Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
TheBreeze
Participant[quote=North County Jim]
These are called business decisions and they are made every day.[/quote]
Calling this a business decision is a ridiculous characterization. This would be a business decision if it involved two private parties who were only risking their own money.
Instead, what we have here is two parties playing with other people’s money. You have the banker on one side who is playing with depositor’s money backed up by taxpayer dollars. His main goal was to make as much short-term profit for himself as possible by shafting depositors/taxpayers. On the other side of the deal you have some clueless moron house buyer who is just looking for as low of an initial payment as he can get along with a low-to-minimal down payment.
Characterizing this type of transaction as a ‘business’ decision is absurd. It’s two jokers playing with other people’s money. Socialism to the core.
Participant[quote=North County Jim]
These are called business decisions and they are made every day.[/quote]
Calling this a business decision is a ridiculous characterization. This would be a business decision if it involved two private parties who were only risking their own money.
Instead, what we have here is two parties playing with other people’s money. You have the banker on one side who is playing with depositor’s money backed up by taxpayer dollars. His main goal was to make as much short-term profit for himself as possible by shafting depositors/taxpayers. On the other side of the deal you have some clueless moron house buyer who is just looking for as low of an initial payment as he can get along with a low-to-minimal down payment.
Characterizing this type of transaction as a ‘business’ decision is absurd. It’s two jokers playing with other people’s money. Socialism to the core.
Participant[quote=North County Jim]
These are called business decisions and they are made every day.[/quote]
Calling this a business decision is a ridiculous characterization. This would be a business decision if it involved two private parties who were only risking their own money.
Instead, what we have here is two parties playing with other people’s money. You have the banker on one side who is playing with depositor’s money backed up by taxpayer dollars. His main goal was to make as much short-term profit for himself as possible by shafting depositors/taxpayers. On the other side of the deal you have some clueless moron house buyer who is just looking for as low of an initial payment as he can get along with a low-to-minimal down payment.
Characterizing this type of transaction as a ‘business’ decision is absurd. It’s two jokers playing with other people’s money. Socialism to the core.
Participant[quote=North County Jim]
These are called business decisions and they are made every day.[/quote]
Calling this a business decision is a ridiculous characterization. This would be a business decision if it involved two private parties who were only risking their own money.
Instead, what we have here is two parties playing with other people’s money. You have the banker on one side who is playing with depositor’s money backed up by taxpayer dollars. His main goal was to make as much short-term profit for himself as possible by shafting depositors/taxpayers. On the other side of the deal you have some clueless moron house buyer who is just looking for as low of an initial payment as he can get along with a low-to-minimal down payment.
Characterizing this type of transaction as a ‘business’ decision is absurd. It’s two jokers playing with other people’s money. Socialism to the core.
Participant[quote=ibjames]I’m sorry for being a little vulgar, but you have the balls to come back, and try to justify this after we sat, post after post, with SOLID data, and he bought anyway, and many here told him this day would come too..
You can lead a horse to water.. [/quote]
Wasn’t this joker here like just a year ago asking for advice which he totally ignored? I can’t believe this is the type of dildo our taxpayer dollars are bailing out. I wish the main-stream media would do a profile on this guy so all the J6Ps could see the type of jackass that they are paying for with their taxpayer-bailout dollars. Unbelievable.
Participant[quote=ibjames]I’m sorry for being a little vulgar, but you have the balls to come back, and try to justify this after we sat, post after post, with SOLID data, and he bought anyway, and many here told him this day would come too..
You can lead a horse to water.. [/quote]
Wasn’t this joker here like just a year ago asking for advice which he totally ignored? I can’t believe this is the type of dildo our taxpayer dollars are bailing out. I wish the main-stream media would do a profile on this guy so all the J6Ps could see the type of jackass that they are paying for with their taxpayer-bailout dollars. Unbelievable.
Participant[quote=ibjames]I’m sorry for being a little vulgar, but you have the balls to come back, and try to justify this after we sat, post after post, with SOLID data, and he bought anyway, and many here told him this day would come too..
You can lead a horse to water.. [/quote]
Wasn’t this joker here like just a year ago asking for advice which he totally ignored? I can’t believe this is the type of dildo our taxpayer dollars are bailing out. I wish the main-stream media would do a profile on this guy so all the J6Ps could see the type of jackass that they are paying for with their taxpayer-bailout dollars. Unbelievable.
Participant[quote=ibjames]I’m sorry for being a little vulgar, but you have the balls to come back, and try to justify this after we sat, post after post, with SOLID data, and he bought anyway, and many here told him this day would come too..
You can lead a horse to water.. [/quote]
Wasn’t this joker here like just a year ago asking for advice which he totally ignored? I can’t believe this is the type of dildo our taxpayer dollars are bailing out. I wish the main-stream media would do a profile on this guy so all the J6Ps could see the type of jackass that they are paying for with their taxpayer-bailout dollars. Unbelievable.
Participant[quote=ibjames]I’m sorry for being a little vulgar, but you have the balls to come back, and try to justify this after we sat, post after post, with SOLID data, and he bought anyway, and many here told him this day would come too..
You can lead a horse to water.. [/quote]
Wasn’t this joker here like just a year ago asking for advice which he totally ignored? I can’t believe this is the type of dildo our taxpayer dollars are bailing out. I wish the main-stream media would do a profile on this guy so all the J6Ps could see the type of jackass that they are paying for with their taxpayer-bailout dollars. Unbelievable.
Participant[quote=Russell]Breeze, are you taking into consideration that it is not the upside down borrowers fault that tax payers are picking up the slack? Should they be masochistic because the remedies offered offend some of us, including myself? They are not victims but whether they see themselves as that or not, very few of us are going to look that proverbial gift horse in the eye if in their shoes.It would definitely come down to a cost benefit analysis once the damage was done. They always had the right to walk by contract . There were various consequences but those are the basics. If there are better choices that were not originally in the contract that isn’t their fault.[/quote]
Hey, paramount can justify his walking away using whatever flimsy basis he prefers. But since the taxpayers will be picking up his tab, he is the equivalent of a welfare queen. Popping out housing babies and sucking up government cash all while producing nothing of value.
Participant[quote=Russell]Breeze, are you taking into consideration that it is not the upside down borrowers fault that tax payers are picking up the slack? Should they be masochistic because the remedies offered offend some of us, including myself? They are not victims but whether they see themselves as that or not, very few of us are going to look that proverbial gift horse in the eye if in their shoes.It would definitely come down to a cost benefit analysis once the damage was done. They always had the right to walk by contract . There were various consequences but those are the basics. If there are better choices that were not originally in the contract that isn’t their fault.[/quote]
Hey, paramount can justify his walking away using whatever flimsy basis he prefers. But since the taxpayers will be picking up his tab, he is the equivalent of a welfare queen. Popping out housing babies and sucking up government cash all while producing nothing of value.
Participant[quote=Russell]Breeze, are you taking into consideration that it is not the upside down borrowers fault that tax payers are picking up the slack? Should they be masochistic because the remedies offered offend some of us, including myself? They are not victims but whether they see themselves as that or not, very few of us are going to look that proverbial gift horse in the eye if in their shoes.It would definitely come down to a cost benefit analysis once the damage was done. They always had the right to walk by contract . There were various consequences but those are the basics. If there are better choices that were not originally in the contract that isn’t their fault.[/quote]
Hey, paramount can justify his walking away using whatever flimsy basis he prefers. But since the taxpayers will be picking up his tab, he is the equivalent of a welfare queen. Popping out housing babies and sucking up government cash all while producing nothing of value.
Participant[quote=Russell]Breeze, are you taking into consideration that it is not the upside down borrowers fault that tax payers are picking up the slack? Should they be masochistic because the remedies offered offend some of us, including myself? They are not victims but whether they see themselves as that or not, very few of us are going to look that proverbial gift horse in the eye if in their shoes.It would definitely come down to a cost benefit analysis once the damage was done. They always had the right to walk by contract . There were various consequences but those are the basics. If there are better choices that were not originally in the contract that isn’t their fault.[/quote]
Hey, paramount can justify his walking away using whatever flimsy basis he prefers. But since the taxpayers will be picking up his tab, he is the equivalent of a welfare queen. Popping out housing babies and sucking up government cash all while producing nothing of value.
Participant[quote=Russell]Breeze, are you taking into consideration that it is not the upside down borrowers fault that tax payers are picking up the slack? Should they be masochistic because the remedies offered offend some of us, including myself? They are not victims but whether they see themselves as that or not, very few of us are going to look that proverbial gift horse in the eye if in their shoes.It would definitely come down to a cost benefit analysis once the damage was done. They always had the right to walk by contract . There were various consequences but those are the basics. If there are better choices that were not originally in the contract that isn’t their fault.[/quote]
Hey, paramount can justify his walking away using whatever flimsy basis he prefers. But since the taxpayers will be picking up his tab, he is the equivalent of a welfare queen. Popping out housing babies and sucking up government cash all while producing nothing of value.
-
AuthorPosts
