Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like most folks can barely avoid the monthly payment on a 30Y fixed; wouldn't 10Y being the norm just cause a lot of people to be unable to buy at all?
I don't know. The question is whether subsidizing 30Y mortgages (fannie mae/freddie mac/FHA/QE/standard terms enforced by law to enable refinancing, etc.) is the right policy in an open system where it has many major side effects, compared to other ways to adjust housing policy. For reference, Canada has no 30Y fixed mortgages - instead they have 5-10Y fixed terms and distinguish between prepayment for refinancing (e…
I do wonder, if we just had 10Y mortgages, would home prices just crash? People won't buy what they can't afford (I mean, sure, they do to some extent, but not if their monthly payment would double), so sellers might just be forced to sell for less. The first "generation" of 10Y-only mortgages would be disastrous for current owners, as their existing 30Y mortgages would be underwater. Or maybe people just would stop moving...
I just glanced at the article you linked, and realized I'd read it back when it was posted, and agreed with its conclusions. I just don't know what the solution is.