Hacker News Reader

That's a bit out of context. My comment was a reply to:

> We all need a place to live but we all didn't take a risk in taking out a mortgage like Bob did.

My point is it wasn't necessarily a risk Bob has voluntarily taken. I'm not saying that we shouldn't do something to fix this but we shouldn't cause Bob to go bankrupt while trying to help younger generations as Bob may not be the opportunist here.

View on HN

Correct. The bank, and the seller are. The seller has his money already. The bank created money out of nowhere to service that mortgage.

To my point of view, I see exactly where the haircut makes the most sense.

> The bank created money out of nowhere

This is the part most people don't know or understand. We should fix the banking system first. Only one entity should be able to print money, not all banks.

One man's debt is another's asset. If the banks don't collect their mortgages they might collapse. Will I trust a bank to save my money if I knew their balance sheet is negative?

it is negative. Real banks run negative in practice (in USA).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com