@Scott1457 Disgusting? You don't understand this at all. Let me make it simple for you to understand.
You book Happy Home on the Lake for one night at $200/ night. You choose the pay half up front option. So you put down $100. You find you have to cancel and are due a 50% refund. Half of the $200 booking cost is $100, so you don't get refunded anything. You are out $100 and the host gets $100 (because your booking blocked their calendar from getting other bookings for that day).
Joe books Happy Home on the Lake, also for $200, but Joe pays for the booking in full. Joe has to cancel. Joe is due back 50%, just like you were. But Joe gets a refund of $100, because he paid the entire cost upfront. So Joe, just like you, is out $100, and just like with your cancellation, the host receives $100.
Both you and Joe are out of pocket $100.
Why do you think that just because you took advantage of being able to pay only half up front, that you should receive a larger refund than Joe, when you both booked the same place, for the same price?
How would it be fair if cancelling meant you are only out of pocket $50 and Joe is out of pocket $100?
The inconvenience to the host is the same in both cases- the bookings blocked their calendars and they may very well not have time to get another booking for those dates, resulting in a loss oof income for the host. So why should the host have a loss of income of $100 in Joe's case and a $150 loss of income in your case?
The pay less upfront option is simply a convenience offered to guests so they don't have to come up with the full cost of the reservation all at once. It isn't a method of receiving a larger refund if you cancel than a guest who chose to pay for the entire reservation when they booked.