Quote:
Originally Posted by Bjorn_Tasty1
You are seeing it wrong in some points. Nowadays nobody get a jobcontract for life. It is a false statement of security cause any boss can fire you, even if you have a permanent contract. That is not taking care of money, it is walking behind the facts. So they can not buy and must rent, but if you make a little more than welfare you must rent private, what means most of the people are pusehd in private rent they can't afford.
If banks don't want the risk, they shouldn't lent to USA banks and buy shitty papers but lent money to Dutch/European people so they can buy a house. Or better, they should have built more houses.
Insurance companies are a rip off. Government force you to take an Insurance when you buy a house, but you will never get the money. They have it in Holland, Insurance when the house price goes down. I think maybe 10 people used it. (kidding don't know). Cause first you have 80% unemployment rate the first 2 years (or longer). Than you get money from government when you have wellfare and it is cheaper you keep your house instead of renting. So in that time the house prices went up again in that period. Insurance for nothing.
|
you missunderstand the fact WHO is in risk.
the banks loan money from other people and not their own.
they have the OBLIGATION to keep the risk small.
here the risk is handled to a 3rd party and exactly this 3rd party is insuring it again with other people´s money.
you can turn it however you want - as soon as loans are given easy the risk will be high and it always ends up even in higher interest rates or in higher fallouts.
these fallouts are again paid from the taxpayer.