how do those questions affect the morality of the situation?
random thoughts Send a noteboard - 13/10/2010 03:20:14 PM
I am talking theory not specifics so you are free to set any conditions you want. Just to pick one, if I am flipping houses then I am running a business and I would not feel any worse about walking away from bad debt then any other business would. Businesses walk away from bad all the time. GM just walked away from massive amounts of, if GM can do why can't a small company do it?
Is walking away from a mortgage immoral?
- 12/10/2010 04:45:43 PM
1590 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street -
- 12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM
1058 Views
Of course it's immoral.
- 12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM
1024 Views
But does one sided morality work?
- 12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM
1141 Views
You asked about the morality of walking away when the borrower still has the ability to pay.
- 12/10/2010 07:31:10 PM
937 Views
A company or organization cannot act morally or immorally? I strongly disagree. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:50:42 PM
462 Views
No, it cannot. However the individuals making the decisions for the company can. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:48:23 PM
403 Views
If banks can not behave in moral manner why should people be expected to behave in moral manner?
- 12/10/2010 08:07:56 PM
1005 Views
I'm not absolved of my obligations based on the bad behaviors of others.
- 12/10/2010 08:25:33 PM
923 Views
Because it's their moral obligation. Morality is not a trade, you act morally because it is right
- 12/10/2010 08:47:41 PM
1117 Views
That's the only kind of morality there is! What the hell is wrong with you?
- 12/10/2010 08:15:55 PM
980 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again
- 12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM
957 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again
- 15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM
1472 Views
well I really can't argue with the wrong is wrong end of story belief system
- 15/10/2010 05:40:22 PM
1157 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM
476 Views
Which is why contracts have to be pages and pages long and combed over by bloodsucking lawyers.
- 12/10/2010 06:39:18 PM
999 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them.
- 12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM
848 Views
Hrm.
- 12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM
1069 Views
did you take a personal oath in front of god and your loved ones to pay the loan back? *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:09:07 PM
475 Views
Let's assume we're talking about a marriage where no such oath was taken... *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:10:54 PM
488 Views
if there is no oath of fidelity then straying would not be immoral *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:40:53 PM
451 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract.
- 12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM
1117 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note 
*NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM
493 Views
*NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM
493 Views
I don't think it's immoral at all. The contract usually specifies penalties for breach.
- 12/10/2010 05:28:34 PM
1105 Views
You didn't mention the third party
- 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM
886 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society
- 12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM
1029 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective?
- 12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM
1056 Views
Sure, you could do that.
- 13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM
1045 Views
The problem is that you're buying something today and paying for it for the next 15/30/50 years.
- 13/10/2010 03:04:26 PM
945 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not.
- 13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM
985 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way
- 13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM
987 Views
Is the deal that if you default, the bank gets the house and nothing else, though?
- 13/10/2010 02:40:48 PM
976 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM*
- 13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM
451 Views
I agree, what do you think is different?
- 13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM
998 Views
The difference is that the bank owns the house. Whereas when I buy stuff, it's mine. *NM*
- 19/10/2010 07:05:34 PM
450 Views
I too am unable to work out what distinguishes the two situations.
- 13/10/2010 11:54:15 PM
940 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway.
- 13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM
1081 Views
I have some questions about this issue.
- 13/10/2010 08:14:37 AM
1000 Views
how do those questions affect the morality of the situation?
- 13/10/2010 03:20:14 PM
951 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay.
- 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM
964 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank?
- 13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM
1029 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do.
- 13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM
965 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage.
- 13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM
980 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here.
- 13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM
1007 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM*
- 13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM
514 Views
You can garnish their wages.
- 13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM
988 Views
With parsley?
- 13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM
1057 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM*
- 13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM
498 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM
574 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM
447 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM
465 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies.
- 14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM
962 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money?
- 14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM
1007 Views
I am currently in that situation...
- 14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM
1107 Views
In Washington you can contest the assessed value used to determine property taxes.
- 14/10/2010 07:27:02 AM
1026 Views
it is easy for me and others to be glib when it is just a theory *NM*
- 14/10/2010 08:19:16 PM
453 Views
If you have the ability to pay, I would consider it yet another immoral act in an immoral industry.
- 14/10/2010 07:49:38 AM
1018 Views