> Alright, these situations are sad, and sometimes unavoidable due to what is essentially "bad luck". I can't imagine being caught in the vicious cycle. Social

> Alright, these situations are sad, and sometimes unavoidable due to what is essentially "bad luck". I can't imagine being caught in the vicious cycle. Social and societal safety nets are supposed to help with "bad luck". We all have bad luck from time to time, but imagine if all your close friends and relatives had died... you'd be in a really hard spot. > Why should "the poor" have access to mortgages? Lending to poor people (NINJA loans, predatory loans) was a root cause of the housing collapse. Do people really think giving the poor mortgages is any kind of solution? The issue is that there is a limited supply of affordable rental properties in many markets. This means that people who do have the money / credit to get loans can charge a huge renter's premium: there is a large segment of the market that simply doesn't have the option of getting a mortgage if the rent is too high. > It's a pretty common refrain on HackerNews that the "banksters" and (mostly, in reality) shady mortgage brokers took advantage of people by providing them with loans they couldn't afford. But, other times, this is seen as a good idea? Because they often pushed people towards larger loans than they could afford. Someone who can afford a $300k house was being pushed toward a $500k house with a ballooning payment. I'm all for poor people being able to buy homes they can afford. We'll ignore the fact that land value is correlated with location and the implications of that; but yes: home ownership should be in reach of every income level.