- This topic has 215 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
patientrenter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 1, 2009 at 12:30 PM #424085July 1, 2009 at 12:38 PM #423354
jpinpb
ParticipantTrash the kitchen? I vaguely remember reading somewhere that some guy mowed down his whole house, claiming he was going to remodel, but ran out of money. This was after the NOD and threat of foreclosure. I haven’t heard anything more of that, but I’m thinking he got away w/it. I mean, think about this. If you want to remodel your kitchen, you don’t have to ask the bank’s permission.
Perhaps legal. Not ethical. Gosh. Are we disputing the lack of ethics after this whole bubble seemed based on it?
July 1, 2009 at 12:38 PM #423585ParticipantTrash the kitchen? I vaguely remember reading somewhere that some guy mowed down his whole house, claiming he was going to remodel, but ran out of money. This was after the NOD and threat of foreclosure. I haven’t heard anything more of that, but I’m thinking he got away w/it. I mean, think about this. If you want to remodel your kitchen, you don’t have to ask the bank’s permission.
Perhaps legal. Not ethical. Gosh. Are we disputing the lack of ethics after this whole bubble seemed based on it?
July 1, 2009 at 12:38 PM #423862ParticipantTrash the kitchen? I vaguely remember reading somewhere that some guy mowed down his whole house, claiming he was going to remodel, but ran out of money. This was after the NOD and threat of foreclosure. I haven’t heard anything more of that, but I’m thinking he got away w/it. I mean, think about this. If you want to remodel your kitchen, you don’t have to ask the bank’s permission.
Perhaps legal. Not ethical. Gosh. Are we disputing the lack of ethics after this whole bubble seemed based on it?
July 1, 2009 at 12:38 PM #423931ParticipantTrash the kitchen? I vaguely remember reading somewhere that some guy mowed down his whole house, claiming he was going to remodel, but ran out of money. This was after the NOD and threat of foreclosure. I haven’t heard anything more of that, but I’m thinking he got away w/it. I mean, think about this. If you want to remodel your kitchen, you don’t have to ask the bank’s permission.
Perhaps legal. Not ethical. Gosh. Are we disputing the lack of ethics after this whole bubble seemed based on it?
July 1, 2009 at 12:38 PM #424095ParticipantTrash the kitchen? I vaguely remember reading somewhere that some guy mowed down his whole house, claiming he was going to remodel, but ran out of money. This was after the NOD and threat of foreclosure. I haven’t heard anything more of that, but I’m thinking he got away w/it. I mean, think about this. If you want to remodel your kitchen, you don’t have to ask the bank’s permission.
Perhaps legal. Not ethical. Gosh. Are we disputing the lack of ethics after this whole bubble seemed based on it?
July 1, 2009 at 12:59 PM #423374
CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rt.66][quote]XBoxBoy
Banks extort money from people.
They extort 28% APR from you while paying 2% to account holders.
[/quote]
Good point for this thread! How many people are actually getting a feeling of revenge/satisfaction from sticking it to the bankers?
How many of us are both sick and mad at these freeloading bums and at the same time, enjoy seeing the working stiff, stiff the bankers?
Fight Club type debt destruction reset only with mortgages blowing up; not credit card company buildings?
On a related point, I paid off my Bank of Amerika credit card balance last month in full because they hiked my interest rate to the moon (after being a card holder since 1990 with ZERO lates). Today I opened my bill and they were asking for more interest $$ even though I paid before the due date. I call BofA and they say, “oops our bad, we’ll take that off”. Conniving Assholes!
They get all the tax payer funded dollars they like, at zero % interest so they can play like they are solvant and we get the shaft. [/quote]
While there is a lot of blame to be said for banks relaxing leading standards, one forgets that most mortgage applicants are hardly “victims”. No one forced them at gunpoint to take cheap credit and spend beyond their means. It’s pretty simple…If you don’t like the terms of your credit, don’t take the credit. Some people just want to have one’s cake and eat it too.
As far as trashing the place…By all means, go for it. The people get to make it difficult for the banks and the banks get to put a ding on people’s credit. Mutual relationship….Now as a prospective landlord of additional property, this is exactly why I would never rent to someone with spotty credit. If you think some people are willing to trash a place to get out of a contract, just imagine what they’ll do as a tenant… If the collective landlords would simply refuse to rent to folks with spotty credit, it probably would make people think twice about things. Unfortunately, there are probably some knife catchers who need their properties rented, and will just about rent to anyone.
July 1, 2009 at 12:59 PM #423604CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rt.66][quote]XBoxBoy
Banks extort money from people.
They extort 28% APR from you while paying 2% to account holders.
[/quote]
Good point for this thread! How many people are actually getting a feeling of revenge/satisfaction from sticking it to the bankers?
How many of us are both sick and mad at these freeloading bums and at the same time, enjoy seeing the working stiff, stiff the bankers?
Fight Club type debt destruction reset only with mortgages blowing up; not credit card company buildings?
On a related point, I paid off my Bank of Amerika credit card balance last month in full because they hiked my interest rate to the moon (after being a card holder since 1990 with ZERO lates). Today I opened my bill and they were asking for more interest $$ even though I paid before the due date. I call BofA and they say, “oops our bad, we’ll take that off”. Conniving Assholes!
They get all the tax payer funded dollars they like, at zero % interest so they can play like they are solvant and we get the shaft. [/quote]
While there is a lot of blame to be said for banks relaxing leading standards, one forgets that most mortgage applicants are hardly “victims”. No one forced them at gunpoint to take cheap credit and spend beyond their means. It’s pretty simple…If you don’t like the terms of your credit, don’t take the credit. Some people just want to have one’s cake and eat it too.
As far as trashing the place…By all means, go for it. The people get to make it difficult for the banks and the banks get to put a ding on people’s credit. Mutual relationship….Now as a prospective landlord of additional property, this is exactly why I would never rent to someone with spotty credit. If you think some people are willing to trash a place to get out of a contract, just imagine what they’ll do as a tenant… If the collective landlords would simply refuse to rent to folks with spotty credit, it probably would make people think twice about things. Unfortunately, there are probably some knife catchers who need their properties rented, and will just about rent to anyone.
July 1, 2009 at 12:59 PM #423882CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rt.66][quote]XBoxBoy
Banks extort money from people.
They extort 28% APR from you while paying 2% to account holders.
[/quote]
Good point for this thread! How many people are actually getting a feeling of revenge/satisfaction from sticking it to the bankers?
How many of us are both sick and mad at these freeloading bums and at the same time, enjoy seeing the working stiff, stiff the bankers?
Fight Club type debt destruction reset only with mortgages blowing up; not credit card company buildings?
On a related point, I paid off my Bank of Amerika credit card balance last month in full because they hiked my interest rate to the moon (after being a card holder since 1990 with ZERO lates). Today I opened my bill and they were asking for more interest $$ even though I paid before the due date. I call BofA and they say, “oops our bad, we’ll take that off”. Conniving Assholes!
They get all the tax payer funded dollars they like, at zero % interest so they can play like they are solvant and we get the shaft. [/quote]
While there is a lot of blame to be said for banks relaxing leading standards, one forgets that most mortgage applicants are hardly “victims”. No one forced them at gunpoint to take cheap credit and spend beyond their means. It’s pretty simple…If you don’t like the terms of your credit, don’t take the credit. Some people just want to have one’s cake and eat it too.
As far as trashing the place…By all means, go for it. The people get to make it difficult for the banks and the banks get to put a ding on people’s credit. Mutual relationship….Now as a prospective landlord of additional property, this is exactly why I would never rent to someone with spotty credit. If you think some people are willing to trash a place to get out of a contract, just imagine what they’ll do as a tenant… If the collective landlords would simply refuse to rent to folks with spotty credit, it probably would make people think twice about things. Unfortunately, there are probably some knife catchers who need their properties rented, and will just about rent to anyone.
July 1, 2009 at 12:59 PM #423951CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rt.66][quote]XBoxBoy
Banks extort money from people.
They extort 28% APR from you while paying 2% to account holders.
[/quote]
Good point for this thread! How many people are actually getting a feeling of revenge/satisfaction from sticking it to the bankers?
How many of us are both sick and mad at these freeloading bums and at the same time, enjoy seeing the working stiff, stiff the bankers?
Fight Club type debt destruction reset only with mortgages blowing up; not credit card company buildings?
On a related point, I paid off my Bank of Amerika credit card balance last month in full because they hiked my interest rate to the moon (after being a card holder since 1990 with ZERO lates). Today I opened my bill and they were asking for more interest $$ even though I paid before the due date. I call BofA and they say, “oops our bad, we’ll take that off”. Conniving Assholes!
They get all the tax payer funded dollars they like, at zero % interest so they can play like they are solvant and we get the shaft. [/quote]
While there is a lot of blame to be said for banks relaxing leading standards, one forgets that most mortgage applicants are hardly “victims”. No one forced them at gunpoint to take cheap credit and spend beyond their means. It’s pretty simple…If you don’t like the terms of your credit, don’t take the credit. Some people just want to have one’s cake and eat it too.
As far as trashing the place…By all means, go for it. The people get to make it difficult for the banks and the banks get to put a ding on people’s credit. Mutual relationship….Now as a prospective landlord of additional property, this is exactly why I would never rent to someone with spotty credit. If you think some people are willing to trash a place to get out of a contract, just imagine what they’ll do as a tenant… If the collective landlords would simply refuse to rent to folks with spotty credit, it probably would make people think twice about things. Unfortunately, there are probably some knife catchers who need their properties rented, and will just about rent to anyone.
July 1, 2009 at 12:59 PM #424115CoronitaParticipant[quote=Rt.66][quote]XBoxBoy
Banks extort money from people.
They extort 28% APR from you while paying 2% to account holders.
[/quote]
Good point for this thread! How many people are actually getting a feeling of revenge/satisfaction from sticking it to the bankers?
How many of us are both sick and mad at these freeloading bums and at the same time, enjoy seeing the working stiff, stiff the bankers?
Fight Club type debt destruction reset only with mortgages blowing up; not credit card company buildings?
On a related point, I paid off my Bank of Amerika credit card balance last month in full because they hiked my interest rate to the moon (after being a card holder since 1990 with ZERO lates). Today I opened my bill and they were asking for more interest $$ even though I paid before the due date. I call BofA and they say, “oops our bad, we’ll take that off”. Conniving Assholes!
They get all the tax payer funded dollars they like, at zero % interest so they can play like they are solvant and we get the shaft. [/quote]
While there is a lot of blame to be said for banks relaxing leading standards, one forgets that most mortgage applicants are hardly “victims”. No one forced them at gunpoint to take cheap credit and spend beyond their means. It’s pretty simple…If you don’t like the terms of your credit, don’t take the credit. Some people just want to have one’s cake and eat it too.
As far as trashing the place…By all means, go for it. The people get to make it difficult for the banks and the banks get to put a ding on people’s credit. Mutual relationship….Now as a prospective landlord of additional property, this is exactly why I would never rent to someone with spotty credit. If you think some people are willing to trash a place to get out of a contract, just imagine what they’ll do as a tenant… If the collective landlords would simply refuse to rent to folks with spotty credit, it probably would make people think twice about things. Unfortunately, there are probably some knife catchers who need their properties rented, and will just about rent to anyone.
July 1, 2009 at 1:57 PM #423404Hatfield
Participant[quote=CA renter]I fault the govt 100% for the mess they’ve created. What they should have done is stand behind the original FDIC and SIPC insurance, and let the chips fall where they may.[/quote]
I agree, they probably should have left the banks fail and insure the deposits, even the ones above the FDIC limits. Those deposits would then get moved wherever the depositor decides. This would have the effect of recapitalizing the surviving banks, and maybe the gov’t could provide additional capitalization if necessary. And the “toxic assets” of the failed banks would be liquidated at auction. So the market could figure out a value for them, instead of the current case where they’re hidden away in the balance sheets with some bullshit valuation. (Still waiting for THAT shoe to drop.)
I think it would have cost us a lot less money, and left us with a stronger banking system. And we’d have a few more unemployed idiot bankers.
July 1, 2009 at 1:57 PM #423635Participant[quote=CA renter]I fault the govt 100% for the mess they’ve created. What they should have done is stand behind the original FDIC and SIPC insurance, and let the chips fall where they may.[/quote]
I agree, they probably should have left the banks fail and insure the deposits, even the ones above the FDIC limits. Those deposits would then get moved wherever the depositor decides. This would have the effect of recapitalizing the surviving banks, and maybe the gov’t could provide additional capitalization if necessary. And the “toxic assets” of the failed banks would be liquidated at auction. So the market could figure out a value for them, instead of the current case where they’re hidden away in the balance sheets with some bullshit valuation. (Still waiting for THAT shoe to drop.)
I think it would have cost us a lot less money, and left us with a stronger banking system. And we’d have a few more unemployed idiot bankers.
July 1, 2009 at 1:57 PM #423913Participant[quote=CA renter]I fault the govt 100% for the mess they’ve created. What they should have done is stand behind the original FDIC and SIPC insurance, and let the chips fall where they may.[/quote]
I agree, they probably should have left the banks fail and insure the deposits, even the ones above the FDIC limits. Those deposits would then get moved wherever the depositor decides. This would have the effect of recapitalizing the surviving banks, and maybe the gov’t could provide additional capitalization if necessary. And the “toxic assets” of the failed banks would be liquidated at auction. So the market could figure out a value for them, instead of the current case where they’re hidden away in the balance sheets with some bullshit valuation. (Still waiting for THAT shoe to drop.)
I think it would have cost us a lot less money, and left us with a stronger banking system. And we’d have a few more unemployed idiot bankers.
July 1, 2009 at 1:57 PM #423982Participant[quote=CA renter]I fault the govt 100% for the mess they’ve created. What they should have done is stand behind the original FDIC and SIPC insurance, and let the chips fall where they may.[/quote]
I agree, they probably should have left the banks fail and insure the deposits, even the ones above the FDIC limits. Those deposits would then get moved wherever the depositor decides. This would have the effect of recapitalizing the surviving banks, and maybe the gov’t could provide additional capitalization if necessary. And the “toxic assets” of the failed banks would be liquidated at auction. So the market could figure out a value for them, instead of the current case where they’re hidden away in the balance sheets with some bullshit valuation. (Still waiting for THAT shoe to drop.)
I think it would have cost us a lot less money, and left us with a stronger banking system. And we’d have a few more unemployed idiot bankers.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.