The National Reverse Mortgage

[TexasFreedom]

In another board here I came up with this term, but it really belongs here.

The National Debt is really just a National Reverse Mortgage (NRM).

Think about it. It's the perfect name and congers the most accurate image. One generation saying "you are screwed" to the next generation. It's a debt that is never expected to be paid off. And it leads usually to a big bankruptcy. It's a great plan to lead to homelessness.

And this whole "Economic Collapse" board is a bunch of us guessing when the US economy losses at the game of Chairs. So when will the NRM music stop?

Agree? Disagree?

 

[TexasFreedom]

I was looking down at past threads & saw this one. My surprise was that nobody every commented. I suspect I didn't explain my meaning well enough, so let me try again.

Whenever you hear "reverse mortgage", what comes to mind? To me, it's an older couple who don't have any savings left to live off but do own their home. They need money to live on to pay for food & doctors but have no source for that money. The only thing they have left is their home, but they don't want to just sell it out right. So instead they sign for the "Reverse Mortgage". Some people fool themselves into thinking they 'still own their home', that there will be something left for their kid's inheritance. I suspect (can't find data on this) that most RM's lead to the bank taking possession of the home with family getting little to no equity. So yes, the owners get money they desperately need late in life. BUT many RM's come with unfavorable rates and terms.

An RM reminds me of 2 Kings 6:29 when a woman gets tricked into sacrificing her own infant so they can avoid starvation. What a horrible scenario.

OK, how does this apply to the national debt? Well, for decades America has been living unwisely, spending excessively leaving massive debt. Every generation in the past left more inheritance for the following generation that the last. So the "Home" was passed generation to generation intact & growing. But the past 50 years have used the 'national debt' as a variation of the reverse mortgage. The 'couple' (Congress & President & gov't in general) have been borrowing over and over against the country's credit ("home"). And not just a little bit, but over 60% of the "home" value (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_position_of_the_United_States , back in 2014 the US gov't had $270T in assets and $145T in debts).

Does that explain my original post better? What do you think of this?

 

[Mountain trapper]

I was looking down at past threads & saw this one. My surprise was that nobody every commented. I suspect I didn't explain my meaning well enough, so let me try again.

Whenever you hear "reverse mortgage", what comes to mind? To me, it's an older couple who don't have any savings left to live off but do own their home. They need money to live on to pay for food & doctors but have no source for that money. The only thing they have left is their home, but they don't want to just sell it out right. So instead they sign for the "Reverse Mortgage". Some people fool themselves into thinking they 'still own their home', that there will be something left for their kid's inheritance. I suspect (can't find data on this) that most RM's lead to the bank taking possession of the home with family getting little to no equity. So yes, the owners get money they desperately need late in life. BUT many RM's come with unfavorable rates and terms.

An RM reminds me of 2 Kings 6:29 when a woman gets tricked into sacrificing her own infant so they can avoid starvation. What a horrible scenario.

OK, how does this apply to the national debt? Well, for decades America has been living unwisely, spending excessively leaving massive debt. Every generation in the past left more inheritance for the following generation that the last. So the "Home" was passed generation to generation intact & growing. But the past 50 years have used the 'national debt' as a variation of the reverse mortgage. The 'couple' (Congress & President & gov't in general) have been borrowing over and over against the country's credit ("home"). And not just a little bit, but over 60% of the "home" value (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_position_of_the_United_States , back in 2014 the US gov't had $270T in assets and $145T in debts).

Does that explain my original post better? What do you think of this?

It's sad but I don't think most people really care any more. We've gone 2-3 generations of government dependency now. People are used to getting "free" stuff from the government and being coddeled by the government. These debt numbers are way too big for most people to comprehend. As long as government keeps passing out "free" stuff nobody is going to say much of anything. Certainly not the takers, which now days is over 50% of our population that gets some sort of government handout. The welfare state and government has grown so huge in this country that we've become just another socilist society. Our current system is unsatainable in my opinion. I personally think that we are heading towards economic failure some day in the future. How much longer can the government keep printing more money, how much bigger can our socilist/welfare state get before it collapses? How high can taxes be raised before the tax payers say something? We're at a point in time where nobody would vote for a politician who would run on the policy of putting the Constitution first and who would cut or eliminate most welfare programs and government spending.