What would happen if EVERYONE stopped paying their mortgage?

[flobadob]

I don't claim to know all the details of why the world appears to have financial problems. Every country seems to owe some other country money. That in itself seems a strange scenario. A lot of banks also took loans out, they were unable to pay these loans back, and what happened to them? Nothing. They got them paid off by the government.

So my question is, why should people who have mortgages,loan etc. who are having serious problems repaying them - TO THESE SAME BAILED OUT BANKS - why should these people have to pay at all? And then furthermore, what would happen if everyone just said enough of all this financial injustice, and simply stopped their repayments until a fairer system was enforced. What is the worst/best that could happen?

[Noraq]

Probably go back to this:

The history of banking is closely related to the history of money but banking transactions probably predate the invention of money. Deposits initially consisted of grain and later other goods including cattle, agricultural implements, and eventually precious metals such as gold, in the form of easy-to-carry compressed plates. Temples and palaces were the safest places to store gold as they were constantly attended and well built. As sacred places, temples presented an extra deterrent to would-be thieves.

[VHG]

Firstly, the banking system is vital to the worlds economy. While it may have annoyed us all to "bail out" the banks, it would have been worse if they had gone under.

Secondly, the UK does very well out of "financial services" (I think about 10% of UK income comes from financial services) and places like Canary Wharf, where some of the large banks have their headquarters, are central to the success of the UK economy.

If we made life difficult for the large banks here in the UK then HSBC, and some of the other banks with their headquarters here, would go to Paris, Amsterdam and so on and we would lose all the tax they pay.

And the reason we as individuals need to carry on paying our loans or mortgages is that we are just that, individuals. We are not important in the "big picture".

Stop paying your mortgage and you lose your house, maybe get declared bankrupt, go on a "bad credit" list, and may never be able to get a loan, mortgage or credit card for years.

But if you want to do it go ahead.

[Kayless]

well you don't have to ask, that's basically what happenned with the financial collapse from 2008.

[Old_Geezer]

True they got bailed out when a more fitting fate would have been nationalisation. But as to why folk should pay what they own to the bank at all; the fact is that borrowers are in relative clover at the moment and has been for years. It is those with a little life savings that are getting stiffed as they are supposed to be happy hiring out their money for next to no return.

[jake-the-peg]

Sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did my eyes decieve me?????

Did VHG just say we'd lose all the tax the banks pay?


Where would we be without the £113 million it paid in tax on it's earnings on £11.6 Billion earning?

Please George can I pay 1% income tax too?

http://www.guardian.c...-113m-corporation-tax

[wildwood]

I am sure the banks would be only too pleased if everyone didn't pay their mortgage. You are responsible for all costs to sell the house (including taxes and repayments) which will come off the equity in the property once sold. They can then re-loan the money out to other sources at a greater interest rate.

[skiddum]

If we all stopped paying creditors a financial collapse would occur. It's really a question of the critical mass. Theoretically, governments would step in to stabilize the financial markets just as they have in the past. The debt would thus be transferred from the debtor to the government. The banks would still not be stuck with the bill, theoretically we would (as citizens) and our progeny. Hilarious, huh?

[MisterLooner]

The central banks would collapse, the US DOllar would be worthless, and governments would have no money for wars. A GOOD THING so long as there are a few things in place:

Banking could be a not-for-profit service to humankind ran transparently and accountable. Money must communicate values of goods and services facilitating trade as a secondary means. Trade and barter being the primary means. But any money that can be "invested" in is USURY based and will lead to economic collapse as was and will be the fate of all empires. Money must itself be non-profitable.

By the definition of an economy, we don't have an economy. We have a privately owned real-life game of monopoly. In an actual working, self-contained economy, there would be no need for taxes, interest, and inflation would not exist. All the wealth stays within the economy. No poverty. Sound like Utopia? nah, just a working economy.

Homeownership is an illusion. You pay the bank for 30-40 years of mortgage to get a deed that says you "own" the property. But stop paying property tax and see if you still own it. btw, the bank makes more than half of your payments via interest. The deed just means you don't have to pay the bank anymore.

If everyone stopped paying rent and mortgage, you would own your property truly. Stay where you are. When the central bank collapses (Federal Reserve), the US dollar would have no spending power so the guns the bank would hire to kick you out of your home wouldn't have any motivation to kick you out. they wouldn't be paying rent either.

560,000 homeless in the US (2017).
18,600,000 vacant homes (banks are withholding from the people). Plenty of homes for everyone, refugees, migrants even. And if people gravitated towards their families, more places would open up.

build with your neighbors, protect each other, create ways to work out issues in the community (restoritive justice model), grow food together, outlaw corporations and initiate a co-op model of business, ...

In this model you wouldn't have to have a job, jobs would look more like "roles in your community," although jobs would still exist. small businesses, etc.

Prisons and police wouldn't be necessary or at least police would be reserved for occasional serious crimes as murder but without poverty and desparation, crime would be virtually non-existent. much of mental sickness that occurs with isolation, stress, trauma, what have you, much of this would have been nipped in the bud before they get to that stage.

No more corporate, profit-driven war.

Society would be healthy, so long as people didn't panic, riot, and fear the collapse of the empire's stronghold (not likely). It would be true freedom.