[quote=pabloesqobar]
I disagree with you, Davelj. And if all the contract said was “I promise to pay”, then I may even agree with you. But, it says much more than that. Enough, in fact, to completely protect the person who made the “promise to pay”. The banks made certain promises in that contract too. Promises that limit their remedy to recovery of the property that was the collateral. Those are the default promises that most real estate contracts contain – contracts that weren’t drafted by attorneys representing individual buyers of single family homes.
“Breaking your word” is akin to breaching a contract. Many of our laws, including contract law, have their roots in fairness and morality. Most times when one party to a contract “breaks their word”, they can be sued in court to recover damages. Not so in most real estate contracts. Because they aren’t breaking their word.[/quote]
Let me summarize your argument here: What’s legal is moral. (If the contract allows for it, then it is legal and therefore also moral.) And I disagree with this position. Call me crazy, but I think legality and morality are two different issues.
I think we’ll find that most of what Goldman did during the crisis was legal. Do you think we’ll also find that it was moral? Do you distinguish between the two?
[quote=pabloesqobar]
By the way, who determines when any particular person/family “is tapped out” enough to get a moral pass in your book? Is there a specific formula? [/quote]
Sure. When their current income can’t support the payments and they’re down to their last $5K. That’s just off the top of my head.
