Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

187

whilst im always one for paying in cash and minimizing credit usage, i always wondered why 20% down was required for a house when taking out a loan. At the end of the day a loan is a loan, regardless of how much money is put down, be it 100% financing, or 80% financing. And when you think about it, the bank owns your house followed by gov, even if 99.9% of it is paid off, thanks to the way lien laws work. So really, whilst in a sound money system, one would pay cash for a house, all the downpayment is doing is giving free equity to a bunch of parasitical kikes so they can gamble it away

whilst im always one for paying in cash and minimizing credit usage, i always wondered why 20% down was required for a house when taking out a loan. At the end of the day a loan is a loan, regardless of how much money is put down, be it 100% financing, or 80% financing. And when you think about it, the bank owns your house followed by gov, even if 99.9% of it is paid off, thanks to the way lien laws work. So really, whilst in a sound money system, one would pay cash for a house, all the downpayment is doing is giving free equity to a bunch of parasitical kikes so they can gamble it away

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (8).
[–] • 0 pt

You didn't do a very good job of refuting his argument bud. Reeing and calling him a kike isn't a good rebuttal.

[–] • 0 pt

He had zero argument, that's why. There was nothing to 'refute'.

[–] • 0 pt

He wasn't making an argument. He made a statement. You rebutted his statement by telling him his statement was wrong because you said so.

[–] • 0 pt

He wasn't making an argument.

(((you're))) really bad at pilpul.

Arguments aren't statements.