(Crankers) Radio guy and podcaster Chris Stigall has been a right wing Trump supporter for years, but him and many others are speaking out about the completely stupid idea of a 50-year-mortgage.
Stigall said, “Trump’s 50 Year Mortgage Plan? Wrong Solution for Young America. They need freedom, opportunity and faith in the free market. Trump Is Still America First-But 50 Year Mortgages Are Not.”
Stigall then went into reasons why it’s wrong in one of his videos, which is embedded below.
I can tell you why the 50-year-mortgage is wrong.
Do you want to pay interest to a bank for 20 extra years? OK, that’s why it’s wrong.
Do you want to pay off your house? OK, well you pretty much never will with a 50-year-mortgage and the bank will probably steal the home from you at some point.
Are you getting the point yet?
If it’s good for the banks, then it’s not good for us, and it’s not good for America.
Lower the interest rate.
Kick the freeloaders out of the homes.
Fix the housing market.
You don’t fix the market by introducing another problem like adding 20 years of interest and giving the banks free money.
Now here’s Chris’ video for you to enjoy:
7 Comments
Honestly, I get where Stigall’s coming from, saying a 50-year mortgage is a bad idea. It’s kinda making it sound easy for young folks to own a home, but the reality of paying a mortgage for the rest of your life? That’s daunting. Lower interest rates sound way better than having a debt hanging over you for 50 years. What young America needs is real solutions that don’t trap them in a cycle of debt. Also, why give the banks more power and money? There’s gotta be a better way to tackle the housing market issues.
50 years? so basically, the bank owns your soul now. great plan. not.
It’s not about owning your soul, it’s about affordability. But yeah, the longevity of 50 years is pretty ludicrous. Wonder if there’s a balance to be found.
At least it’s an attempt to solve the housing crisis.
After reading through both Stigall’s criticism and the principles behind the 50-year-mortgage idea, I believe it’s imperative to analyze both the pros and cons thoroughly. While the initial concept of assisting young people into homeownership might seem appealing, the extended period of financial obligation raises significant concerns. Historically, long-term mortgages have contributed to the cyclical nature of housing market inflations and crashes. Additionally, this plan disproportionately benefits banking institutions through prolonged interest payments. Clearly, a more sustainable solution that does not primarily serve the financial industry must be explored.
wow, just read about the 50-year mortgage, and i’m not impressed. why are we okay with making banks richer while we’re stuck with more debt? this isn’t the solution we need. we gotta demand better options, not just what’s thrown at us.
Guess I’ll own a house when I’m a ghost, lol. 50 years is a spooky long time!