How about we call it nothing because it's a bad idea. Using government to 'balance the scales' is just wrong on every level. Let's use a scenario:

Me and Marty work at the Widget factory earning the same amount of money and have similar credit scores and debt to income ratios. In every aspect we have similar financial situations, married with 1.8 children, a couple of cars and the typical household bills (except Marty has this strange corset fetish, but that's another story).

At around the same time we both decide to purchase homes. One day as we're discussing mortgages, we discover our rates are not similar considering our nearly equal financial factors. I'm paying substantially less because Marty's father was ambitious, productive and a good provider for his family while mine was an alcoholic who didn't work and cared little about providing for his family. Furthermore, I get an additional discount because my wife, who didn't even grow up in this country, also experienced a destitute childhood. In what ways did our upbringing have any factor on our ability to acquire and honor the obligations of a mortgage as adults established in the workforce? Providing aid to young people for the opportunity to get out of poverty is one thing. Retroactively aiding adults for a poor childhood is misguided at best. In what world does this seem remotely fair?

---