This is one of the reasons my wife and I took so long to get a house. I refused to pay this absolute SCAM. So we saved up to put 20% down. What a crock.
Comment on A conundrum
brognak@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
And while we’re ranting about this, can we throw PMI and whomever came up with it on the bonfire where they belong?
Your telling me that I need to pay for you to have insurance in case I default while your also charging me interest who’s very purpose is to offset risk? Why am I paying to offset your risk FUCKING TWICE AND HOW IS THIS FUCKING LEGAL.
Shit infuriates me. I want all the bankers to get William Wallace on live TV, recorded and played back once a year during a mandatory viewing window so that we never, ever, forget.
OmegaMan@lemmings.world 1 day ago
RagingRobot@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Also if you were to default they would take your house and get the insurance money
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Interest is not intended to offset risk?
Interest provides a return on capital.
If you have $1 youre not using you might let someone else use it if they incentivise you by giving you an interest in their need.
If you give $1 to 100 different people you might increase the rate for some of them to offset your additional risk, but thats not the purpose of Interest.
brognak@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Part of interest calculation is risk. That’s why higher credit score leads to lower interest, it’s less of a risk to the lender.
PMI is double dipping. They can pick one, either a flat across the board interest rate for all borrowers or PMI.
Didn’t mean to imply it was entirely about risk.
null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
The financial illiteracy of lemmy users always amazes me.
PMI is not double dipping.
It keeps the risk reasonable so that interest rates can remain reasonable.
With no PMI there’s extra risk that would need to be priced in to interest.
No one likes PMI, but it’s not evil.
piconaut@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Ok, your loan has been determined to be higher risk therefore you have to pay more. Why did we need to invent a second payment called PMI instead of just charging a higher rate to higher risk borrowers? Why do interest rates need to remain “reasonable” ?
FosterMolasses@leminal.space 1 day ago
Shit infuriates me. I want all the bankers to get William Wallace on live TV
Thanks for the hearty laugh
JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
The alternative would probably be (much) higher interest rates until you get below 80% LTV at which point you’re “allowed” to refinance…but no bank will ever remind you of this in hopes you forget…or prime will skyrocket and you’ll be stuck in high interest for an unknown amount of time.
I think you should put away the monkey paw before they get more inspiration.
outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Its legal because value comes from ownership, not from doing things.
And if that sounds insane; you’re a fucking commie.
lmagitem@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
Is it ironic? We can’t know nowadays.
Sarcasmo220@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
The vibe I get is that they mean it as a compliment
outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Im responding to someone saying laws not protecting the weak from the strong is a failure, so i think we’re pretty well i!to surrealist nonsense fantasy land.