The vase breaking makes no sense

The whole 'this is your house'-scene always rubbed me the wrong way. There's just SO much wrong with it.

First, they didn't have Eddie's character sign any papers, so technically, the house does not belong to him - sure, a verbal contract is valid, but without a written contract with signatures and witnesses, notarization and so on, it's basically his word against theirs, so realistically, no.

Second, if it's _HIS_ house and _HIS_ vase, how are THEY going to make profit from him breaking the vase? How does this work, exactly?

Third, the insurance company would have some QUESTIONS, if a vase they insured for 50 000 (that cost much less, which is basically a fraud anyway) suddenly breaks. From their perspective, it looks like the old geezers hired someone to break it. I mean, they GIVE this house to someone, and that individual proceeds to break the vase. If I was the insurance company, I wouldn't pay that without a THOROUGH investigation. That's a lot of money in the 1980s.

Fourth, if it's HIS house, then why would THEY care whether he trashes the place completely or not or anything inbetween? They have nothing to do with it, it's not THEIR house anymore, right? So why are they SO keen on him not breaking anything further? It makes no sense. They should say 'go ahead and do whatever you want, after all, it's YOUR house'.

How does insurance transfer work anyway? I mean, it's not THEIR insurance anymore, it's EDDIE's character's insurance, right? Because the house does not belong to the rich bros, then the insurance is Eddie's as well. Shouldn't _THAT_ require some signatures with the insurance company?

To add, a homeless individual wouldn't treat his house so 'royally' immediately. Come on, you are broke, homeless, trying to peddle and scam people on the streets on a cold winter's day. Suddenly you're given a house. Would you _REALLY_ care whether someone leaves a cigarette burn on the carpet or doesn't use a coaster for their drink on the table?

There's even a real-world example of something like this - sort of. A youtuber called 'Magicofrahat' ('Rahat' ironically meaning 'moneys' in a nordic language - as in 'money' in plural) gave a homeless guy a house, and he proceeded to complain about some gas leak and wanting to live in a hotel instead and being driven in a limo everywhere.

This guy wouldn't have cared what his 'friends' did to the house, as long as he could egoboast with his new fortune as much as possible and flex all those tens of thousands away (as he did).

Eddie's character, when having that party, would have just let loose, party on, and not care about the house, he would've let anything and everything happen, get high, booze, smoke and be a PART of tearing down the whole place without a worry in the world. You don't change from a 'greedy homeless drug user' to a 'classy homeowner that cares about coasters' in one second, damnit. He would still have had the homeless mentality and instead of thinking of the future, he would've just kept going on a moment-to-moment basis, just like the 'Magicofrahat' youtube channel showed us.

A homeless guy doesn't turn into a 'regular, hard-working man' just because you give him a house, money, or even get him a job. He never worked much in that arranged job and had to be fired. You can't change someone just by material wealth, it's a much deeper situation than that.

That's why you don't REALLY help the homeless just by giving them material stuff, that's like pouring water into a bottomless barrel, it just flows through and nothing remains. That's why they are homeless in the first place (not always, of course, there are 'innocent victims' (not karmically, of course) amidst them, but Eddie's character didn't seem like one of those).

The whole thing is just _SO_ nonsensical as to how it's portrayed in the movie. Sure, he may have enjoyed the bubble bath (or 'whirlpool bath'), but there's NO WAY he would've CARED about the house one bit, and he would definitely have let his friends trash the place, and he'd have been part of it. Maybe after weeks or months of living there, he could've developed some 'pride of house-ownership', but the FIRST god damn day he would not have cared.

It's like a lottery winner - they are NOT going to go to stock market and invest wisely, they are not going to play the house market, they are not going to 'stabilize' their life with this good fortune, make wise purchases and investments. No.

They are going to go to the first high-class restaurant they see and have a huge party, and spend hundreds of thousands on trivial, superficial, useless crap the first couple of weeks. They are going on cruises and holidays and buy cars and blingbling and houses and helicopters and party and 'live it up', until all the money is gone.

Then, and ONLY then are they gonna stop to wonder what happened. Especially if female - statistically speaking. Women don't generally make wise financial decisions, they have the THICK glass floor.