Fezmid Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 Your fault. However we're talking about predatory lending.. not a simple 10k loan I love that phrase -- like the banks were stalking you in the alleyway, put a gun to your head and a pen in your hand and said, "Sign or die." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 I love that phrase -- like the banks were stalking you in the alleyway, put a gun to your head and a pen in your hand and said, "Sign or die." You have to understand the way pBills thinks. See, if the government gets rid of predatory lenders, then no one will take out a bad loan. And if the government makes people eat better food, then no one will get fat. And if the government makes people take the train, then no one will worry about gas prices. And if the government makes people buy health care, then no one will die. Because in the end, we're stupid and the government knows what's best for us. So do us all a favor and get out of your Mom's basement, take Amtrack to your government job, eat your tofu fries, stop thinking for yourself and shut yer damn piehole. Cuz only the government can save you now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 You have to understand the way pBills thinks. See, if the government gets rid of predatory lenders, then no one will take out a bad loan. And if the government makes people eat better food, then no one will get fat. And if the government makes people take the train, then no one will worry about gas prices. And if the government makes people buy health care, then no one will die. Because in the end, we're stupid and the government knows what's best for us. So do us all a favor and get out of your Mom's basement, take Amtrack to your government job, eat your tofu fries, stop thinking for yourself and shut yer damn piehole. Cuz only the government can save you now. So you think having the private sector make all of our decisions is better? Do the people that don't agree with your mantra need to shut their pieholes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 1. So you think having the private sector make all of our decisions is better? 2. Do the people that don't agree with your mantra need to shut their pieholes? If I may answer a question that wasn't posed to me: 1. In this context the "private sector" is us as individuals making our decisions for ourselves insead of some bureaucratic dick bag in DC playing the role of step daddy telling us he's going to make it ok and then rubbing his bloody dick on our teddy bear. 2. yes, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 If I may answer a question that wasn't posed to me: 1. In this context the "private sector" is us as individuals making our decisions for ourselves insead of some bureaucratic dick bag in DC playing the role of step daddy telling us he's going to make it ok and then rubbing his bloody dick on our teddy bear. 2. yes, please. 1. I was merely reflecting back at him what he posted. I don't really believe than, nor does pbills believe what LABillsfan said either. 2. You've seen me post long enough to know that will NEVER happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 So you think having the private sector make all of our decisions is better? Do the people that don't agree with your mantra need to shut their pieholes? It's not about the private sector making our decisions, it's about INDIVIDUALS making and living with the decisions they make for themselves. It's about holding people accountable for their own actions. People took out bad loans. Sure, some of them were duped, but if you've ever bought a house, you know the day you sign your closing docs you are walked through the terms and conditions of your purchase. Trying to make the case that this whole problem was caused by the banks is ignoring the real core of the issue; a bunch of people got greedy and overextended themselves. People who disagree with me need not shut their pieholes because they're welcome to their opinion, however misguided it may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 It's not about the private sector making our decisions, it's about INDIVIDUALS making and living with the decisions they make for themselves. It's about holding people accountable for their own actions. People took out bad loans. Sure, some of them were duped, but if you've ever bought a house, you know the day you sign your closing docs you are walked through the terms and conditions of your purchase. Trying to make the case that this whole problem was caused by the banks is ignoring the real core of the issue; a bunch of people got greedy and overextended themselves. People who disagree with me need not shut their pieholes because they're welcome to their opinion, however misguided it may be. I was just trying to make a point on one of your previous posts about pbills. It is a misconception that liberals hate the private sector and that neocons hate everything that is run by the government. Actually, it may be an honest misconception on your part (I will give you the benefit of the doubt, as I don't know you). It reality, it is a tool that both sides use to demonize the other and consolidate power. As far as your comment on the housing loan issue- let the buyer beware, unless it is a fraudulent act by the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 (edited) One could say that... but it wasn't just the middle-class that did this. Ultimately it was the banks offering loans to people they knew couldn't afford them. Not up to the individual, that's why banks want financial statements, pay stubs, etc to see if they can actually afford the loan. What is considered "afford." I still think it should be 25% of your gross income/pay per month... Anything above that, the person/family/etc... can't afford it. IMO. That is taxes and everything. Edited May 27, 2011 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 It is a misconception that liberals hate the private sector... My issue is not that liberals hate the private sector. It's that they don't understand the simple concept of personal accountability. The moment you get in a discussion with a liberal (or their more hard-core cousin, the progressive) about personal accountability, the discussion turns from one about "being responsible for your own actions" to one about "you only care about yourself and not others." It's a lazy, stupid, childish argument. Taking responsibility for my own actions does not equate to me not caring about others. But that's their argument, and you know you've read it here countless times from all the usual progressive suspects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 What is considered "afford." I still think it should be 25% of your gross income/pay per month... Anything above that, the person/family/etc... can't afford it. IMO. That is taxes and everything. Personally, I think that may be too high. We spend 18% of our NET income. This lets us max out 401(k) and Roth IRAs, put a ton into savings for a rainy day, as well as lets us take nice vacations from time to time. If one of us gets laid off, it'll suck -- but we'll still be able to afford our house. We purchased back in 2002, at the height of the craziness. Not once did a banker put a gun to my head and force me into buying a house I wasn't comfortable buying. That's why I laugh at pBills saying it's the banks fault. No it's not. It's the individual's fault for not figuring out how much they can afford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 (edited) Personally, I think that may be too high. We spend 18% of our NET income. This lets us max out 401(k) and Roth IRAs, put a ton into savings for a rainy day, as well as lets us take nice vacations from time to time. If one of us gets laid off, it'll suck -- but we'll still be able to afford our house. We purchased back in 2002, at the height of the craziness. Not once did a banker put a gun to my head and force me into buying a house I wasn't comfortable buying. That's why I laugh at pBills saying it's the banks fault. No it's not. It's the individual's fault for not figuring out how much they can afford. :thumbsup: People are conditoned to think they continually have to have something else... That they have to constantly expand. It really isn't their fault that we as a society are sent mixed messages. And YES, the banks prey on this. Both are to blame. Edited May 28, 2011 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 One could say that... but it wasn't just the middle-class that did this. Ultimately it was the banks offering loans to people they knew couldn't afford them. Not up to the individual, that's why banks want financial statements, pay stubs, etc to see if they can actually afford the loan. And most of the banks that did do that very justly no longer exist (though sadly, many of the people who facilitated it - mortgage brokers - are still in business). Of course, I've explained all of this before, and I know you're completely incapable of perceiving a difference between Wells-Fargo and Washington Mutual, so I'll eschew further explanation here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts