Active Users:344 Time:17/06/2025 10:40:50 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 1466 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street - SilverWarder - 12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM 972 Views
do we have a moral obligation to society? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 06:00:17 PM 963 Views
It's a good question SilverWarder - 14/10/2010 02:41:21 AM 871 Views
Sort of have to disagree... Antigone - 13/10/2010 02:52:07 AM 931 Views
That's not true actually SilverWarder - 14/10/2010 02:35:43 AM 863 Views
Of course it's immoral. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM 931 Views
But does one sided morality work? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM 1056 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 854 Views
A company or organization cannot act morally or immorally? I strongly disagree. *NM* Legolas - 12/10/2010 07:50:42 PM 416 Views
No, it cannot. However the individuals making the decisions for the company can. *NM* Cannoli - 12/10/2010 08:48:23 PM 364 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 921 Views
I'm not absolved of my obligations based on the bad behaviors of others. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:25:33 PM 837 Views
but who you owe obligations to is a factor random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:03:04 PM 899 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 1018 Views
you also use reason and logic to decide where your loyalty rest random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:16:51 PM 917 Views
You have not explained how it IS the banks' fault Cannoli - 15/10/2010 01:30:10 PM 959 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 875 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM 883 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again Cannoli - 15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM 1376 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 1074 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM* Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM 438 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 921 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM 769 Views
Hrm. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM 976 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 435 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 448 Views
if there is no oath of fidelity then straying would not be immoral *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:40:53 PM 416 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM 1033 Views
I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 08:37:52 PM 945 Views
Re: I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. Ghavrel - 12/10/2010 09:00:00 PM 1025 Views
also random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:37:38 PM 885 Views
That makes no sense whatsoever. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:38:06 PM 1005 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note *NM* Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM 459 Views
Exactly *NM* Cannoli - 12/10/2010 07:58:25 PM 426 Views
So, you think bankruptcy laws are immoral? everynametaken - 13/10/2010 12:18:43 AM 911 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 1024 Views
I thought the answer might be something like that. *NM* Rebekah - 12/10/2010 05:35:35 PM 408 Views
that is close to the way I see it random thoughts - 12/10/2010 05:45:25 PM 860 Views
It's both legal and immoral. LiterateDog - 12/10/2010 06:37:49 PM 948 Views
You didn't mention the third party Roland00 - 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM 798 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society random thoughts - 12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM 939 Views
Thus the edit Roland00 - 12/10/2010 09:10:53 PM 974 Views
either way I think you made a good point *NM* random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:38:58 PM 406 Views
will those neighbors... damookster - 14/10/2010 04:52:26 AM 1073 Views
All depends where you get your morals from, really. Nebhead - 12/10/2010 08:28:41 PM 931 Views
I guess what i was trying to ask, at least in part random thoughts - 12/10/2010 09:48:24 PM 896 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective? Sareitha Sedai - 12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM 945 Views
do you think they would if they had a legal way to do it? random thoughts - 12/10/2010 10:04:57 PM 924 Views
Good point. *NM* Tashmere - 12/10/2010 11:10:26 PM 426 Views
Sure, you could do that. Aeryn - 13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM 954 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 831 Views
Much like the concept of morality itself. Gaps - 12/10/2010 11:47:23 PM 865 Views
I find this line particularly interesting. everynametaken - 13/10/2010 12:13:18 AM 893 Views
Dunno. nossy - 13/10/2010 12:56:56 AM 993 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not. Aeryn - 13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM 903 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way random thoughts - 13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM 892 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 888 Views
yes but the bank has a limited ability to collect random thoughts - 13/10/2010 02:47:34 PM 805 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM* Aeryn - 13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM 415 Views
I'm curious how you reconcile that Sareitha Sedai - 13/10/2010 09:47:59 PM 916 Views
Collateral Aeryn - 19/10/2010 07:21:14 PM 1417 Views
I agree, what do you think is different? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM 915 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 400 Views
I too am unable to work out what distinguishes the two situations. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:54:15 PM 851 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway. John - 13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM 986 Views
OK what if you take it a step further random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:44:30 PM 940 Views
Good question John - 14/10/2010 05:13:41 AM 959 Views
I have some questions about this issue. MightyYT - 13/10/2010 08:14:37 AM 920 Views
how do those questions affect the morality of the situation? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:20:14 PM 861 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay. Elaine - 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM 872 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank? random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM 944 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do. Elaine - 13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM 888 Views
it is the home fault that the banks have to be bailed out random thoughts - 13/10/2010 03:49:37 PM 936 Views
I believe it immoral to do harm. Macharius - 13/10/2010 04:38:28 PM 962 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage. Tim - 13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM 899 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here. LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM 914 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM* Tim - 13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM 475 Views
You can garnish their wages. LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM 900 Views
With parsley? Rebekah - 13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM 958 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM* LiterateDog - 13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM 462 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM 541 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM* Tim - 14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM 406 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM 426 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies. Tim - 14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM 870 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money? TaskmasterJack - 14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM 919 Views
Yeah, I guess we are. Tim - 14/10/2010 10:28:40 PM 951 Views
Re: Gaps - 14/10/2010 03:09:18 AM 907 Views
I am currently in that situation... damookster - 14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM 1011 Views
In Washington you can contest the assessed value used to determine property taxes. Vodalus - 14/10/2010 07:27:02 AM 942 Views
Re: I am currently in that situation... Macharius - 14/10/2010 05:49:24 PM 1233 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 415 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 926 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes