War and property mortgage you still need to pay If war destroy your Property

[Uruhara]

If you are in a country filled with conflict that could endanger our property, such as war or something like that. So of course it would be better if we transferred our wealth to things that we can carry freely wherever we go. Storing it in Bitcoin and stable coins can indeed be the right choice in a very critical situation such as during a war. But if we live in a peaceful country and far from all conflicts. So I prefer to maintain my ownership in more property. And the rest in Bitcoin. So this will depend on the situation and conditions where we live. It depends on the comfort and safety of where we live.

[inthelongrun]

Yes, you can sell your property or return it to the bank if you are expecting that war will rage your place. But you also have to take note that you will be losing part of your investment when selling or returning it to the bank. The open market, especially the bank are experts in assessing properties including an upcoming war so they will definitely take a huge chunk of value to your property.

Imagine paying a portion of the property and then only to find out that its value is like nothing already. It is for you to decide. After the war, you still won the property if you continued paying for it. And in case of a war, banks will of course pause the payments so there will be no penalties. So it is for you to decide since you are more familiar with your place and its situation.

[Taskford]

There is no rule that war Will make free of mortgage payments.
Now it's better to own only cryptocurrency becouse crypto is untouchble by war and you can take it with you If you move in world.
Now it's not good own nothing i sell everything now and put in stablecoins and btc.
Now it's better to give your Property back to bank instead of owning i have mortgage i told my bank take it i Dont need i'll just rent apartment and hold most of my wealth in crypto.
Imagine war will destroy your Property and you still have mortgage better IS to give mortgage property to bank let them have it.

Nobody dont protect your wealth If not protect yourself safety first.

I think that the only way of protecting your property is buying and hodling bitcoin. The only property that in fact you can own and take it to any part of the planet is bitcoin. The world is suffering a coletivism epidemy, which is a really path to the war. Even a pacific country is not safe for suffering the damages.

Just consider it as a lost if your property has been destroyed in war since for sure no one will take charge to pay those damages after the war that's why we can consider it as a huge lose in our side. If this incident will happen then we can't do anything with it, that's why its important for us to have multiple source to roll out or gain some better profit that can help us out on critical situations. Maybe bitcoin is really a best to have for sort of security but we should not put any huge amount in one investment only since we might lose all of it if somethings fail to come up.

Better invest on other assets like gold or even other more property away from conflicted cities so that people can handle the current issues and crisis what people facing on.

[jaberwock]

This is why diversification is the key on your investments and properties. I personally wouldn't invest on properties that are located near conflicted territories because the value of the properties will obviously depreciate, plus there is a huge possibility that the property will be destroyed or damaged when conflict arises. Better invest on properties that are far from these hotspots, and don't build something on it, just buy it as a parcel of land and wait for its value to appreciate.

Ah yeah, the good old " diversification ", so that when one fails we still have the other. The only advantage of investing a property on riskier areas is that their price could be cheaper but who knows right?

Maybe something better can happen on that area soon like it will be free from wars. That is also the time that our investment can rise high and can now be ready for selling. Properties which are free from big risk, can cost a little higher but it is still possible to recover our capital and make profits on it as long as we know how to patiently HODL. We can also choose to build something under it. Don't worry, as wars are less likely to occur in that zone.

[tjtonmoy]

Owning cryptocurrency does not give you safety from war. The first thing you need to seek is safety of your own. If you are not around to be in the future then owning property or cryptocurrency does not mean anything. It's a risk that you have to take if you are facing a war. Your device, your data and everything that you own could get destroyed in a war. If there's a potential that your country will get into war or is already in a war, then it is wise to have something that you can carry to any place. I think this is where cryptocurrency could play a major role. Other than that putting everything into one investment or saving is foolish.

Life is uncertain and anything could happen at any time. We cannot see the future but can prepare for it. If you think that someday what will happen and you don't want to expand your investment into other things then you can never grow. I always say this and I will say it again, when you have the option to choose both then why should you stick to only one? Investing into only one thing makes it more risky and anything happening to that investment could lead to losing everything.

Depending on the situation, cryptocurrency could be your best choice. But if the situation is not bad then you should consider investing in multiple sector to improve financial condition and get more profit.

[Antotena]

 I think that if it is mortgaged to the government and you have to pay it no matter what happens to your land or property, if there is a war and it affects your property, causing it to be damaged, you have no choice but to pay it anyway.

  Or, depending on what was written in the terms of the agreement at the time you mortgaged it, Maybe if your property is insured, you can recover the cost of the damage caused by the war to your property from your pledge if it is included in your terms of agreement. But usually, it is not covered by insurance, especially if it is damaged in war.

But there are other things like this situation you may see anyway here's the link below
https://ti-ukraine.org/en/news/money-or-housing-certificate-compensation-for-property-destroyed-by-war/

I don't think there is a rule of law guiding that but perhaps there some in some countries that experience war, I don't think a country that has long gone into war (after wwII) will have that in mind but just as you have said, when if it is the government that mortgage out the property and later experienced war, they might reduce some money or even forget about because in serious war, there could be casualties and you don't expect people that are mourning to come pay you, Isn't that what the government was form for? at least have some sympathy. However, if it was a company and there is an agreement, I don't think they might want to let go but incase they sue you to court, the judge will cannot be harsh on the person, nobody pray for war isn't.

@OP In war, the most precious thing people look out for is food, house and medication, people that are affected by war don't need investment, they need how to survive. The only place investment comes is after the war has stop or maybe before the war, that's the only best way you can advice any person for investment.

[Biznesmen]

There is no rule that war Will make free of mortgage payments.
Now it's better to own only cryptocurrency becouse crypto is untouchble by war and you can take it with you If you move in world.
Now it's not good own nothing i sell everything now and put in stablecoins and btc.
Now it's better to give your Property back to bank instead of owning i have mortgage i told my bank take it i Dont need i'll just rent apartment and hold most of my wealth in crypto.
Imagine war will destroy your Property and you still have mortgage better IS to give mortgage property to bank let them have it.

Nobody dont protect your wealth If not protect yourself safety first.

Expecting a foreseen future is appreciated, but in my opinion, you should be more optimistic rather than blame your own government. If it's a war-prone area, then my bad; I don't have any clue about that situation. In those areas, people who have stable governments, economies, and social conditions should get rid of this mindset. Don't you think it's a really stupid idea to put your whole or a major part of your share in one investment option? Let me be clear here: even if it's the least risky and highest return, you have to avoid this kind of strategy, and don't you see the future of crypto currencies even when you can foresee it in your own political system?

[lombok]

It depends on where we live, if we live in a country that is not a war zone, isn't owning a house better than renting?
That might also be a good idea, but you also have to think about other factors too. The most important thing here is the cryptocurrency investment point. And it's also best not to go all in on crypto, if something happens that endangers crypto, this will also have a big impact on us if crypto is our only savings. Diversification is the best.

[Mpamaegbu]

Now it's better to own only cryptocurrency becouse crypto is untouchble by war and you can take it with you If you move in world.

You think that crypto is untouchable during a war situation because it's not a physical commodity/goods, but wait till you lose assess to where you kept your PKey or Passphrase. Of a truth, this is more likely to happen during wars as people are fleeing their homes for safety and can easily drop or forget stuff like that.

Now it's better to give your Property back to bank instead of owning i have mortgage i told my bank take it i Dont need i'll just rent apartment and hold most of my wealth in crypto.

I'm not really sure I understand what you meant there. If by any chance you meant to reveal to your bank that you owned cryptos, that will be a bad idea.

Summarily, during wars, people think more of their safety and survival than business.

[God bless u]

I just think that everything has certain risk as your property can be destroyed by war so cryptocurrency can also become less valuable instead of its untouchable feature. Although there is a risk with property to be destroy during war so it does not means that if you are selecting crypto then it will be present through out the life. Don't get fear due to risk but try to focus on reducing risk and find a solution because there always an issue in every way so solving issue can only minimize your loss.

If you are in fear that your money will be lost which you have spent on property due to war then try to move away from that places where there is a possibility of war so your property and you both will be saved. War can also impact your bitcoin investment and life has no guarantee so if bitcoin holders dies then he will not take his bitcoin with him and his family will also not use this bitcoin as its a digital money and it requires key information which is not accessible for everyone.

[Bushdark]

There is no rule that war Will make free of mortgage payments.
Now it's better to own only cryptocurrency becouse crypto is untouchble by war and you can take it with you If you move in world.
Now it's not good own nothing i sell everything now and put in stablecoins and btc.
Now it's better to give your Property back to bank instead of owning i have mortgage i told my bank take it i Dont need i'll just rent apartment and hold most of my wealth in crypto.
Imagine war will destroy your Property and you still have mortgage better IS to give mortgage property to bank let them have it.

Nobody dont protect your wealth If not protect yourself safety first.

Wow I think this is a good idea based on your interest for cryptocurrency. In time of war, we all know that anything can happen and we might even lose the book or file where we keep our wallet information. War is not something we thing to talk about our expect because the damage can be even worse than the ordinary thing we ever thought about. It is good to invest in cryptocurrency but that does not mean that we are not going to own a property or buy our favorite cars when we have the funds to buy whatsoever we want.

[arimamib]

I don't think there is a rule of law guiding that but perhaps there some in some countries that experience war, I don't think a country that has long gone into war (after wwII) will have that in mind but just as you have said, when if it is the government that mortgage out the property and later experienced war, they might reduce some money or even forget about because in serious war, there could be casualties and you don't expect people that are mourning to come pay you, Isn't that what the government was form for? at least have some sympathy. However, if it was a company and there is an agreement, I don't think they might want to let go but incase they sue you to court, the judge will cannot be harsh on the person, nobody pray for war isn't.

It is understandable for governments and lenders to be more lenient towards borrowing countries who are unable to make their mortgage payments due to the hardships of war. War can cause significant disruption to people's lives, and it is unreasonable to expect them to prioritize debt payment over their immediate needs for food, shelter, and medical care. In many cases, governments and lenders will offer temporary measures to help borrowers cope with the challenges of war. These measures can provide borrowers with breathing room and help them to get back on their feet once the war is over.

In the case of government-backed mortgages, probably the government will be willing to waive or reduce the debt. This is because the government has a vested interest in ensuring that its citizens are able to rebuild their lives after the war. For private mortgages, the situation is more complex. Private lenders are generally bound by the terms of their contracts. In some cases, private lenders may even consider taking a loss in order to avoid seizuring on a property that is destroyed by the war.

[Argoo]

Yes, you can sell your property or return it to the bank if you are expecting that war will rage your place. But you also have to take note that you will be losing part of your investment when selling or returning it to the bank. The open market, especially the bank are experts in assessing properties including an upcoming war so they will definitely take a huge chunk of value to your property.

Imagine paying a portion of the property and then only to find out that its value is like nothing already. It is for you to decide. After the war, you still won the property if you continued paying for it. And in case of a war, banks will of course pause the payments so there will be no penalties. So it is for you to decide since you are more familiar with your place and its situation.

Wars, as a rule, begin unexpectedly, or there is not enough time to alienate one’s property in a dangerous zone, or it is no longer possible to do this for a number of reasons. Therefore, the majority of the civilian population in any case suffers from the destruction of their real estate by war.

Now in Ukraine, the Russian army is destroying 90 percent of the majority of settlements that it conquers. Civilians can't do anything about it. It is impossible to sell your property in a combat zone because no one is buying it, given the too great risk of its destruction in the future.

[coupable]

If you live in or near of a conflict country, you shouldn't own a property because the risk of losing it is high. Since the risk of owning property is high in a conflict country, but the interesting fact is the property price in Palestine [1] and Israel [2] are high, how it's possible?

They might able to protect their wealth through Bitcoin, but you're forget if them aka civilians can't leave the country and they need to join the war.

It is not surprising that Israel is one of the most expensive regions for real estate because it is a tourist country and tourist activities always raise the value of real estate (perhaps this is not the case today due to the conflict with Hamas and Hezbollah), but it is difficult to explain the reason for the high cost of real estate in occupied Palestine, and I mean here. West Bank cities, even though it is an area of ongoing conflict.
In my opinion, the only thing that explains this is that the properties are owned by Israeli settlers who raise their prices so that no one can buy them, especially the Palestinians who own the land. Or that its owners are Palestinians who raise prices because there are Israelis who are always ready to buy with the aim of possessing as much land as possible. This applies to agricultural land just as it applies to real estate.

[gunhell16]

If the land that you say you bought, as far as I know, we still have to pay the amelar there every year, but if it is not fully paid, we have nothing to do, but we still have to pay it until we pay it in full, of course.

There is also nothing in the contract that says that if the house we built is destroyed by the war but the land is still there, we still have the responsibility to pay for the mortgaged land. And crypto investment is another matter.

[DrBeer]

If you live in or near of a conflict country, you shouldn't own a property because the risk of losing it is high. Since the risk of owning property is high in a conflict country, but the interesting fact is the property price in Palestine [1] and Israel [2] are high, how it's possible?

They might able to protect their wealth through Bitcoin, but you're forget if them aka civilians can't leave the country and they need to join the war.

It is not surprising that Israel is one of the most expensive regions for real estate because it is a tourist country and tourist activities always raise the value of real estate (perhaps this is not the case today due to the conflict with Hamas and Hezbollah), but it is difficult to explain the reason for the high cost of real estate in occupied Palestine, and I mean here. West Bank cities, even though it is an area of ongoing conflict.
In my opinion, the only thing that explains this is that the properties are owned by Israeli settlers who raise their prices so that no one can buy them, especially the Palestinians who own the land. Or that its owners are Palestinians who raise prices because there are Israelis who are always ready to buy with the aim of possessing as much land as possible. This applies to agricultural land just as it applies to real estate.

I beg to differ. And there are arguments for that.
1. the territory of Israel is very small
2. The density is very high
These 2 nuances form the HIGH price of real estate.
This price is high for the residents of Israel, and for people who want to buy there, regardless of nationality.  Population density, according to the rating - 14 in the world ! I have my friends living there, several families, ages 30 to 45, and are still forced to live with their parents, because the price is very high. Mortgage loans are from 15 to 30 years, with mortgage interest from 3 to 5% (correct me if I'm wrong). While wages in Israel can not be called very high, provided that the cost of living - on the contrary, quite high.

Bottom line: No conspiracy against Palestinian real estate buyers, just such a market situation

[coupable]

If you live in or near of a conflict country, you shouldn't own a property because the risk of losing it is high. Since the risk of owning property is high in a conflict country, but the interesting fact is the property price in Palestine [1] and Israel [2] are high, how it's possible?

They might able to protect their wealth through Bitcoin, but you're forget if them aka civilians can't leave the country and they need to join the war.

It is not surprising that Israel is one of the most expensive regions for real estate because it is a tourist country and tourist activities always raise the value of real estate (perhaps this is not the case today due to the conflict with Hamas and Hezbollah), but it is difficult to explain the reason for the high cost of real estate in occupied Palestine, and I mean here. West Bank cities, even though it is an area of ongoing conflict.
In my opinion, the only thing that explains this is that the properties are owned by Israeli settlers who raise their prices so that no one can buy them, especially the Palestinians who own the land. Or that its owners are Palestinians who raise prices because there are Israelis who are always ready to buy with the aim of possessing as much land as possible. This applies to agricultural land just as it applies to real estate.

I beg to differ. And there are arguments for that.
1. the territory of Israel is very small
2. The density is very high
These 2 nuances form the HIGH price of real estate.
This price is high for the residents of Israel, and for people who want to buy there, regardless of nationality.  Population density, according to the rating - 14 in the world ! I have my friends living there, several families, ages 30 to 45, and are still forced to live with their parents, because the price is very high. Mortgage loans are from 15 to 30 years, with mortgage interest from 3 to 5% (correct me if I'm wrong). While wages in Israel can not be called very high, provided that the cost of living - on the contrary, quite high.

Bottom line: No conspiracy against Palestinian real estate buyers, just such a market situation

According to a report published by the timesofisrael website, it was recorded that house prices rose by 118% over a decade in the same circumstance that the government announced that there were 4 times more empty houses than before. This makes Israel one of the leading countries worldwide in empty apartments per capita. These figures, which show four times the number of empty apartments previously estimated, provide statistical explanations for those who see a link between the rise in foreign investment in Israeli real estate and the rise in Israeli housing prices. I do not exclude the phenomenon of money laundering, most of which is borne by the real estate market.
Therefore, Israel is a tourist and investment destination as well because its real estate market is booming and it is a preferred destination for foreign capital.

[milewilda]

There is no rule that war Will make free of mortgage payments.
Now it's better to own only cryptocurrency becouse crypto is untouchble by war and you can take it with you If you move in world.
Now it's not good own nothing i sell everything now and put in stablecoins and btc.
Now it's better to give your Property back to bank instead of owning i have mortgage i told my bank take it i Dont need i'll just rent apartment and hold most of my wealth in crypto.
Imagine war will destroy your Property and you still have mortgage better IS to give mortgage property to bank let them have it.

Nobody dont protect your wealth If not protect yourself safety first.

This is something that you do need to think if you are really that living into a war prone kind of country on which it would really be normal that you would really be thinking about those things and probabilities
but if you are someone who had been living on a place or country on which war isnt something that could happen then you would really be that confident on having those mortgages on which it is something that
make ourselves that be able to own a property. Who doesnt really want on buying up something specially their own house or other similar investment?

If ever you are living on a country which war is something that could happen then i do believe that there might be some chance that you could really be able to make some counteract
if ever your house is been destroyed because of war. I dont know on such processes but it would be impossible that they would be forcing you to pay on a mortgage
that is something that you cant really be able to live with.

[Fortify]

There is no rule that war Will make free of mortgage payments.
Now it's better to own only cryptocurrency becouse crypto is untouchble by war and you can take it with you If you move in world.
Now it's not good own nothing i sell everything now and put in stablecoins and btc.
Now it's better to give your Property back to bank instead of owning i have mortgage i told my bank take it i Dont need i'll just rent apartment and hold most of my wealth in crypto.
Imagine war will destroy your Property and you still have mortgage better IS to give mortgage property to bank let them have it.

Nobody dont protect your wealth If not protect yourself safety first.

There's a few things wrong with your assessment. First off, if you're in a war where your home is getting destroyed then it's quite possible the banks in your country are in a war time economy and will barely be holding together the most basic transaction activity. They will be forced by the government not to charge people who have lost their homes in such a manner, or a competent government would set up a compensation scheme to held cover this emergency situation, if they cannot manage that then you are quite possibly losing the war. There's no chance that a population would accept such a situation and the government would fear an uprising if banks forced people to pay while facing ruin like this. There would likely be some sort of communal insurance fund set up to compensate people who have lost their home in the war, as most insurance operators would leave the market.

[AmoreJaz]

There's a few things wrong with your assessment. First off, if you're in a war where your home is getting destroyed then it's quite possible the banks in your country are in a war time economy and will barely be holding together the most basic transaction activity. They will be forced by the government not to charge people who have lost their homes in such a manner, or a competent government would set up a compensation scheme to held cover this emergency situation, if they cannot manage that then you are quite possibly losing the war. There's no chance that a population would accept such a situation and the government would fear an uprising if banks forced people to pay while facing ruin like this. There would likely be some sort of communal insurance fund set up to compensate people who have lost their home in the war, as most insurance operators would leave the market.

that is true, i don't think banks will be thinking of collecting the mortgage if your country is at war. also, after the war is over, they will be lenient as no one can easily recover unless, they have other riches stash outside of their country.
do take note that not all individuals have the capability or the interest to invest in this market. so you can't expect them to think about crypto when they are at war.
also, if you are indeed in the war zone, insurance, banks and all the other businesses may find it hard to secure their papers and all. just think that if one of the banks have been bombarded by a bomb. what do you think will happen to their clients' funds or assets?