This morning, the television channel RAIUNO, durante la trasmissione "UNOMATTINA", si parlava di mutui.
Ovviamente si sottolineava, con l'aiuto di varie tabelle, che con l'aumento delle rate dei mutui a tasso variabile, ci sono sempre più famiglie in difficoltà.
Allora la domanda "giornalistica" sorge spontanea:
Come mai, a partire dai primi anni 2000, così tante persone/famiglie hanno sottoscritto un mutuo a tasso variabile e non uno a tasso fisso?
La domanda non sarebbe nemmeno da porre visto che la risposta ovvia è: perchè le rate variabili costavano di meno di quelle fisse!.
Ma la gran parte dei "nostri", "nostrani" giornalisti, ben formati e conformati alla cultura di incontrovertibile matrice Cattolico-Social-Comunista (che è la cultura storica Italiana e pure quella "Politicamente Corretta" per eccellenza), sono sempre alla ricerca del "ricco" che opprime il "povero"... e certo indagando il rapporto tra banche e famiglie Italiane non c'è bisogno di far fumare il cervello per individuare chi è il "ricco" e chi il "povero".... fin troppo facile!
A questo punto, quindi, alla domanda indecente dalla ovvia risposta, si affianca l'idea di una indecente risposta che rende ovvia la domanda:
- Non'è che "per caso", siano state le banche a suggerire il tasso variabile? -
E di seguito...
- E perchè le banche suggerivano quello variabile quando ben avrebbero dovuto sapere che rates, and therefore the rate would be increased? -
And then ...
- not that, "by chance", the banks have more "interest" in mortgages with variable than with fixed ones? -
So, final question ...
- E 'or not (but of course it is!) The fault of banks (the rich and unscrupulous) where now there are people / families (poor and uneducated, but in good faith) that are no longer able to cope with the rate always heavier?
Guess what they say about the various guests of the show?
say that, in fact, banks have advised that one should not suggest, that the variable rate is better than the fixed one because it protects the increases rates, whereas today the Italians (obviously more aware of the "scam") sign in the ground fixed-rate mortgages ... so ...
VIEW CONFIRMED!
The variable rate was a "scam", the banks knew, but they have "pushed" to make money on the "poor, ignorant, needy and in good faith.
What a shame!
But, I say, is that perhaps this argument implies that the Italians signed an adjustable rate mortgage, as well as being ignorant and in good faith, are also lobotomized?
people who can not understand and therefore not even want to? (And why would they still have the right to vote and then drive the car if that is their condition? )
lobotomized Why? because it is' credible that an adult, able to read and write, immersed up to their necks in the enclosed mass in the information in real time at your "click" when subscribing to a loan equivalent to hundreds of millions of Lira, who was in debt for the next 15, 20, and that has definitely signed reams of "information sheets" containing the "causes of risk, which banks are obliged by law to deliver to the customer but the customer regularly DO NOT READ ... NO 'CREDIBLE, I said, this person was not aware of any loans fixed rate and the difference between these and the floating rate.
NOT 'credibility ...
unless ...
unless you assume that that person is really "stupid", that is seriously deficient in cognitive skills and understanding.
Incidentally, the variable rate is calculated by the banks based on a reference rate (often the Euribor) to which the bank adds its real gain ... the spread (which could also be less than 1%);
The fixed rate, however, is calculated based on forecasts of trends in variable rate over the period covered by the mortgage, so, especially if the forecast is upward, The fixed rate is NECESSARILY higher than the variable ... and is also the gain that the bank is seeking, since it bears the risk of having granted a fixed rate for the lowest rate of any effects that were to occur tomorrow.
From the standpoint of the bank's floating rate that is fixed as, an Italian who wanted to bring in their savings, the Bills are the actions, the first guaranteed but give little in time, the latter can give a lot .. . if the forecasts are hit!.
To summarize, five years ago, who wanted to sign a twenty-year mortgage, certainly knew of the existence of fixed-rate mortgages (unless, as I said above, was not "deficient") and certainly is will be made to more than one proposal for more than a bank, and undoubtedly will have realized that the payment rate of fixed rate mortgage was substantially higher than the floating rate.
So, I say, departing from the assumption that, yes him incapable of understanding and will exist, but most of those who enter into contracts are not and can not be ... is not that, "by chance" the Italians, at that time, they preferred the adjustable rate mortgage because "it is better to spend a little today ... tomorrow we'll see?" (And "I hope that I manage).
And after the arrival of the euro and the slowdown in the economy (if not stagnation in the Italian case) the future could easily be at the mezzanine ... but very, very slow.
And then, with the floating rate, the bank will earn the same spread ... if that spread was considered fair and acceptable five years ago, why now should no longer be?
He also has a bank or the right and duty to make money on the loan (mortgage) who gives?
Even if the mortgage is the axiom "Security costs ..." and his assumption "that cost ... and surely someone will pay.
security given by fixed rate mortgage has a cost ...
then, if the Italians who chose adjustable rate mortgage, they consciously chose not to pay, we must perforza search for a culprit?
The contradiction now is this: Will
saving rate variable and then complain of not having the safety of the fixed one.
Greetings e. ..
good nonsense at all.
0 comments:
Post a Comment