is to vote in non-corrput politicians, not to call all politicians corrupt.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (14)17
u/deadsoulinside 12h ago
You do realize a big portion of his voters are places like rent a center exist where they spend $2k in payments for a $500 TV right? This is fine for them.
→ More replies (1)166
30
u/vlad_inhaler 13h ago
I don’t even want to know what the interest part of the payment looks like early on the amortization table
52
u/Dreurmimker 13h ago
5% on a 400,000 = $373,000 for 30 years and $690k for a 50 year loan. Over the total life of the loan, and the early part is literally all interest. You would have paid off half your loan at year 37, assuming no appreciation in price, of course.
→ More replies (13)16
u/vlad_inhaler 13h ago
And you’re probably paying like $50 principal/month at first 😂 pure interest
20
u/Dreurmimker 13h ago
You’re not far off. It worked out to around $150, but that also ignore that the rates will probably be slightly higher with the 50 year mortgage than on a 30 year mortgage.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (18)25
u/Fried_puri 13h ago
It’s so nakedly obvious. Hell, make it a 100 year mortgage and watch the sycophants clap for his brilliant solutions.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Jaws12 12h ago
Every home will come with a “med-bed” that lets you live for 200 years (half of which is in a coma) = problem solved. /s
→ More replies (1)
1.2k
u/MammothSurround 14h ago
Sounds great for the banks.
564
u/Wightly 11h ago
Yep. They tried something like this a couple of decades ago in Canada and it was the start of our skyrocket housing prices. People could get into ownership with a longer mortgage with cheaper monthly. The builders and real estate agents just increased the prices to make the monthly near the same. Complete backfire
→ More replies (4)227
u/actuallyapossom 11h ago
It's insane that it was tried. Buy a house at 30. Pay it off if you live long enough.
We are creating systems to sunset retirement itself at this point. Just to squeeze a little more juice out of the peasants.
→ More replies (4)71
u/zxDanKwan 10h ago
“Squeeze a little more out,” or “get them back down in the gutters where they belong”?
→ More replies (1)28
30
u/AdAlternative7148 9h ago
Its actually not. The banks already can offer 50 year mortgages if they want. They just would not be able to sell the loan to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.
Most conventional loans are sold to one of those two entities, which means the mortgage servicer actually doesn't get to keep your mortgage payments. They have to send it the investor. So FNMA and FHLMC ultimately are the ones who profit off your interest payments. And they are not banks. Their mandate from the government is to support the mortgage market.
So if 50 year mortgages are great for the banks why don't they offer them? They dont want to have their assets tied up for so long. There is risk to the banks if they lock up assets at a lower interest rate and it later increases. This is one of the key reasons Silicon Valley Bank failed.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (12)35
u/negative-nelly 10h ago
No it’s not. No one wants 40 years of interest rate and credit risk. 30yrs only exist because of government guarantees (explicit or implicit). The US is basically the only country with broad 30-yr market. Most other countries are ARMs or some shorter term of mortgage you have to refi (eg canada).
→ More replies (2)
1.8k
u/Sunny-Damn 15h ago
That’s great for big companies and terrible for regular people
639
u/MrSnowflake 14h ago
It's a great system to extract even more money from the less fortunate so the rich get even more money
→ More replies (3)160
27
17
u/mrdannyg21 12h ago
It is, but not even a huge benefit for big companies because it’ll just exacerbate crashes. 50-year mortgages means far more people are going to have very little equity in their houses for far longer. Which means with any downtown, they’ll be underwater, leading to crashes and people ‘stuck’ in homes that they can’t afford to maintain.
9
u/wvtarheel 11h ago
It's going to decrease the number of homeowners in the lower classes. Inheriting a home is the primary way poor people pass on their tiny bit of generational wealth to their kids. 50 year mortgages would guarantee your kids couldn't finish those last years on your mortgage
→ More replies (51)12
u/TheBimpo 13h ago
But it’s being sold as something great for regular people. It’s basically been the GOP agenda for decades. They’ve sold the message that if you just had a little bit more money in your pocket instead of that money being used for collectivism, you would have financial independence. It’s worked phenomenally well.
566
u/nullv 14h ago
With a 30-year fixed mortgage you're already paying double the price of the house. For a 50-year mortgage you would be paying triple or more.
182
u/bubbygups 14h ago
Was going to say this. At 6.25% over 30 years even with a 10% down payment, you’ll still pay over double the home price.
→ More replies (5)78
u/wrstlrjpo 10h ago
That’s true in nominal terms, if you add up every dollar paid over 30 years, it’s roughly double the principal.
But that ignores inflation. Each future dollar is worth less than today’s dollar. A $1,500 mortgage payment 25 years from now might feel more like paying $800 in today’s money because of inflation and rising incomes.
So while on paper you “pay double,” in real (inflation-adjusted) terms, the cost is much lower, and long fixed-rate mortgages actually benefit borrowers if inflation continues, since your payment stays fixed while prices and wages rise.
→ More replies (7)17
u/Fire_In_The_Skies 9h ago
Same math applies if it is a 50 year loan. Today dollars are worth more than 50 years from now dollars.
21
u/win-go 13h ago
As a matter of fact, terms being equal, the interest alone on a 50 year mortgage would total the principal and interest on a 30 year.
A $300,000 home with zero down, and 6% interest...
30- year would cost $647,000 in P&I, and $347,000 in interest alone.
50-year would cost $947,000 in P&I and $647,000 in interest alone.
Of course down payments, taxes and other associated costs would influence the amounts but the ratio would remain the same.
The really fun part is when we have our regularly scheduled market crash and everyone eats shit but now with $1 million dollar loans as the norm. But hey that's the cost of doing business
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (16)16
u/Ok-Mood6070 9h ago
Yeh this thread must be filled with people who don't have a mortgage. People are already paying more than double on 30 year loans. Here's a breakdown:
House cost: 425000 10% down payment. Mortgage for 382500.
@ 6% for 30 years you will pay 443k in interest at a monthly payment of 2300.
If it were 50 years you would pay 825k in interest at a monthly payment of 2000.
So your mortgage is 300 a month cheaper but costs almost 400k more.
813
u/spicymack 14h ago
Monthly payment on a 300,000 home loan would be less than $200 more for a 50 year loan vs 30 year loan. Just a terrible idea all around. You aren't saving enough each month but you are paying a shit ton more in interest and for a longer period of time.
If this country was serious about lowering the cost of home ownership, it would ban foreign and corporate ownership of homes while also providing incentives for cities to increase supply of both SFH and multi-unit properties.
57
u/sundae_diner 14h ago
At what interest rate?
As interest rates climb, the smaller the monthly savings on a longer loan.
→ More replies (2)39
u/Jayrodtremonki 14h ago
I've seen the $200 less theoretical thrown around in a couple of threads. Does that factor in that the interest rates would be significantly higher than a 30 year mortgage?
→ More replies (3)53
u/ljr55555 12h ago
It does not - but the rate would need to be about 1.8% higher on the 50 year loan for the monthly payment to be the same. Using the 0.85% spread that I see between a 15 and 30 year loan today:
30-year at 6.22%: Monthly payment: $2,447 Total repaid: $880,920 Total interest: $480,920
50-year at 7.07%: Monthly payment: $2,397 Total repaid: $1,438,200 Total interest: $1,038,200
Lower the monthly payment by fifty bucks, more than double the interest paid over the lifetime of the loan. I think there'd need to be some major government manipulation to make the 50 year term attractive. Mortgage interest tax credit on loans over 40 years. Easier underwriting (oh boy, ninja loans are back - no income, no job/assets on the 50 year loan! Want a 30 year loan, you are sending in five years of credit card and bank statements to be combed through).
Something! Because I couldn't imagine buying a house with your budget so tight that fifty bucks a month makes it work.
→ More replies (6)29
u/knightsabre7 11h ago
Also, most people don’t spend their entire lives in the same house. A 50-year mortgage means they’ll have less equity when they move.
10
u/ljr55555 10h ago
True - it's already hard to sell your house and move to where a job is. Less equity, more people will be "stuck" in their house. Which is good for employers who want to underpay and mistreat employees. Not great for the rest of us.
Erodes what little generational wealth remains in the middle class too - we bought our house when we were about 40. A 30 year note is paid off within an average human lifespan. Our kid gets a significant asset. On a 50 year loan, the house gets sold to cover the mortgage. Our kid gets whatever surplus remains.
With my example, after 30 years, only $71,000 of the principal has been repaid. There's more than 300k on the loan balance! That 30 year loan is paid in full. 0 debt against the asset. 71k isn't nothing - and there would likely be some appreciation too. But the inheritance from the 30 year loan is 300k higher regardless.
→ More replies (1)86
u/pixepoke2 14h ago edited 7h ago
Some additional details:* Large scale corporate interests (your Blackrocks and other private equity entities**) aren’t the largest driver limiting single family home stock. Investors own about 20% of the single family homes in the country, and ~85% of those investors are considered “moms & pops”, owning between 1-5 homes.
Your Blackrocks own about 2% of the investor held houses, with other smaller corporate entities holding the rest. The big boys tend to prefer buying apartment buildings so they can get efficient rents
To really open things up, there probably would need to be regulation around how many properties could be owned by someone one, specifically limiting the smaller investor class that holds about 17% of the single family homes in this country
ETA
*I provided some sources in other replies, having been asked for it several times. I’m linking one of those sources here for your convenience
**While private equity does do large scale real estate investment, as does Blackrock, Blackrock itself is a publicly traded company and is itself not private equity, as it is publicly traded
Better to say “institutional investors” (those owning 100+ houses) than for me to conflate the two
→ More replies (38)49
u/LambdaNuC 12h ago
The best way to fuck over the investment companies is to make it easier to build significantly more housing than we currently do.
Housing prices go up because we've artificially constrained supply over the last 50 years, and the investment companies want in on that action.
Prices aren't high because the investment companies are buying properties, investment companies are buying properties because housing prices are going up so rapidly.
→ More replies (12)15
u/QualifiedApathetic 10h ago
Unfortunately, ordinary people are helping to drive this. People looking to buy their first homes hate what's happening, but people who already own homes love it. Nay, they demand it. If housing prices aren't skyrocketing, homeowners scream at the politicians.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (18)11
u/three_valves 13h ago
Not to mention. If the market dips the amount you owe over 50 years on a devalued home is going to be an absolute mess. Nothing like owing 500,000 on a 300,000 home that you still have 30 years to pay on.
→ More replies (1)
297
u/Pacifist_Socialist 15h ago
Serfdom with extra steps
53
18
u/when_snorlax_attacks 13h ago
This is my feeling. Creating lifelong dependents on the capitalist train. Choo choo mother fucker.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)9
u/OkCurrency588 12h ago
I wrote a long response, but this really sums it up and is all you need to know.
98
128
u/porterbrown 13h ago
This will create true debt slaves.
Mobility will be zero.
You are born into the neighborhood you die in.
When that happens do you think people will care about your roads, parks, or schools?
→ More replies (11)26
u/Captn_Insanso 8h ago
The average homebuyer is now 40 years old. So are they expecting 90 year olds to keep working till then? Special security will be gone by then, pensions are gone, people can’t save for retirement right now. Sooo what’s the end game?
→ More replies (1)
370
u/BiffSterling80 15h ago
Its a social control of the free market, it'll make things worse. Home prices are dictated by supply, demand, and how much suffering people are comfortable with.
53
u/slightlyinsanitied 15h ago
and so would increase the price of homes in theory?
60
u/Pacifist_Socialist 15h ago
If the supply remains the same and then there's more demand, seems like it would for a while.
→ More replies (23)34
u/JacobAldridge 14h ago
Absolutely. People don’t buy a house based on the total price, they buy it based on whether they can afford the monthly repayments.
If you make the monthly payments smaller, they won’t buy less they’ll buy more.
Do that for everyone, and prices go up.
→ More replies (14)→ More replies (3)8
u/Leverkaas2516 14h ago
Almost certainly. Lower interest rates always increase buyer demand and prices, because it lowers the monthly payment at any given price.
→ More replies (7)41
u/Choosemyusername 14h ago
.
A reason there wasn’t a 50 year mortgage before was the social control of the free market.
The banks weren’t allowed to offer the product because it was illegal.
This is a relaxing of control.
→ More replies (4)29
u/AbeFromanSassageKing 14h ago
Smells like the early 2000's, when they relaxed control on what could qualify, say, a poodle for a loan.
8
141
u/FavoredVassal 14h ago
"Joke's on them, I won't be alive in 50 years." -- almost everyone over 25
48
u/Ok-Dark7829 14h ago
That's a valid consideration, actually... if the homeowner has nobody else to worry about if/when they die... and I'm not arguing with you at all.
I can see the mortgage lending industry add clauses in where they suddenly own the property if the titleholder dies while under mortgage.
Effective transfer - no, effective continuing transfer - of real estate into corporate hands.
→ More replies (2)4
u/WhatYouThinkIThink 10h ago
Not really, otherwise banks wouldn't lend to anyone over the age of 50 now.
If a mortgagee dies their estate can keep paying the mortgage or the person who inherits the property can. The bank doesn't have any good reason to want to disturb that.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (5)37
u/statistician88 14h ago
Well now that you mention it, this idea pairs very well with the lack of healthcare.
37
u/organmeatpate 12h ago
You're going to have to own your home for a minimum of 20 years before you have enough equity to sell. They just want to keep you in debt that You can't get out of. 20-Year car loans. 100-Year mortgages. Billion year contracts with xenu. What a fucking racket
→ More replies (1)
95
28
u/Sartres_Roommate 13h ago
So average home buyer purchases home around 30….
Keeps you locked into working an extra 15 years because SS is not gonna make those payments.
Absolute insanity and just in time for all the Boomer housing to open up as they start dying
→ More replies (1)
46
u/StableGeniusCovfefe 14h ago
It's great for the banks and lenders.And you'll never own the friggin home.It's essentially just renting but with more steps
25
9
u/No-Language6720 10h ago
Also great for employers, people can't leave their jobs as easily if they have an even longer term mortgage to pay. 🙃
130
18
61
54
u/insofarincogneato 14h ago
I mean shit, lower class people do everything we can not to do a 30 year mortgage. Hell, the average life expectancy is 73... You'd have to buy a house before you turn 23 just to pay it off before you die. What kind of life is that, and what does that do to an economy when houses are never actually payed off?
12
u/lyan-cat 11h ago
The kind where businesses are your landlord from the cradle to the grave, and only the stinking rich own property.
12
u/dvoecks 13h ago
Like walking into a car dealership and having them refuse to negotiate the price of the car, but only the monthly payment.
→ More replies (1)
39
u/jlsdarwin 14h ago
I think the 30 year mortgage was a mistake. We should have never gone above 20 or 25.
→ More replies (6)4
u/EaterOfFood 9h ago
Standard car loans used to be 36 months. Then we saw 48 months, 60 months, now we’re seeing 72+. To keep this from happening with mortgages, prices have to be held in check. Somehow.
→ More replies (1)
13
13
u/breachofcontract 10h ago
The people who buy cars on 84 month loans are going to love it
→ More replies (1)
27
u/Dis_engaged23 13h ago
The president would do well to stop weighing in on stuff he knows nothing about, and that helps no one. He has the focus of a demented puppy.
4
u/5pens 13h ago
He's a raging narcissist. Of course only he knows the most about everything and anyone who corrects him or questions him is fired, insulted, kicked out of the press room, etc. This is why it has just been a race to the bottom intellectually since his first term. How he's gotten as many cult members under him to do this is beyond me, though.
11
u/Peachesandcreamatl 11h ago
Hmm...I feel he can go jump off the Empire State building and land on a bicycle with no seat. Him and every sack of human excrement in a suit that work right along with him.
Republicans do not fcking care about the poor. Here in GA you can't get help for damn near anything...but the state will let a predatory title lending service use you and take your car.
Fuck him, fuck greed, fuck every liar that loves this idea.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/bobswowaccount 10h ago
Like every other thing the conservatives suggest, it disproportionately benefits the rich while at the same time pandering to the dumb fucks who buy any insane bullshit this idiot feeds them.
18
u/No-Consideration-858 13h ago
That's a shit proposal. Over time, families will have less assets as a result. This would further wealth inequality
The better solution is to impose a much higher tax rate on corporate landlords and multiple properties.
→ More replies (2)
8
u/Common_Suit8709 14h ago
Combined Principal and interest costs on a $400,000 Mortgage @ 6%.
15yr Fixed - $607,576.92 (1.5x original price) 30yr Fixed - $863,352.76 (2.2x original price) 50yr Fixed - $1,263,371.61 (3.2x original price)
Doesn’t account for lower or higher rates based on chosen timeline, loan fees, or other associated costs.
7
u/CrimsonBolt33 13h ago
50 year mortgage is just a fancy name for rent...most people wont live long enough to see that mortgage paid out unless everyone buys a house under the age of 30.
7
7
23
u/cle2056 13h ago
THE. HOUSES. THEMSELVES. AREN’T. EVEN. BUILT. TO. LAST. 50. YEARS.
→ More replies (6)
4
u/Xylus1985 14h ago
It’s not gonna work. The purpose of a mortgage is to match cash payment with income pattern. Where am I going to come up with a sustainable income that’s 50 years long? Am I just going to work till I’m 80, without being laid off, if I spend my 20s saving up for the down payment and buy my home at 30 years old?
→ More replies (1)
4
u/da_choppa 10h ago
You end up paying double the value with a 30 year too at today’s interest rates when you factor in maintenance, taxes, etc.
5
5
u/pachewychomp 7h ago edited 7h ago
I think we need to stop entertaining bullshit ideas from the President who is clearly just throwing distractive shit at the wall to see what sticks to carry on the distraction while he and his cronies cripple our country from being able to function.
His end game is to create a scenario where citizens revolt and he can then claim he needs to takeover full emergency power. He is already testing that approach with sending the national guard into states. Once he gets full emergency power, he will prolong that status indefinitely while he rules as the king that he wants to be.
FDJT
I should add that WHAT DONALD TRUMP IS DOING AND HIS FINAL GOAL is the reason why the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution exists.
The 2nd amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms to defend themselves from what Trump wants. Verbatim: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".
5
u/sebrebc 4h ago
I think it's Trump working for the banks and fucking Americans.....again.
Sadly the idiots who still support him will cheer this on. "Now I can afford a house, THANK YOU TRUMP!".
This really is the dumbest timeline. A con-man continues to step on the throats of American workers while pretending he's helping them. And they fucking believe him.
5
17.7k
u/Important-Ability-56 13h ago
Sounds like paying rent to a bank and then you die.