I think you miss the point and write it off as quaint or comforting. The idea is that if more people understood what was going on in terms of common parlance, s

I think you miss the point and write it off as quaint or comforting. The idea is that if more people understood what was going on in terms of common parlance, such as "gambling," then there would be more transparency simply because of less fog of obscurity and therefore potentially more eagerness to call for regulation or what have you. The homeowners are not a major factor in this sense because the economy should not have rested on these risks. It's not about assuming people don't default. In fact, such defaults can be quite profitable for some people. I think you're making it about personal responsibility or something when there is real merit to wheels of finance running in ways many would prefer them not to but are quite unaware of, partly due to "difficult" language. Whether this is really a problem with the language or with education levels or whatever is another matter but I think it is a real issue in a democracy.