>> Michael Smith writes "But look on the bright side. "We" are no longer
>> enslaved, mentally and otherwise, by a mortgage and the insane fetish
>> of "home" ownership."
> Sorry, but I am not really following this thought here, are you really
> saying that it is a good thing that people lose their homes, because
> that will liberate them? Or that it is good that they are poor,
> because that makes them free? I know Diogenes thought so - 'I saw a
> child drink from her hands, and threw my cup away'. But then he slept
> in a barrel and masturbated in the town square.
>
> Home ownership is not an insane fetish, it is one of the ways that
> people meet their need for a roof over their heads.
Prostrating myself before usurers for the privilege of borrowing money at interest to engage in real estate speculation never seemed to have anything to do with shelter to me. It always seemed to me, and was always *presented* to me, as being a path to wealth, a way to own a "piece of the rock", never as "get inside, it's raining".