Active Users:400 Time:10/11/2024 07:08:18 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay. Elaine Send a noteboard - 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM


Morality has sod all to do with it. If you're negative equitied to the hilt and you can pay your monthly mortgage, there is no argument. You owe the money and you may not gleefully socialise your debt. If you lose your job and can't make the payment until you find another, the bank's best interest here is to bear with you for a little while. If you took out a massive mortgage based on nonsense unsustainable earnings and then lose your job, you're an idiot and you will lose your house, and you will owe them the difference between the sale price and the mortgage amount.

I have very little sympathy for financial morons who push their debt on my tax bill, or my interest rate. Has nobody ever heard of moral hazard? They'll just do it again.
Elaine
Irish Honey
Reply to message
Is walking away from a mortgage immoral? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 04:45:43 PM 1367 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street - SilverWarder - 12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM 865 Views
do we have a moral obligation to society? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 06:00:17 PM 860 Views
It's a good question SilverWarder - 14/10/2010 02:41:21 AM 774 Views
Sort of have to disagree... Antigone - 13/10/2010 02:52:07 AM 808 Views
That's not true actually SilverWarder - 14/10/2010 02:35:43 AM 758 Views
Of course it's immoral. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM 839 Views
But does one sided morality work? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM 954 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 756 Views
A company or organization cannot act morally or immorally? I strongly disagree. *NM* Legolas - 12/10/2010 07:50:42 PM 383 Views
No, it cannot. However the individuals making the decisions for the company can. *NM* Cannoli - 12/10/2010 08:48:23 PM 326 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 831 Views
I'm not absolved of my obligations based on the bad behaviors of others. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:25:33 PM 731 Views
but who you owe obligations to is a factor random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:03:04 PM 792 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 920 Views
you also use reason and logic to decide where your loyalty rest random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:16:51 PM 820 Views
You have not explained how it IS the banks' fault Cannoli - 15/10/2010 01:30:10 PM 852 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 781 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM 773 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again Cannoli - 15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM 1276 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 976 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM* Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM 404 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 813 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM 672 Views
Hrm. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM 879 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 393 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 406 Views
if there is no oath of fidelity then straying would not be immoral *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:40:53 PM 379 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM 938 Views
I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:37:52 PM 836 Views
Re: I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 09:00:00 PM 928 Views
also random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:37:38 PM 783 Views
That makes no sense whatsoever. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:38:06 PM 904 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note *NM* Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM 404 Views
Exactly *NM* Cannoli - 12/10/2010 07:58:25 PM 387 Views
So, you think bankruptcy laws are immoral? everynametaken - 13/10/2010 12:18:43 AM 825 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 909 Views
I thought the answer might be something like that. *NM* Rebekah - 12/10/2010 05:35:35 PM 371 Views
that is close to the way I see it random thoughts - 12/10/2010 05:45:25 PM 769 Views
It's both legal and immoral. LiterateDog - 12/10/2010 06:37:49 PM 852 Views
You didn't mention the third party Roland00 - 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM 699 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM 840 Views
Thus the edit Roland00 - 12/10/2010 09:10:53 PM 869 Views
either way I think you made a good point *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:38:58 PM 370 Views
will those neighbors... damookster - 14/10/2010 04:52:26 AM 971 Views
All depends where you get your morals from, really. Nebhead - 12/10/2010 08:28:41 PM 829 Views
I guess what i was trying to ask, at least in part random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:48:24 PM 796 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective? Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM 846 Views
do you think they would if they had a legal way to do it? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 10:04:57 PM 822 Views
Good point. *NM* Tashmere - 12/10/2010 11:10:26 PM 387 Views
Sure, you could do that. Aeryn - 13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM 849 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 733 Views
Much like the concept of morality itself. Gaps - 12/10/2010 11:47:23 PM 766 Views
I find this line particularly interesting. everynametaken - 13/10/2010 12:13:18 AM 784 Views
Dunno. nossy - 13/10/2010 12:56:56 AM 892 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not. Aeryn - 13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM 795 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way random thoughts - 13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM 800 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 792 Views
yes but the bank has a limited ability to collect random thoughts - 13/10/2010 02:47:34 PM 709 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM* Aeryn - 13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM 378 Views
I'm curious how you reconcile that Sareitha Sedai - 13/10/2010 09:47:59 PM 822 Views
Collateral Aeryn - 19/10/2010 07:21:14 PM 1314 Views
I agree, what do you think is different? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM 818 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 362 Views
I too am unable to work out what distinguishes the two situations. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:54:15 PM 754 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway. John - 13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM 884 Views
OK what if you take it a step further random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:44:30 PM 835 Views
Good question John - 14/10/2010 05:13:41 AM 854 Views
I have some questions about this issue. MightyYT - 13/10/2010 08:14:37 AM 811 Views
how do those questions affect the morality of the situation? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:20:14 PM 768 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay. Elaine - 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM 775 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM 826 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do. Elaine - 13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM 782 Views
it is the home fault that the banks have to be bailed out random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:49:37 PM 843 Views
I believe it immoral to do harm. Macharius - 13/10/2010 04:38:28 PM 859 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM 802 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here. LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM 818 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM* Tim - 13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM 437 Views
You can garnish their wages. LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM 777 Views
With parsley? Rebekah - 13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM 868 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM* LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM 429 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM 503 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM* Tim - 14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM 353 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM 372 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies. Tim - 14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM 765 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money? TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM 813 Views
Yeah, I guess we are. Tim - 14/10/2010 10:28:40 PM 854 Views
Re: Gaps - 14/10/2010 03:09:18 AM 800 Views
I am currently in that situation... damookster - 14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM 895 Views
In Washington you can contest the assessed value used to determine property taxes. Vodalus - 14/10/2010 07:27:02 AM 848 Views
Re: I am currently in that situation... Macharius - 14/10/2010 05:49:24 PM 1140 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 376 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 822 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes