• lazylion_ca@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mortgages needing to be renewed every 5 years so that banks can jack the the interest rate. Cap residential mortgages at 25 years max and 2% interest for the duration.

    • Changetheview@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Many people lock in interest rates for the life of the loan. Most often 30 years for mortgage loans. You don’t have to renew a mortgage’s interest rate unless you get an adjustable rate one.

      This is the main reason why mortgage applications are down significantly right now. People with super low interest rates don’t want to move because they’d have to get a new loan to do so, and interest rates are much higher now. If they stay and they have a fixed-rate loan, nothing changes.

      • JWBananas@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The user you are responding to has an account on a .ca domain. In Canada (as well as UK) it is more common for the rate to only be locked in for 5 years.

        • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well that’s lame… You guys should do something about that, as a US home owner, having a fixed rate mortgage is one of the best parts about owning vs renting.

            • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              In Canada (as well as UK) it is more common for the rate to only be locked in for 5 years.

              I think it’s pretty clear I was talking about the folks you’re referring to… not you specifically if you’re not in that group… but fair enough.

      • DrunkenPirate@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because it doesn’t matter the company. A bank creates money if you apply for credit. It just have to have a fraction - say 3% - real money to store at a central bank account. Then they literally type the numbers on your account. Money created!

        So, for a bank, it doesn’t matter if you apply for 5.10.20 years. They get the interests anyway. May be there is some weird financial acrobatic behind the 5 years target. However, here in Germany it’s pretty common to get a 20 years credit.

        • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The hell are you on about, reserve banks can create money, but a retail bank borrows it from someone else and loans it to you.

          And if that “somewhere else” can get a better deal elsewhere, they won’t loan it to the bank in the first place.

          • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What they mean by that is if there is a newly created bank with no money in it, and you deposit 100 of whatever currency, then I come in and withdraw 80, which I will use to pay for the creation of a bakery. Then I give those money to you, after you have built the bakery for me. Then you go back and deposit those 80 back to the bank. Then the cycle continues: I take out another 80, for example, to pay for initial products, I pay them to Person 3, who deposits them in the bank. The bank just turned 180 into 260. If, at that moment, I, as the bakery owner, decide to refinance my loan, I can get 60 from the bank. If then we get you, with a balance of 160, and Person 3, with a balance of 80, to withdraw their deposits, what do we get? Think about it: the bank only had 100 in its reserves from the initial deposit, and all the other deposits were money that the bank had loaned out, so while you had 100 deposited, then 80, you technically have 180 in your bank account, but there’s only 100 actual money in the system.

              • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                You know what? Let me simplify if for you:

                Person A deposits $100 to the Bank

                Person A’s account is worth $100. The Bank has $100 in its reserves.

                Person B takes out a loan of $80 from the Bank.

                The Bank now has only $20 in its reserves.

                Person B pays the $80 to Person A for a service

                Person A deposits the $80 to the Bank.

                Person A’s account is worth $180.

                The Bank now has $100 ($80 deposit + $20 left from earlier) in its reserves.

                2 days later, nothing’s changed, except Person A needs some extra money quickly, so they go and try to withdraw the $180 in their account. The Bank only has $100 in its reserves.

                • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That’s why we have a “fractional reserve” system in place pretty much everywhere.

                  And besides, they haven’t created that money, as the first person has a balance of -80.