- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Re It's "immoral" to strategically default on one's mortgage
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:05 am to LSURussian
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:05 am to LSURussian
quote:
What part of what I posted is not true?
All parts? I've never defaulted on a single obligation in my entire life. And your characterization of the recourse states was wildly inaccurate.
quote:
Back on topic, it's a big difference between (1) a borrower who can't repay his home loan because his situation has changed, i.e., he lost his job, serious illness, divorce, etc. and (2) someone who refuses to repay a loan to satisfy his own personal convenience although he continues to have the income/assets to repay the obligation.
Those in the #2 category are scumbags with non-existent ethics, IMO, and just a notch above street panhandlers.
What you so dismissively call "personal convenience" can also accurately be called "personal financial standing". Rational economic actors should ALWAYS be maximizing their family's position.
quote:
Those in the #2 category are scumbags with non-existent ethics, IMO, and just a notch above street panhandlers.
Wow, are you an extravagant moral grandstander. Usually happens with the pedophiles, though.
quote:
Using the corporate example you posted, American Airlines was to the point where their continual losses were going to eventually affect them as a going concern. They had to use the bankruptcy provisions in order to adjust their collective bargaining agreements to get their expenses under control. It did not appear to be a matter of convenience but of necessity, sooner or later. They chose "sooner."
They should have "ethically" paid until the very end and then had circumstances dictated to them instead of being proactive about it.
quote:
That is a big difference between someone just walking away from a personal obligation just because they can.
What does "walking away" from a personal obligation even mean? Is your position that the borrower somehow also steals the house and doesn't deliver the collateral to the lender...AS PER THE AGREEMENT? If so, link?
1
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:05 am to Cold Cous Cous
quote:
To be fair, this thread was basically a big chunk of LSURussian bait.
Agreed.
When JT gets to feeling really guilty about his personal failings, he usually trolls.
I thought about ignoring him, but, hell, I'm bored today so why not gig him again?
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:08 am to LSURussian
quote:
he usually trolls.
Just because you are pathetically incapable of carrying on a reasonable conversation without resorting to ridiculously uninformed ad hom, doesn't mean I'm trolling.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:08 am to Tiger JJ
quote:Spoken like a true ethically deficient deadbeat. Corzine probably believes as you do....
Rational economic actors should ALWAYS be maximizing their family's position.
quote:
Usually happens with the pedophiles, though.
There you go again with your usually slander. What is it about you and young children? Is it because you claimed a priest molested you when you were a youngster so you transfer that hate to anyone who disagrees with you? You know your statement is a lie.
quote:
What does "walking away" from a personal obligation even mean?
IT means refusing to pay an obligation even though the borrower has the means and obligation to pay it. It's not that difficult to understand, JT.
This post was edited on 12/13/11 at 10:10 am
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:09 am to LSURussian
quote:
Spoken like a true ethically deficient deadbeat.
Oh, you're right. A family should not be concerned with their financial well-being.
quote:
There you go again with your usually slander.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:10 am to LSURussian
quote:
IT means refusing to pay an obligation even though the borrower has the means and obligation to pay it. It's not that difficult to understand, JT.
Yes it is. It makes no sense to say "walking away". The VERY SPECIFIC "obligation" of a borrower is to service debt or deliver collateral. I'd like to see you provide me with an example of someone "walking away" from both of those.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:26 am to Tiger JJ
quote:
There you go again with your usually slander.
As I have offered several times before, post something backing up your claim and I'll permanently ban myself from this site. If you can't do it, we can only assume you just lying again. I'm confident you can't do it because I know nothing like that has happened.
And by "post something" I mean some type of evidence, not some anonymous blog you might write yourself and then refer to it.
Until then, you're just the liar you've proven yourself to be many times.
quote:Of course they should, but not to point of dishonoring obligations they have agreed to. That is unless the head of the family and/or his Polish wife have little or no personal ethics and places their own well being over their obligations to others. That is the very definition of having poor ethics.
A family should not be concerned with their financial well-being.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:55 am to LSURussian
quote:
As I have offered several times before, post something backing up your claim and I'll permanently ban myself from this site. If you can't do it, we can only assume you just lying again. I'm confident you can't do it because I know nothing like that has happened.
And by "post something" I mean some type of evidence, not some anonymous blog you might write yourself and then refer to it.
Until then, you're just the liar you've proven yourself to be many times.
I've never seen that offer, but if you say so. I'd invite you LIKEWISE to post something yourself backing up your routine slander of me. If you can't do it, then we can only assume that you are a lying pedophile.
quote:
Of course they should, but not to point of dishonoring obligations they have agreed to. That is unless the head of the family and/or his Polish wife have little or no personal ethics and places their own well being over their obligations to others. That is the very definition of having poor ethics.
Again, point me to an example of someone walking away from delivering collateral. If you have delivered the collateral, you have not "dishonored" an obligation. You have perfectly honored it.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:31 am to Tiger JJ
This getting good. 
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:32 am to Tiger JJ
quote:But as you've already proven, you don't consider walking away from a house and surrendering it to the lender as being "defaulted." I do.
I've never defaulted on a single obligation in my entire life.
quote:
I'd invite you LIKEWISE to post something yourself backing up your routine slander of me.
I didn't bookmark your post where you hinted a couple of years ago that you walked away from your house in Washington and moved into a rental house. And by "hint" I remember you wrote how much it saved you on your monthly housing expense when you did it. I now wish I had bookmarked that post.
Regarding you writing that you were abused by a Catholic priest when you were a boy, here ya' go:
LINK
quote:Post proof. You said you have it. If you do, I'll ban myself forever. And as far as you denying that I have made that offer before now, get real. You've even responded to my offer by claiming you didn't want to give away "confidential sources." Total BS on your part and you know it.
we can only assume that you are a lying pedophile.
In any case, post it now and be done with me forever. You can't do it because nothing exists and you know it.
quote:LINK
And all I'm doing is keeping the board abreast of the pending pedophilia charges against you. Didn't think I knew about that, did you?
ep, that's right. With a little research (amazing what the interwebs can bring you for free) I found out that our very own LSURussian likes to lure little boys to the park to show them what's in the brown paper bag.
quote:
point me to an example of someone walking away from delivering collateral.
I don't associate with someone who walks away from their obligations. But you pointed out above that Freddie and Fannie have not been going after deficiency judgements. That certainly fits the definition of surrendering the collateral and then walking away even though the borrower continues to owe on the mortgage.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:39 am to LSURussian
quote:
But as you've already proven, you don't consider walking away from a house and surrendering it to the lender as being "defaulted." I do.
Link? I never said that. It very clearly IS a default of the payments. And the responsibility then is to deliver the collateral to the lender. Ever get tired of just making shite up?
quote:
I didn't bookmark your post where you hinted a couple of years ago that you walked away from your house in Washington and moved into a rental house. And by "hint" I remember you wrote how much it saved you on your monthly housing expense when you did it. I now wish I had bookmarked that post.
No such thing was EVER posted. But I do believe you that when you say you wish you had kept your stalker archive of me more intact.
quote:
Post proof. You said you have it. If you do, I'll ban myself forever. And as far as you denying that I have made that offer before now, get real. You've even responded to my offer by claiming you didn't want to give away "confidential sources." Total BS on your part and you know it.
In any case, post it now and be done with me forever. You can't do it because nothing exists and you know it.
My standard is the EXACT same as yours: i.e. say things about the other guy that have no backing whatsoever. So, until you stop slandering me as a defaulted borrower, I will continue to tell the TRUTH of your known pedophilia. Deal? Deal.
quote:
I don't associate with someone who walks away from their obligations.
No, of course not, you hyper-moral moralist you! Please, tell us all more about how MORAL you are.
quote:
But you pointed out above that Freddie and Fannie have not been going after deficiency judgements. That certainly fits the definition of surrendering the collateral and then walking away even though the borrower continues to owe on the mortgage.
Oh please. Now your idea is for people to throw themselves before a court and surrender assets out of the goodness of their heart?
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:45 am to Tiger JJ
quote:You got nothing. If you did, you'd be happy to see me gone.
I will continue to tell the TRUTH of your known pedophilia.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:48 am to LSURussian
quote:
You got nothing. If you did, you'd be happy to see me gone.
right back at you, peddo
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:48 am to Tiger JJ
quote:My reply to you about Freddie and Fannie has nothing to do with what I think.
Now your idea is for people to throw themselves before a court and surrender assets out of the goodness of their heart?
I was merely pointing out YOU YOURSELF had already pointed to examples of borrowers walking away from loans where surrendering the collateral did not satisfy the debt, which is what you asked me to provide to you in a previous post.
Short memory you have there, JT.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:49 am to Tiger JJ
quote:But you have not made the same offer, JT. Match it and see what happens.....
right back at you, peddo
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:57 am to LSURussian
So I take it you two don't get along?
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:59 am to LSURussian
quote:
I was merely pointing out YOU YOURSELF had already pointed to examples of borrowers walking away from loans where surrendering the collateral did not satisfy the debt, which is what you asked me to provide to you in a previous post.
Short memory you have there, JT.
The obligation is to surrender the collateral and respond to any deficiency judgments. I am certainly not defending anyone who refuses to comply with court orders. But I am also not deriding anyone who doesn't start court actions against themselves.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 12:00 pm to LSURussian
quote:
But you have not made the same offer, JT. Match it and see what happens.....
Yes I have. Look above. You keep telling people I defaulted or some bullshite like that. You seem dedicated to promoting that particular lie...why is that? Seriously...ask yourself why you are unable to simply post a topical response without resorting to lies about me IRL.
This post was edited on 12/13/11 at 12:51 pm
Posted on 12/13/11 at 12:53 pm to Tiger JJ
quote:Where? Maybe you made the self ban offer in your head, but it's not in this thread that I can find. Please tell me where you made the same offer to ban yourself. Thanks.
Yes I have. Look above.
quote:You keep confusing "morals" with "ethics." And I AM very ethical. I've never broken a business or personal commitment in my life, even when it would have been more convenient, and legal, for me to do so.
No, of course not, you hyper-moral moralist you! Please, tell us all more about how MORAL you are.
I've used the word ethics referring to personal and business ethics.
You keep using the word morals, which has a more religious tone and which is ironic considering you repeatedly claiming to be a devout atheist on the Poli Board.
There is a slight but distinguishable difference between morals and ethics, as any word parser like you should know.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 1:26 pm to LSURussian
quote:
You keep confusing "morals" with "ethics."
Interesting point. Similar to not carving out a large segment of borrowers who were trying to game the system to begin with or reached for too much home, those "borrowers" are unethical to begin with. What happens to borrowing costs for those that pay and desire credit in the future? In a normal world they will go up, that's what, as lenders demand more compensation to take risk but in this current scenario all bets are off. If I knew a neighbor walked and had the means to pay and it affected the resale value of my house I wouldn't hold the person in a very forgiving manner as, in effect, they would be stealing from me and my family.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News