Active Users:744 Time:11/09/2026 12:34:53 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
will those neighbors... damookster Send a noteboard - 14/10/2010 04:52:26 AM
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.


help me pay my mortgage to offset the loss of value their homes will suffer if I default? Doubt it.
Mook

*MySmiley*



"Bustin' makes me feel good!"

Ghostbusters, by Ray Parker Jr.
Reply to message
Is walking away from a mortgage immoral? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 04:45:43 PM 1650 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street - SilverWarder - 12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM 1123 Views
do we have a moral obligation to society? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 06:00:17 PM 1114 Views
It's a good question SilverWarder - 14/10/2010 02:41:21 AM 1018 Views
Sort of have to disagree... Antigone - 13/10/2010 02:52:07 AM 1095 Views
That's not true actually SilverWarder - 14/10/2010 02:35:43 AM 1003 Views
Of course it's immoral. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM 1080 Views
But does one sided morality work? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM 1199 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 1001 Views
A company or organization cannot act morally or immorally? I strongly disagree. *NM* Legolas - 12/10/2010 07:50:42 PM 497 Views
No, it cannot. However the individuals making the decisions for the company can. *NM* Cannoli - 12/10/2010 08:48:23 PM 437 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 1086 Views
I'm not absolved of my obligations based on the bad behaviors of others. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:25:33 PM 978 Views
but who you owe obligations to is a factor random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:03:04 PM 1052 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 1183 Views
you also use reason and logic to decide where your loyalty rest random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:16:51 PM 1097 Views
You have not explained how it IS the banks' fault Cannoli - 15/10/2010 01:30:10 PM 1143 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 1042 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM 1027 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again Cannoli - 15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM 1525 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 1224 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM* Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM 507 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 1055 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM 908 Views
Hrm. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM 1161 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 509 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 519 Views
if there is no oath of fidelity then straying would not be immoral *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:40:53 PM 488 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM 1180 Views
I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:37:52 PM 1079 Views
Re: I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 09:00:00 PM 1168 Views
also random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:37:38 PM 1036 Views
That makes no sense whatsoever. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:38:06 PM 1175 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note *NM* Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM 564 Views
Exactly *NM* Cannoli - 12/10/2010 07:58:25 PM 493 Views
So, you think bankruptcy laws are immoral? everynametaken - 13/10/2010 12:18:43 AM 1065 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 1164 Views
I thought the answer might be something like that. *NM* Rebekah - 12/10/2010 05:35:35 PM 482 Views
that is close to the way I see it random thoughts - 12/10/2010 05:45:25 PM 1018 Views
It's both legal and immoral. LiterateDog - 12/10/2010 06:37:49 PM 1131 Views
You didn't mention the third party Roland00 - 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM 944 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM 1091 Views
Thus the edit Roland00 - 12/10/2010 09:10:53 PM 1105 Views
either way I think you made a good point *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:38:58 PM 467 Views
will those neighbors... damookster - 14/10/2010 04:52:26 AM 1272 Views
All depends where you get your morals from, really. Nebhead - 12/10/2010 08:28:41 PM 1082 Views
I guess what i was trying to ask, at least in part random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:48:24 PM 1090 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective? Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM 1124 Views
do you think they would if they had a legal way to do it? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 10:04:57 PM 1069 Views
Good point. *NM* Tashmere - 12/10/2010 11:10:26 PM 490 Views
Sure, you could do that. Aeryn - 13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM 1106 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 1010 Views
Much like the concept of morality itself. Gaps - 12/10/2010 11:47:23 PM 1015 Views
I find this line particularly interesting. everynametaken - 13/10/2010 12:13:18 AM 1060 Views
Dunno. nossy - 13/10/2010 12:56:56 AM 1162 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not. Aeryn - 13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM 1048 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way random thoughts - 13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM 1043 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 1031 Views
yes but the bank has a limited ability to collect random thoughts - 13/10/2010 02:47:34 PM 975 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM* Aeryn - 13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM 481 Views
I'm curious how you reconcile that Sareitha Sedai - 13/10/2010 09:47:59 PM 1080 Views
Collateral Aeryn - 19/10/2010 07:21:14 PM 1572 Views
I agree, what do you think is different? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM 1049 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 479 Views
I too am unable to work out what distinguishes the two situations. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:54:15 PM 1006 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway. John - 13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM 1144 Views
OK what if you take it a step further random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:44:30 PM 1149 Views
Good question John - 14/10/2010 05:13:41 AM 1121 Views
I have some questions about this issue. MightyYT - 13/10/2010 08:14:37 AM 1060 Views
how do those questions affect the morality of the situation? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:20:14 PM 1010 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay. Elaine - 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM 1030 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM 1092 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do. Elaine - 13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM 1025 Views
it is the home fault that the banks have to be bailed out random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:49:37 PM 1088 Views
I believe it immoral to do harm. Macharius - 13/10/2010 04:38:28 PM 1097 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM 1044 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here. LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM 1077 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM* Tim - 13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM 549 Views
You can garnish their wages. LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM 1048 Views
With parsley? Rebekah - 13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM 1115 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM* LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM 530 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM 604 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM* Tim - 14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM 483 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM 501 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies. Tim - 14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM 1026 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money? TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM 1074 Views
Yeah, I guess we are. Tim - 14/10/2010 10:28:40 PM 1095 Views
Re: Gaps - 14/10/2010 03:09:18 AM 1058 Views
I am currently in that situation... damookster - 14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM 1158 Views
In Washington you can contest the assessed value used to determine property taxes. Vodalus - 14/10/2010 07:27:02 AM 1095 Views
Re: I am currently in that situation... Macharius - 14/10/2010 05:49:24 PM 1398 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 485 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 1095 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes