patrick.net

Yes, with housing, student loans, and crazy unregulated medical bills, the entire goal is to trap as many people as possible with debt.

Once you are in debt, then lenders can threaten you with eviction, garnishment of wages, etc. So you must work for them.

It's all about control over labor. Your slavery is their freedom.

Patrick says

Yes, with housing, student loans, and crazy unregulated medical bills, the entire goal is to trap as many people as possible with debt.

Once you are in debt, then lenders can threaten you with eviction, garnishment of wages, etc. So you must work for them.

It's all about control over labor. Your slavery is their freedom.

Pretty damn good comment Patrick.

Yep, sucker people into debt and then fuck them into debt slavery forever.

Patrick says

Yes, with housing, student loans, and crazy unregulated medical bills, the entire goal is to trap as many people as possible with debt.

Once you are in debt, then lenders can threaten you with eviction, garnishment of wages, etc. So you must work for them.

It's all about control over labor. Your slavery is their freedom.

Patrick says

Yes, with housing, student loans, and crazy unregulated medical bills, the entire goal is to trap as many people as possible with debt.

One great method: Feminism.

$20,000-$50,000 Weddings were once reserved only for high nobility and nouveau riche.
The "6 months" salary ring was unheard of, it was uncommon to have any ring, and most had a bronze band - only for the woman.
The push to buy too much house usually comes from the Vagina bearer.
Men, more resistant (not immune, just more resistant) to the vanities controlled the income stream.

Patrick says

Yes, with housing, student loans, and crazy unregulated medical bills, the entire goal is to trap as many people as possible with debt.

Once you are in debt, then lenders can threaten you with eviction, garnishment of wages, etc. So you must work for them.

It's all about control over labor. Your slavery is their freedom.

@Patrick - good comment. One additional point:

Even if you have no debt, you can be threatened with eviction. Renters are evicted more often than owners. They got us by the balls

True, it's best to own outright if it's a better deal than renting (which is usually not the case in the Bay Area). Though owners still have the infinite-term rents of property tax, insurance, and maintenance.

Owners are more locked in as well. They cannot sell without losing 6% to the realtor mafia. Renters usually have a lot more flexibility, and can move more quickly without much loss beyond the inconvenience. The commitment for renters is much lower.

Patrick says

True, it's best to own outright if it's a better deal than renting (which is usually not the case in the Bay Area). Though owners still have the infinite-term rents of property tax, insurance, and maintenance.

Owners are more locked in as well. They cannot sell without losing 6% to the realtor mafia. Renters usually have a lot more flexibility, and can move more quickly without much loss beyond the inconvenience. The commitment for renters is much lower.

Once you have a spouse with a career of her own and 2-3 kids in school the "flexibility" of renting becomes all but illusion.