Amazing.
Alan Greenspan was a cheerleader (at least, as much as a Fed Chair can be) for tapping home equity. Or as he termed it, "previously unrecognized borrowing capacities". And the banks listened. I remember opening my first bank account when I was 15 or 16. Pre-crisis. Everywhere in the branch, I saw, "HELOC!" Commercials lit up the airwaves, encouraging you to borrow against your home equity.
Needless to say, Greenspan's behavior on this has aged very poorly.
Leveraging your home equity is just that; leveraging. It's a calculated risk. It can certainly work out, as it has for my brother. As it has for members of this forum, I'm sure. But to act as if we've discovered some sort of arbitrage opportunity here, when the downside risk should be so fresh in our minds...
If I can stump for a minute, Forbes is a garbage publication. It may have at one time, been respected. Maybe back in the 1980s, but that's before my time. They're now in the business of harvesting clicks. If you don't believe me, go to the website and look at how far down the option to pay a subscription fee is. They know that what they're selling is of little value to the end reader. The chief value they create is attracting eyeballs to advertisements.
It's why they let on so many guest contributors with hot takes. It's why they put Kylie Jenner on the cover recently and called her a self-made billionaire, despite the fact that they did little in the way of verifying her company's revenue. They're trolling people into a reaction. "How dare they call Kylie Jenner "self made"?". That's their product. That reaction. And they sell that reaction to advertisers.
Compare this to The Economist. Go to their website, and you'll see a subscription banner right at the top, and paywalls galore. That's because they know there's value in what they're writing.
But enough ax grinding :)