This is not really my area of expertise, and it's unclear whether you're basing this comment upon an actual analysis or it's just a quick remark? I was trying

This is not really my area of expertise, and it's unclear whether you're basing this comment upon an actual analysis or it's just a quick remark? I was trying to explain how the bond rates can go so low. The real-estate lenders have rigid policies in place as for who can get a loan. Of course, enough correlated failures, and the system goes down. But there was a crashing housing bubble in Denmark too in 2008/2009, and to the best of my knowledge none of real-estate lenders went down, although they did increase their fees to cover losses. Banks were crashing, though, until the bailouts started. I personally think that the overall system would be more healthy if the real-estate lenders and banks in general did not protect their investors against losses, but just passed them on so you avoid this sure-everything-is-fine until it crashes. But again I don't know much about the banking world. Maybe that idea is too complicated.