|
|
|
|
|
by seibelj
1369 days ago
|
|
It’s not that the interest is higher now! It’s that it’s fixed for 30 years no matter what the interest rate environment is! Plus it can be paid off early and refinanced when it suits the borrower! I don’t know how more clearly I can state why this is a glaring subsidy for the rich. I’m sure in a free market these would just appear by themselves /s |
|
There is some historical validity to the point that fixed-rate mortgages existed because of taxpayer subsidies. The creation of the FHA during the New Deal, and Fannie-Mae shortly after that, basically jumpstarted the practice. But there's a difference between jumpstarting the a market and continued subsidy of it. The existence of jumbo loans is an indication that even without taxpayer subsidies, fixed-rate mortgages still exist, presumably because the expectation of price stability means that private institutions don't think that the risk of interest rate variability is that great (jumbo mortgage borrowers usually pay about 0.5% more, so that's the implied risk premium). This can change during times of high price variability - my parents mortgage was 13.5% back in 1978, because expected inflation was about that. But that also indicates that interest rate risk is primarily absorbed by the private markets, and taxpayer subsidies play a relatively small part in it.