Active Users:576 Time:03/08/2025 10:47:18 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
You didn't mention the third party Roland00 Send a noteboard - 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM
The third party being everyone else in the neighborhood. When a house becomes vacant either due to foreclosure or someone walking away from their mortgage it lowers the property value of everybody else in the neighborhood (it also decreases the property tax base.)

Any discussion on morality should take in consideration the harms of the people directly involved as well as indirectly involved. Harms are still harms no matter how casual the connection is.
This message last edited by Roland00 on 12/10/2010 at 08:28:06 PM
Reply to message
Is walking away from a mortgage immoral? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 04:45:43 PM 1479 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street - SilverWarder - 12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM 983 Views
do we have a moral obligation to society? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 06:00:17 PM 973 Views
It's a good question SilverWarder - 14/10/2010 02:41:21 AM 881 Views
Sort of have to disagree... Antigone - 13/10/2010 02:52:07 AM 943 Views
That's not true actually SilverWarder - 14/10/2010 02:35:43 AM 872 Views
Of course it's immoral. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM 943 Views
But does one sided morality work? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM 1067 Views
You asked about the morality of walking away when the borrower still has the ability to pay. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:31:10 PM 866 Views
A company or organization cannot act morally or immorally? I strongly disagree. *NM* Legolas - 12/10/2010 07:50:42 PM 422 Views
No, it cannot. However the individuals making the decisions for the company can. *NM* Cannoli - 12/10/2010 08:48:23 PM 370 Views
If banks can not behave in moral manner why should people be expected to behave in moral manner? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:07:56 PM 933 Views
I'm not absolved of my obligations based on the bad behaviors of others. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:25:33 PM 847 Views
but who you owe obligations to is a factor random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:03:04 PM 911 Views
Because it's their moral obligation. Morality is not a trade, you act morally because it is right Cannoli - 12/10/2010 08:47:41 PM 1027 Views
you also use reason and logic to decide where your loyalty rest random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:16:51 PM 930 Views
You have not explained how it IS the banks' fault Cannoli - 15/10/2010 01:30:10 PM 977 Views
That's the only kind of morality there is! What the hell is wrong with you? Cannoli - 12/10/2010 08:15:55 PM 890 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM 894 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again Cannoli - 15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM 1390 Views
well I really can't argue with the wrong is wrong end of story belief system random thoughts - 15/10/2010 05:40:22 PM 1088 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM* Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM 442 Views
Which is why contracts have to be pages and pages long and combed over by bloodsucking lawyers. LiterateDog - 12/10/2010 06:39:18 PM 930 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM 779 Views
Hrm. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM 988 Views
did you take a personal oath in front of god and your loved ones to pay the loan back? *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:09:07 PM 439 Views
Let's assume we're talking about a marriage where no such oath was taken... *NM* Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:10:54 PM 453 Views
if there is no oath of fidelity then straying would not be immoral *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:40:53 PM 421 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM 1044 Views
I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:37:52 PM 955 Views
Re: I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 09:00:00 PM 1034 Views
also random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:37:38 PM 895 Views
That makes no sense whatsoever. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:38:06 PM 1018 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note *NM* Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM 462 Views
Exactly *NM* Cannoli - 12/10/2010 07:58:25 PM 431 Views
So, you think bankruptcy laws are immoral? everynametaken - 13/10/2010 12:18:43 AM 924 Views
I don't think it's immoral at all. The contract usually specifies penalties for breach. Tom - 12/10/2010 05:28:34 PM 1034 Views
I thought the answer might be something like that. *NM* Rebekah - 12/10/2010 05:35:35 PM 412 Views
that is close to the way I see it random thoughts - 12/10/2010 05:45:25 PM 874 Views
It's both legal and immoral. LiterateDog - 12/10/2010 06:37:49 PM 958 Views
You didn't mention the third party Roland00 - 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM 809 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM 948 Views
Thus the edit Roland00 - 12/10/2010 09:10:53 PM 982 Views
either way I think you made a good point *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:38:58 PM 411 Views
will those neighbors... damookster - 14/10/2010 04:52:26 AM 1098 Views
All depends where you get your morals from, really. Nebhead - 12/10/2010 08:28:41 PM 941 Views
I guess what i was trying to ask, at least in part random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:48:24 PM 935 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective? Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM 958 Views
do you think they would if they had a legal way to do it? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 10:04:57 PM 935 Views
Good point. *NM* Tashmere - 12/10/2010 11:10:26 PM 430 Views
Sure, you could do that. Aeryn - 13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM 966 Views
The problem is that you're buying something today and paying for it for the next 15/30/50 years. Sareitha Sedai - 13/10/2010 03:04:26 PM 842 Views
Much like the concept of morality itself. Gaps - 12/10/2010 11:47:23 PM 878 Views
I find this line particularly interesting. everynametaken - 13/10/2010 12:13:18 AM 905 Views
Dunno. nossy - 13/10/2010 12:56:56 AM 1001 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not. Aeryn - 13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM 913 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way random thoughts - 13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM 904 Views
Is the deal that if you default, the bank gets the house and nothing else, though? Legolas - 13/10/2010 02:40:48 PM 898 Views
yes but the bank has a limited ability to collect random thoughts - 13/10/2010 02:47:34 PM 818 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM* Aeryn - 13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM 419 Views
I'm curious how you reconcile that Sareitha Sedai - 13/10/2010 09:47:59 PM 927 Views
Collateral Aeryn - 19/10/2010 07:21:14 PM 1427 Views
I agree, what do you think is different? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM 926 Views
The difference is that the bank owns the house. Whereas when I buy stuff, it's mine. *NM* Aeryn - 19/10/2010 07:05:34 PM 406 Views
I too am unable to work out what distinguishes the two situations. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:54:15 PM 862 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway. John - 13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM 999 Views
OK what if you take it a step further random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:44:30 PM 975 Views
Good question John - 14/10/2010 05:13:41 AM 971 Views
I have some questions about this issue. MightyYT - 13/10/2010 08:14:37 AM 931 Views
how do those questions affect the morality of the situation? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:20:14 PM 873 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay. Elaine - 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM 884 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM 956 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do. Elaine - 13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM 899 Views
it is the home fault that the banks have to be bailed out random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:49:37 PM 949 Views
I believe it immoral to do harm. Macharius - 13/10/2010 04:38:28 PM 974 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM 909 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here. LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM 928 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM* Tim - 13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM 480 Views
You can garnish their wages. LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM 912 Views
With parsley? Rebekah - 13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM 969 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM* LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM 466 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM 545 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM* Tim - 14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM 410 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM 431 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies. Tim - 14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM 882 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money? TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM 928 Views
Yeah, I guess we are. Tim - 14/10/2010 10:28:40 PM 963 Views
Re: Gaps - 14/10/2010 03:09:18 AM 918 Views
I am currently in that situation... damookster - 14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM 1026 Views
In Washington you can contest the assessed value used to determine property taxes. Vodalus - 14/10/2010 07:27:02 AM 952 Views
Re: I am currently in that situation... Macharius - 14/10/2010 05:49:24 PM 1244 Views
it is easy for me and others to be glib when it is just a theory *NM* random thoughts - 14/10/2010 08:19:16 PM 419 Views
If you have the ability to pay, I would consider it yet another immoral act in an immoral industry. Joel - 14/10/2010 07:49:38 AM 936 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes