digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Blame For Today's Mortgage/Finance Crisis? Look In Mirror!

burbia.com — Former CNN sr. producer/writer skewers so called "victims" of today's financial crisis--at least people who should've known better & greedily overspent. This piece (& 2 others) attack "victims" featured in recent NY Times. Author isn't letting off banks;she wants individuals held to account too. Pointed, unsympathetic (& amusing). A different voice

show profanity settings
expand all
  • openthink, on 03/08/2008, -7/+49Author takes a somewhat politically incorrect view. She definitely doesn't have a lot of sympathy. But I think she's right at least in saying that too many people behaved pretty irresponsibly. Many were ignorant & were misled by banks, etc; these people I think should be sympathized with. But some knew what the risks were (or should have) and still acted like they could keep on spending, borrowing. The banks were bad news (some unbelievably bad). But seems fair to ask some of the more educated among those now in debt...what were you thinking (or not thinking)?
    • diggface5000, on 03/08/2008, -2/+18"But seems fair to ask some of the more educated among those now in debt...what were you thinking (or not thinking)?"
      No. It doesn't take an engineer to understand how a loan works. You don't need a degree to have the self control to live within your means and say "no" to yourself sometimes.
      • greenboogerman, on 03/08/2008, -0/+15I completely agree with diggface. I have to say that it will piss me off a little bit if the government uses our nation's tax revenues to subsidize, what I believe to be, irresponsibility on the part of the people who signed up for these loans in the first place. Sure, sometimes bad things happen to people through no fault of their own. But I really think that most Americans are getting in over their heads with respect to the amount of debt that they sign up for.
        • sancho, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3We're screwed either way. If they don't bail these people out, the economy still tanks as they have less buying power, companies have to raise prices, etc.

          I'm not sure what the actual best solution is, but I'm not ruling out some form of partial bailout. Whatever happens, we need to stop spending billions in a pointless war.
          • edstate, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2You're right. Damned if we do or don't. That's why we need to pick a) let the market work itself out, no matter how messy... instead of b) a government bailout of both the idiot banks and the idiot buyers.
            It really is the lesser of 2 evils, especially long-term.
          • philipl411, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4No, you let the market correct itself. Yes people are going to lose their homes, someone with cash is going to buy them for what they are worth and not what stupid people borrow against them. government has no right or responsibility in solving problems that were created by banks and borrowers. I fail to understand why people keep thinking its a bad thing to overspend on war waste, but a good thing to over spend on domestic waste. Waste is waste and it does neither good
        • ManoWar, on 03/08/2008, -7/+2www.fairtax.org
    • ManoWar, on 03/08/2008, -4/+3When i turned 21 i was offered once a week +300k loan for less than 900 a month. A dumb ass would of taken that loan and lost there home like the other fools.
      • mciampa1214, on 03/08/2008, -3/+3'I' agree, a dumb ass probably would 'have' taken that loan and lost 'their' home.
    • vertinox, on 03/08/2008, -0/+8I dunno. If I was a major shareholder of one of these lending companies, I'd be in the board room right now screaming "WTF WERE YOU DOING LENDING MONEY TO PEOPLE WHO YOU KNOW COULD NOT PAY IT BACK!!! WE'VE LOST OVER 75% OF OUR SHARE PRICE!!! I'M RUINED! *throttles CEO by the neck*"

      Actually, I've read a few groups of shareholders have started lawsuits about CEOs misleading them about particular mortgage practices... They were using junk bonds to finance the lending so in a sense... They were lending out money they didn't even have so thats why so much was allowed to be loaned.

      Of course its the fault of the people who took the loan out, but its also the banks fault for allowing the loan checks to be cut in the first place.

      On the upside... Its a good time to invest in real estate stocks if you still have the money... And the company you invest in doesn't go bankrupt in the next 6 months.
    • thenet411, on 03/08/2008, -1/+8There is NO excuse for ignorance when a home is the biggest investment in most people's lives. Yes, the greedy banks and scumbag lendors share the blame, but there is NO reason that ANYONE can claim ignorance here. If you are dumb enough to spend the most amount of money you ever will and not know the facts, you deserve what you get. Period.
    • rand0mm0nkey, on 03/08/2008, -0/+11Yah, I have no sympathy at all. About that time, we were buying our house. We were offered an adjustable rate mortgage or we could lock it at 5.5%. Duh. We knew banks are companies, and that they are not out to be nice. You are signing a piece of paper that holds you responsible for 6+ figures. If you didn't read it or think about it, sit in your own *****. Why should I have to bail you out with my taxes?
    • dadioflex, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3The "author" is commenting on extracts from a New York Times article, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/business/22homes ... or check the small print at the end of the article. This is journalism like Beavis and Butthead was music criticism.
    • intelligen, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Before I bought my house, I found an online calculator to figure out how much I could afford to spend. Then I went to my local bank and asked them. The figures didn't match up. Without even pulling up my credit history, the bank said I could easily borrow at least $30K more than the online calculator said was safe. I ended up borrowing right in the ballpark of what the online calculator said was okay.

      While I do think people are idiots with their money these days and should take responsibility for their stupidity, the banks knew better. I think what happened here was that a bunch of people here and there all over the country got away with borrowing more than they could afford, and when most of those people did successfully pay back their loans, some banks decided to be more lenient with everyone else, as well. As soon as a few lending companies caved in, the rest had to either follow suit or be left in the dust.
  • starbabe, on 03/08/2008, -9/+76About Freakin time someone actually blames the person that's actually responsible. Nobody forced people to refi and take equity out of their homes to piss it away on consumable goods (Junk). Nobody forced anyone into buying a home while the market was super hot (Overpriced). People love to blame everyone else for their problems, but the hard fact is people create their own problems (99.9% of the time).
    • zephyr42, on 03/08/2008, -2/+5I took this opportunity when the finance rates dropped to buy a new car. I'll be paying it off in less than 8 months after buying it. I always wondered why the media were blaming everyone but the people who actually accepted the responsibility for these loans. Sure maybe part of the blame may lie in the system but surely not all or a majority of the blame.
      • skubiszm, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Home equity loans aren't evil and you get a good rate and pay for thinks like cars, etc. This guy bought a house for 275K and took out so much he now owes 740K! Thats a lot of cars. Maybe the banks shouldn't of kept giving him more credit, but I still think he's an idiot.
    • 15charmaxwtf, on 03/08/2008, -3/+7I would blame everyone for even putting up with the socialist monetary policy. It is a predictable outcome of central banking/fiat currency.

      The system now is in complete contrast to capitlism, which means saving, not creating credit out of thin air.
      • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -1/+10No sir it's capitalism at it's finest fleecing the sheep. How do honestly expect people who didn't even pay attention in high school math to understand compound interest, it's not common sense. People who are not taught by their parents to manage their money are not likely to learn it except from the school of hard knocks. However the financial people who encouraged this sort of behavior and the reality people who pumped up the housing bubble knew exactly what they where doing.
        • lordno, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3It is common sense. If a salesman feels the need to say honestly... or I'm telling you the truth... He is lying.
          • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -2/+2Have you not noticed how nieve the average person is? Or that the average reading level in America is under 6th grade comprehension? Or that the 20 million or so of the Gen x generation that have college degrees have a responsibility to those less fortunate than themselves? Do you not realize that a society which bares no responsibility for the weak isn't worth a *****?
      • roodammy44, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2You obviously have no idea what socialist monetary policy is.
        There are several aspects to it:
        Nationalisation of industry - not in the usa
        Redistribution of wealth to a more equal distribution - certainly not in the usa
        Full employment - nope
        Production quotas - nope
        National economic planning - very little of this occurs without private companies.

        The Fed, which controls the fractional reserve system is even a private company!
        The US is about as far away from socialist monetary policy as you can get, which in my opinion is what is causing the problems.
        • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2Your confusing socialism with communism. Sweden is socialist, Britain is socialist, Canada is socialist. There are privates corporations, public corporations, and crown corporations, and small business in socialist countries. Planning is somewhat centralized in those countries.
          • roodammy44, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Britain up until recently had national industries, has a redistributive tax scheme and has national economic planning.
            Britain, Canada and Sweden are not socialist, they have a combination of socialist and capitalist policies. I was just talking about the socialist ones in my comment.
            Communism is a form of extreme socialism and would generally strive to have all of these policies.
    • mempko, on 03/08/2008, -3/+2No but everyone told them it was a good idea
    • garbanzo, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6I agree that these people made their own problems. That's fine, it doesn't really affect me if other people screw themselves over. But to look at this situation that way oversimplifies things and makes the banks sound like honorable institutions that were left holding the bag. The fact is, the bank should have been the voice of reason and denied the loans in the first place. Instead, they made the loan and then sold the debt on the open market to avoid responsibility for hundreds of loans that never should have been made in the first place. Bottom line is, yes these people are *****-heads but it's the banks that enabled the behavior, profited by it, and when it didn't work out they expect the government to bail them out.
      • Outdoor83, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3It does affect you if others screw themselves over: the economy goes bad, and I'm reasonably sure that affects you somehow. That's the sad part: other people making poor decisions affects all of us. This goes for the manipulative bankers as well as those who listened to them.
      • zacharytelschow, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3People and banks made bad decisions and should face the consequences. A bailout is a terrible idea.
      • skubiszm, on 03/08/2008, -2/+1It does affect you. If he goes into foreclosure in your neighborhood it brings down your property value and those around you.
      • garbanzo, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2To clarify, I meant that a few people making bad decisions doesn't have much affect on me personally. However, the banking industry making bad decisions ***** us all and that's exactly what is happening.
    • roodammy44, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3But house prices can only go up in the long term, right?
      You'd have to be stupid to keep chucking your money away on rent when buying a house builds equity
      And look at those low, low interest rates.
      /sarcasm just so everyone can remember why everyone got into the mess in the first place
      • starbabe, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3That isn't the reason many are in this mess. There are people that owned their home LONG before housing prices ran up and just kept using their home as an ATM. Withdrawing all equity year after year to purchase other consumable crap. These are the ones that this targets.
        • skubiszm, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4It is part of the reason. The NAR kept spewing all this garbage about how great it is to own a home. Owning doesn't make sense in all cases and isn't for everyone. If a few of these idiots just kept renting we wouldn't be in this mess.
    • PolishLogic, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4Homebuyer: Gee I like that house, but it's way more than I could ever afford.
      Mortgage Lender: Well, you could roll the dice based on the future market. However it could also turn against you.
      Homebuyer: Let's gamble then. Get me the paperwork.

      Buying a home is always called "one of the biggest decisions you'll make in life", yet it seems too many people don't want to take the time to thoroughly investigate all the facts and possibilities that go into this 'biggest decision'. Then they wonder what happened and how it happened. If they'd have lived within their means, rather than praying that creative financing works a miracle for them, we wouldn't have this problem.
  • Y0tsuya, on 03/08/2008, -5/+33All those fools who complain about being cheated or misled by banks and brokers should remember an old saying: "You can't cheat an honest man" - WC Fields. It takes just a moment to review the fist few pages of the loan document, where all the important info are. They knew the risks but were enticed by the ever-rising housing market and wanted a piece of the action, thereby throwing caution to the wind. Well it's coming back to bite them now and I sure as heck ain't gonna help them out with my own money.
    • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6Oh but you are going to help them out because it will be taken out on you through inflation and taxes. Also if it gets bad enough you'll be waiting in bread lines like the rest of us.
  • lettuce55, on 03/08/2008, -2/+28Some people didn't have skills to know they were getting screwed by banks. But some did and acted like morons anyway. It is nice to hear someone telling these people, you screwed up too, stop blaming everybody except yourselves
    • dagoonmaster, on 03/08/2008, -1/+12if you cant read you really dont need to enter home ownership in the first place >_>
      • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -7/+2That's completely arsine. Walk a mile in another mans shoes.
    • Outdoor83, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4Not everyone is that good at math or fully understands the consequences of an adjustable rate mortgage. What you should do if you don't know these things is bring a friend who does, or pay someone for advice who doesn't make more money depending on your decision (such as the banks). It's a home. It's way more money than you make in a year. Be very, very, very careful.
  • orlando37, on 03/08/2008, -1/+17many people did not want to hear the consequences. They were told by the banks and even read in the documents but it did not matter because they were too blinded by greed. It is the oldest trick in advertising. As long as you have them hooked on what they want to hear you can tell them all the negatives about what might happen and what could happen and no one cares about that until it actually happens to them
    • edstate, on 03/08/2008, -2/+1Oooooh! The Advertising just TOO POWERFUL! AAFGH!
  • judyo, on 03/08/2008, -3/+48No sympathy here at all; a computer engineer crying over his daughter's college education that forced him to refi more than $700,000? An attorney that had to bring $65K to closing because of his depreciating house so he could move into a home with a $670K mortgage - aw, poor guy. And the 60 yr. old woman who earned $100K a year until she lost her job & now can't afford her new 4 bedroom, 3 bath home that she bought for her lonely self? Does anyone here think these idiots were misled?
    • diggface5000, on 03/08/2008, -1/+10Makes you wonder if these guys ever heard of a stafford loan... it's got to be a better interest rate than doing a refi
      • edstate, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Student loans are eerily similar, unfortunately. Because when you make something artificially cheap (ala subrime, ala fedsub student loans) you don't make it "easier for more people to "live the American Dream"" Or even "get edumacated"... what you do is essentially raise the price of everything. When Clinton and Congress relaxed home lending standards in the 90's, instead of more people being able to buy a house, we made it possible for people to buy MORE house. And the people selling the houses realized this and raised the prices. Just like colleges and universities did.
        • natenovs, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3but once you graduate you can fix the interest rate and stretch the loan out long enough that any working person should be able to afford. student loans are much safer than an ARM or any mortgage, really.
          • edstate, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3But, with student loans, you CANT refi that loan after you've locked in.
        • roodammy44, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2In one sentence: low rates lead to inflation.
        • diggface5000, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2if you get a low rate you can afford, you don't NEED to refi all the time
    • Brasky, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2They generally don't offer stafford loans to people that live in a $750k house.
      • Y0tsuya, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3That's not a $750K house. It's a $300K house refi'd to $750K during the bubble. There's a difference.
    • bdbr, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Funny, I'm in nearly the same situation as that computer engineer (same job, even), and I saved enough to pay for my daughter's college. The difference? I bought a house that cost half that much. Buying a house that costs seven times your annual income is nuts. That guy is going to be retirement age in a decade and he can't even afford his current lifestyle.
  • jaggedwind, on 03/08/2008, -0/+21People in these stories knew better. Lawyers and engineers? They lived through past bubbles. They knew things weren't going to last and now they tell their stories like theuy're victims. It's sad, how they got sucked in and also how theythey won't face reality of their own greed and stupidity.
  • Jade456, on 03/08/2008, -0/+35Too many people trying to keep up with the Joneses.....too bad the Joneses have been foreclosed on!
    • edstate, on 03/08/2008, -0/+7Nail on head, and then some. The "American Dream" has been so twisted up into some Paris Hilton-esque haze for way too many.
  • michaelpinto, on 03/08/2008, -12/+6Many of the subprime mortgages were sold into poor communities (many of which don't have banks) by predatory lenders, and those folks were screwed once the rates started to rise. When dealing with something like a mortgage lender one couldn't be blamed for assuming that there was some government oversight going on - much the way you'd trust a bank to put your money into. Also you're not suppose to be lent the money for a mortgage if the value of the house is hype. Pointing fingers at these folks and not addressing the crisis is a good way to let it ripple into a recession.
    • whorunbartertwn, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3If the lender lied and the documents incorrectly stated interest rate on the loan was fixed then yes these folks were screwed. It's my understanding some lenders did indeed tell a few lies to get their commission.

      However if that document was signed by someone who could read and didn't bother making sure they understood very clearly the terms under which they were committing 30 years of their lives to, they were not screwed and they do indeed deserve the finger pointer their way.
      • LokitheComplex, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1But aren't these documents written in a way to hide everything. If legal documents were clear why would we need lawyers?
        If the Bank goes down because it systematically leant to the wrong people I'm going to blame the bank. You can always find a sucker to rip off.
        But when the Bank goes down the problem becomes all of ours.
    • ReadItAndWeep, on 03/08/2008, -2/+4That is because the lenders were forced by the government to meet certain quotas for lending to blacks and hispanics. The blacks and hispanics claimed racism when they couldn't get loans, and so they bitched to the government. The government then forced the lenders to give out loans to blacks and hispanics with bad credit who probably wouldn't be able to pay them off. Now the blacks and hispanics claim that it was racist for them to get the loans. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
    • JointVenture, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1So let me get this straight
      , "one couldnt be blamed for ASSUMING that there was some government oversight going on"
      you then use banks as an example.

      There are plenty of bogus BANKS, they're the ones that dont have a big ass FDIC credentials.

      Grow up.
  • diggface5000, on 03/08/2008, -2/+31Government help is NOT the solution. I cashed far too many welfare checks as a bank teller as the customer drove away in a nicer car than I have. I imagine these are the same people who have gotten themselves into this mess with the mortgages. I know enough people who have had their homes(and fixed rate mortgages) for 15+ years and are struggling with raising property taxes... aren't they more victims than these greedy people who tried to outsmart the market?
    • BlueSkyfish, on 03/08/2008, -2/+5Maybe the government should give banks some checks and balances so they can't mislead these people like this again.
      • pyronik, on 03/08/2008, -4/+9maybe the govt should stay out of it and let banks and people make bad decisions and suffer the consequences of their own actions.

        End socialistic taxation, Reduce Wellfare, NO UHC, cut spending and pork, put the govt on a effing diet...
        • BlueSkyfish, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Because we all are hurt by inflation, not just the people that made the mistake.
      • Outdoor83, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2I can paste a line of popular ideas that are unrelated to the main point as well, but that doesn't help anyone.

        We can't let banks take the country down with their own greed any more than we can let someone like Bush take the country down with his own ignorance. The points are related: you point at the people who took the loans to blame, you can also point at the 52% of the country that voted for Bush. We're both affected by the negative actions of those people. That's not fair: in this country, you shouldn't suffer because others are dumb.

        So here's what you do: you don't allow such loans or make regulation to ensure that when people are getting an adjustable rate mortgage, you pass legislation that forces certain information on the front page. For instance, if on adjustable rate mortgages, there was required a table with traditional interest rates throughout history and the associated monthly payments, and a line saying that it's very likely that you will have to pay these monthly rates in the very near future, you'd allow people to hang themselves if they chose.

        However, you'd also take the people who don't want to get evicted and give them the information to avoid it. That's what we're looking for. Not handouts or prohibition on things, just enforced information so the homebuyers who clearly aren't getting the clue have a better chance of seeing and understanding the important numbers before it's too late... because what we're doing clearly isn't working.
    • Spektr4, on 03/08/2008, -1/+6They were probably on welfare *because* they piss money away on status symbols. Funny how you see some nice, expensive rims when driving through the ghetto...
      • cozb, on 03/08/2008, -9/+2hey spektr4, I got news for you, in just a few decades, nobody will give a ***** how hard you worked yesterday or that you are at the office this weekend. What's my point? Well, while others like shinny rims, others like to use work as their escape from reality.... so you are no better then them, you are also part of the problem.
        • girlpirate, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4no no no. others use work to get money so they can pay for things like food, shelter, bills and taxes. Taxes so the ghetto fabulous can have their "shinny" rims.
    • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -4/+2These banks and lenders can't be trusted to police themselves then ***** em. They can be nationalized for all I care. We should extend the death penalty to white collar crime.
    • shig, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Devaluation of the currency victimizes us all.
    • byrdgang, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2As a former pharmacy technician, I have seen people use Medicaid for their prescriptions and they were driving cars nicer than mine (never had Medicaid). Some lady came through the drive-thru in a Hummer, and handed me a Medicaid card.
    • krnldmp, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Nice try. I suppose you think there was plenty of proper government regulation before Enron and the .com bust too.
  • allaboutdatiki, on 03/08/2008, -0/+17So at 52, he has to start over, but it sounds like his daughter should be nearly through a 4 year college program. That's a huge plus. And seeing that he's making a six figure income, surely he could cover the rent on a smaller place now that he's an empty nester.
    • nycmac247, on 03/08/2008, -0/+10yeah, wtf?
      1) sell all unneeded *****
      2) move into an apartment
      3) pay off debt / save for 10 years
      4) reap rewards

      --- or is that too difficult?
      • cozb, on 03/08/2008, -1/+21) sell all unneeded *****
        to who, the other poor bastards?
      • Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2DEAR GOD!!! You just put the ???? in the phrase
        -step1-
        -step 2-
        ????
        Profit!!!

        It's as if the space-time continuum has ripped.
      • zacharytelschow, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2For many Americans, sadly, yes, that is too difficult.
      • mabhatter, on 03/10/2008, -0/+2but the banks just got the bankruptcy laws changes so if you lose the house they can still garnish your wages for the left over money. That's what people don't get here. There is no "getting out of it" by working harder... The banks don't have to stop the interest clock running anymore, they don't have to do a lot of things they USED to even 5 years ago. Once you miss a few payments, combine with the even modest drop in house prices, there's no way to even get a REASONABLE bank loan... THAT is the issue.

        The banks spent years gobbling up smaller banks that made honest loans, and used the federal govt to pressure the states to relax their banking laws. I know in the last 10 years my state change laws many times in order to allow the mergers to go thru... the idea of "loansharking" at 15% or 18% gave way to 25% and "buyer beware"... there was a reason those rules were made and banks got around them or invented new ways to catch customers. The ARMS were blatantly betting against customers, why would the banks be so set on securing these outrageous hikes in monthly payments? Many banks won't even return requests to get you into something more suited to your situation. The bankers are willing to let the economy burn so they can get the double-digit interest rates they've secured.
  • dagoonmaster, on 03/08/2008, -8/+2*insert trite, overused quote similar to what goes around comes around for diggs*
  • Cryoniq, on 03/08/2008, -9/+3*looks at fat american that look himself/herself in mirror*
  • DaDrake, on 03/08/2008, -22/+21Why not just blame Bush instead? Its a popular trend on Digg and it allows us to avoid the real issue. =p
  • Bearasaurass, on 03/08/2008, -3/+2The noted philosopher Dr. Phil? That is notoriety that has not merit.
  • greenboogerman, on 03/08/2008, -1/+13And what message will it send to people if our government subsidizes this mess that people got themselves into?
    • shig, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2That they are the enemy of the people.
    • zacharytelschow, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3That's there's no risk to investment as long as enough idiots are willing to do it with you.
  • knobbers, on 03/08/2008, -2/+14I have no sympathy for these greedy ignorant morons..let em all sleep under a bridge
  • Ell3, on 03/08/2008, -13/+12I, for one, am glad to see this article. Americans "waiting for someone to save them" is exactly why America is well on it's way to becoming a 3rd world slum. Sounds exactly like the pathetic people of New Orleans, waiting for their beloved nanny government to rescue them; too stupid or lazy to take care of themselves. What is it about Americans that makes them so helpless? Why the aversion to personal responsibility?

    It's not "corporate greed", it's consumer stupidity.
    • Choop, on 03/08/2008, -5/+5Nanny government, lol. Where are you from England, Canada? Those places have more "nanny government" than the U.S. will ever have. Nice try moron.
    • alex7575, on 03/08/2008, -2/+5"pathetic people of New Orleans, waiting for their beloved nanny government to rescue them"

      God forbid you lose everything you've ever had or worked for, but if you do, I wanna be there to see how "unlazy" and smart you'll act.
      • cozb, on 03/08/2008, -2/+4he will probably apply for some 'nanny' government program that benefits him.
      • natenovs, on 03/08/2008, -3/+2god forbid you chose live in a hurricane prone area nestled in between a lake and an ocean and below sea-level and couldn't see this coming. god forbid you prepare yourself for the possibility of losing everything. people living in the rest of the gulf states have managed to figure this out.
    • KSUdesigner, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5Sorry but New Orleans is an entirely situation than what is going on with the mortgage crisis. I know a few people who lived in New Orleans when Katrina hit and they have been doing everything in their means to rebuild their lives. Many of their jobs were washed away along with their homes. Many of them were poor to begin with and had no savings to rely on. It IS the government's duty to help its citizens when natural disaster strikes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the government should build every Katrina victim a brand new home, but they do deserve some relief while trying to get back on their feet. As a unified country we have a responsibility to help our fellow citizens in time of need. I understand that you don't want to give away any more of your money in the form of taxes, neither do I, but if your life was destroyed by a natural disaster you'd need some help too.

      On the mortgage crisis, I agree with you that a lot of it is consumer stupidity, but you can't discount corporate greed either, especially considering the CEOs of these mortgage companies are reporting record profits this year.
    • edstate, on 03/08/2008, -0/+11"It's not "corporate greed", it's consumer stupidity."
      It's actually a perfect storm of both.
    • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -1/+6People like Ell3 always are the ones who whine the most when disaster strikes them. You'll be saying "I just don't understand it I did everything by the book" Those people in New Orleans lost everything they had and the entire infrastructure collapsed. and then the government ***** the dog. He'll even Walmart was more useful than our government. Katrina would would have a complete cluster ***** if it wasn't for the Mormons and the Red Cross.
      • zacharytelschow, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1People who "do things by the book" typically don't live in hurricane prone areas next to the ocean below sea level, because they tend to see the idiocy in that. Just a thought.
        • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2People who are born in an area tend to stay in that area because of the ties that bind. Bad things happen to good people all the time.
  • rzxc, on 03/08/2008, -2/+12You notice that this story wasn't run by the mainstream media. In fact, its a rebuttal of stories run by the mainstream media. The mainstream media seams intent on generating sympathy for homeowners. Of course, its not because the mainstream media gives a damn about homeowners. But they do care about the financial institutions that take a hit when people default on their mortgages. By the way, if you want to know what the bailout is going to look like, its going to look like this (unless we stop it). All these bad mortgages are going to be transfered from the financial institutions to the taxpayers. One way or another, I'm sure the banks are going to try and make this happen. Most likely, the politicians are going to try to have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac take the loans, and then have the government guarantee the loans. Besides saddling the taxpayers with huge losses, this is going to encourage the morons on Wall Street to behave even more irrationally, because hey, if they screw up, the government will just bail them out, so why not take even more outrageous risks. If you're wondering what's the best way to bankrupt a country, this is probably it.
    • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -0/+4Commit a crime against the public get executed that put an in to wall-streets BS. For my entire life it's been one scandal after another and they always get let off. Meanwhile some black teenager gets 15 years for selling a dime bag. There's no justice left in America.
    • rnolds, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Good comment. In the UK it's already happened. Case in point being the failed bank Northern Rock bought by the tax payers.
  • cespee, on 03/08/2008, -8/+8I'm letting the bank foreclose on my condo so I can take advantage of a sweet rental deal in a house. I don't give a damn about my credit. My credit's only going to take a hit for 3 years. I will have enough money flowing in after ditching monthly mortgage payments that I can pay for anything I want without loans, so my credit doesn't matter. People need to realize that most of their money goes to a bank through debt payments and taxes. Screw the banks and keep more of your own money! You've been brainwashed into worrying about "credit" and getting the large house now instead of waiting until you can pay for it all at once. I wish the entire nation would get out of debt and keep its own money. The right gets us in debt by engaging in wars. The left gets us into never ending debt by buying too much government cheese than our budget can handle. The debt free options - i.e., Paul, Nadar, Kucinich, supposedly will never win, so you can't "waste" your vote on them. Kucinich would pay for all the cheese with taxes. Paul wouldn't pay for any cheese or guns. Nadar, the consumer advocate, would just pay for things only if the nation could afford it and would keep us safer. They're not "practical" candidates. The most "practical" candidates will get us and our families on a debt treadmill.
    • Bamont, on 03/08/2008, -2/+7So you're allowing a foreclosure on a condo so that you can begin renting? One step forward, two steps back - in my opinion. The reality is that your attitude is what's wrong with a significant part of this country. You believe you can borrow money from banks and not have to pay it back, you believe you can be irresponsible with your money and the government will come along and bail you out. You believe that, in the end, it isn't and shouldn't be YOU that pays back the interest rate on your loan, but tax dollars. Get over yourself. You've been brainwashed into believing all of the problems in your life aren't your fault, and by the way - your credit will be shot for 5-10 years (according to who is running it). Hope you don't need to buy a vehicle, have an emergency, or anything else where having good credit might come in handy.
      • cozb, on 03/08/2008, -2/+2bamont and you believe all the spoon feed responsibilities you 'ought' to have by those with the power/money feed you. Do you really think they play by the same rules? They give you this load of crap so they can remain in power. Should the CEO of a mortgage company make $400m out of this mess?
        • natenovs, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3i think i just threw up a little bit reading that....
      • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -3/+2He shouldn't worry about his credit America won't be around in 10 years anyways. At the rate we are going down the toilet anyone with any sort of job skill will leave the country.
        • cozb, on 03/08/2008, -2/+3do you realize every since 1776 you negative nini's have been say 'America won't be around in 10 years anyways'
          get over it, it's the same ***** different day..
        • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -2/+1I realize that since 1776 America has gone bankrupt twice. I realize since 1868 that the Federal government has been a private corporation registered out of Delaware, and running out of the district of columbia and that it it's own sovereign nation. I realize that our courts which fly the gold fringed tassels run under international maritime law.
    • RedShoulder, on 03/08/2008, -1/+5As a real estate investor I can tell you that you are a fool for thinking that a) your credit will 'only' be damaged for 3 years (try 7 to 10) for a foreclosure, b) Your credit score *does* matter and is looked at when renting as it is typically part of the application process, c) you won't "keep more of your own money" when you are paying higher interest rates for anything you don't have cash to buy outright (like a car), d) you are letting your political views blind you to the economic reality - the country may go into debt and be poorly led by a buffoon in the oval office, but you have the ability to manage your own destiny. You can't manage your future by quitting.

      People like you are why I'll be able to quit my W-2 job soon and be a full-time RE investor. There are so many bargain foreclosure properties out there that my good credit allows me to buy them for a song. Soon I'll be able to get your condo. Thanks!
      • Tusa, on 03/09/2008, -1/+3If you try to catch a falling knife, you're likely to be cut.
    • michlibrarian, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2So you agreed to pay back a loan for a condo and now you are going to walk? The bankruptcy judge may have other ideas. And your credit will be affected far longer than 3 years. Have you ever heard of risk-priced lending? They will see that you defaulted and lower your credit rating a lot. Everything you rent or borrow will cost more for years. Loser.
    • Ruqsaq, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3so you promised to pay for your house and now (not because of a crisis like loosing your job) your going back against you word. Morally you're obligated to pay your mortgage... technically your stealing, and every digger should be pissed because the cost your ignorance and laziness is going to be carried by those of us who do pay their bills. Why don't you stop wasting your time on digg and go get a 2nd job to pay your bill you worthless piece of crap.
  • Radigg, on 03/08/2008, -4/+10the blame lay with legislators and greedy bankers, if you give a loan to someone with an abominable credit history, there can only be one outcome.
    • zacharytelschow, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3So let the bankers eat their losses.
      • mabhatter, on 03/10/2008, -1/+1they'll take YOUR hard earned money with them... Bankers NEVER lose!!! Remember, the only reason your stocks were flying was because other people were overspending and the banks were helping keep the money flowing.

        The deal is that many people simply need refinanced at a FAIR rate, bankers are flat out lying about the whole thing.. they knowingly let people into the ARMS because the customers couldn't afford the banks "real" rates and were doing them a "favor'. Now they won't let them out even if it crashes the banks when they can't pay. The real estate bubble was a blessing for them... the perfect for the real banks to get out of competition from the upstarts funded by wall street. Now we go back to the "old rules" where mortgages are hard to get, with contract from when the rules were changed... the perfect storm.
  • protodon, on 03/08/2008, -0/+9I also have no sympathy for these people because they were going out buying their McMansion that they knew they couldn't afford while I was scraping the money together for a studio-apartment sized shack in the middle of nowhere because I was actually being responsible and staying within my budget.
  • davidemm, on 03/08/2008, -2/+14Don't worry guys! Your tax rebate check is in the mail! We're saved! Yay Bush! *sarcasm*
  • yosserhughes, on 03/08/2008, -8/+4Its analogous to people who smoke cigarettes, get cancer and die. I'm glad, yes glad they are going to die because I'm just too damn smart to ever have smoked. I saw through all those phony commercials, the flashing white teeth, gorgeous women and handsome cowboys. I'm just so cool I amaze myself.

    So all you fools out that that were not as brilliant as me when it comes to finance, I'm glad your going to lose your home and all you've worked for, now when I look in the mirror I can feel even more smug and superior.

    /insert whatever tag you want.

    • alex7575, on 03/08/2008, -2/+4/idiot
    • cozb, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3I wish I could read this op's post at his funeral.. how ironic (and possible) that he dies of cancer. Probably one that is linked to eating red meat or high fatty diet or something avoidable.

      He's so smart, smarter then the rest of us....maybe he's the first generation of a super human.

      Probably has the same, I'm invincible, I can drive 90mph, cut off 'slow' people...and if i cream in to a family, so what...I'm smarter...

      idiot teenagers who have the world all figured out..
    • shig, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1The Banks feel the same way.
  • kublerross, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6but how else can people essential items like SUVs, big screen TVs, etc?
    we need people to buy this crap to sustain our economy
    • shig, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2The only economy that can benefit from the American consumer is China's.
  • NelsonR, on 03/08/2008, -2/+5Talk about a biased article. Now the premises are correct within this article but what about our financial institutions that, do you remember, were bailed out for theft and bad loans in the 90s? Or how about the upper class in America investing in overseas manufacturing and currencies while subverting our economy for the all mighty bottom line and their own portfolios. Do you know how to say, Outsourcing? The blame goes all around and it would have been refreshing if this article mentioned it as a sideline. Greed is Greed and America is now showing the ramifications that will continue, it's called "Globalization" while making our rich richer while they sit on their fat asses with no sweat involved. Louis and Marie of France should be the end game in the future for these despicables.
  • beavershaw, on 03/08/2008, -3/+0Don Doyle Epic Fail. Linda Keenan Epic Win
  • nycmac247, on 03/08/2008, -0/+9This is the rich persons' version of a poor person having kids when they can't afford them.
    Why are people so ***** stupid?
    (knock on wood)
    • thejokker, on 03/08/2008, -0/+10because, they "deserve" a nice house, and a house is an investment right? it will always go up in value. And because i want i want i want i want.
  • thejokker, on 03/08/2008, -0/+27i was watching a show on HGTV following a couple buying their first house, the couple talked about how they didnt think they could afford it. Then the broker told them about this great way to finance the house. They were going to get a adjustable loan for 80% of the house and then an interest only loan for the other 20%. This was their best option because according to the broker, 'they wouldn't be approved for the full amount with a regular loan.'

    The guy and girl talk about it and then thank the broker for helping them get their house. Me and my wife just starred at the TV in shock.
    • Goldbricker, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5That's standard practice in the lending industry. All day long. What's worse is about a year ago I started seeing these negative equity loans. They went on the assumption that your home was going to appreciate at a rate of 5% per year "Because we all know that real estate never goes down in the long run right guy?" So they would allow people to pay even lower monthly payments than interest only. Basically borrowing money against your house while you're making payments on it. HORRIBLE product. Got a lot of people in predicaments that they never recovered from.
    • shig, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Good God...
  • mikesown, on 03/08/2008, -1/+5I completely agree with the article. The problem leads back to WWII. At the end of WWII, American was the only remaining superpower. We were flush with cash from other countries buying military goods from us, and we had a ton of money in our economy. There was a job for everyone. With this influx of money and prosperity came the amenities we deem requirements for basic living today(a house, car, TV, various home appliances like microwaves, stereos, etc.). Now, money is leaving our economy at a staggering rate to countries like China. We can no longer afford these amenities. As a country, we must realize our situation, and adjust our standard of living accordingly. Until Americans are willing to work for $2/hr, and live in tenement apartments giving up many amenities we have today, we will be a net exporter, and our economy will continue to tank. Is it glamourous? No way in hell. But, it's the only way we'll gain a prosperous, sustainable, economy.
    • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2If everyone was making $2/hour then all of our debts would be unpaid. Hell at $2/hour you can't pay rent or buy groceries.
    • cozb, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5mikesown, so what you are saying basically capitalism as reached its peak, where the consumers can no longer buy from the producers? I think Karl Marx wrote a book about that...
    • SemiSarcastic, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6I agree, but America didn't become the sole superpower until 1991 after the Soviet Union fell. And if I remember correctly we became (somewhat of) an exporter country after world war two (at least until corporations started looking over seas) and people could still afford televisions and other things for themselves. We aren't doing ourselves any favors saying we'll soon be working on $2/hr wages, because if you do you'll see a lot of people saying "well ***** this, robbing a bank is easier than working 3/5's less of what I was making before". You need balance, and we don't act like a third world country to get there...and unfortunately we'll still bread and circuses because lets face it, if your life was that ***** that's the only thing keeping you from offing yourself. If you don't believe just look at the amount of WoW accounts in China.
    • nycmac247, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1you might want to look at a few articles on Buckminster Fuller - we have the resources for double our population to live at what can be called "middle class" - and all without commie redistribution. All we would need is a gov't that spent money on awesome infrastructure...

    • michlibrarian, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1And in 1944, if you made more than $200,000 the federal income tax rate was 90%.
  • jimmyb3, on 03/08/2008, -1/+8H&ll freaking yeah! Finally, personal responsibility is rescued right before being taken out behind the barn and shot. Please, people, you are responsible for your actions, dammit.
    • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1Yeah and frauds and charlatans in high places have nothing to do with it,
      • zacharytelschow, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2If they give out risky loans to people who default and then after foreclosure get stuck with homes worth a fraction of what they paid for them, are they really ahead?
        • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1Yes. because they take the promise to pay and count it as income on their books. They create the money out of nothing and give you a check. Then your debt is seen as an credit on their books and they lend out based on the amount of equity you have paid them. It's called factional reserve banking, the ratio of money they can now lend to others compared to what they need on hand to the amount owed is now 1000:1.
  • cozb, on 03/08/2008, -4/+5lol, and CEO's of these companies taking $400m are innocent, they couldn't be part of the problem, or could be...

  • aserer511, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1i has a question. when you refinance, is the principle of the loan the remainder of the adjusted value of your house, or is the principle still what you paid in year x?
    • michlibrarian, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2The principle of the loan is how much you borrow, without the interest or fees. If you end up with a mortgage that starts out not even requiring enough to cover the interest, the principle will increase.
  • mattes5, on 03/08/2008, -4/+3... Here comes the finger pointing game... Everyone is going to blame the free markets... still the real problem (monetary issues) go ignored... how many bad buisness cycles do we have to go through to realize that central, fractionial reserve banking, fiat currency is a failure? And is the cause of this current economic down turn and majority of the others in the 20th century including the great depression.

    I'll just ignore bad policy like fair lending laws
    • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2As much as I think the central banks are run by super criminals there was a business cycle before central banking. The Depression in the late 19th century happened without fiat currency and we where on the gold standard. Fractional reserve banking is 500 years old now, it works fine when the banks follow good banking practices.
      • mattes5, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1Well I'm not advocating a gold standard I just want freedom in the banking system and in currency. Instead of bailing out banks and insuring them from bank runs let them go out of buisness. The market will discard banks that practice bad buisness and lax lending. Also artificially low interest rates are detrimental and led to the lax lending and increased borrowing. I think if we allowed the market to compete with the federal reserve note It would pick the superior currency and we won't have an economy that is being debased like our currently is.
  • oilcan, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1all the rich real estate moguls are now suffering because of our insatiable greed and wanton spending. those poor bastards! victims, i say!
  • tattertech, on 03/08/2008, -3/+4That's *****!
    No one should be held responsible for entering into something they couldn't keep up with!
    • Mier, on 03/08/2008, -1/+4I'm going to throw the /sarcasm tag in here for you. Otherwise you are a ***** idiot.
      • tattertech, on 03/10/2008, -0/+2I mean seriously... would any one say that (at least in that way) without being sarcastic?
  • skews13, on 03/08/2008, -4/+3anyone who bought a home with the intention of living in it,and not flipping it,and bought in the price range that reflects in their personal salary the ability to pay for it. should have their mortgage payments,and interest rate,adjusted to help them stay in that home. speculators,and the mortgage companies who catered to them,should lose their asses.
    • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6The ridiculous price of housing in our cities due to speculation is one of the major problems with all this. Housing is actually cheap to build relatively. Land speculation, and housing speculation have priced out any working person from owning anything in a major city. There's no good reason why a house that cost $4000 to build in the sixties should sell in the millions today.
    • dadioflex, on 03/08/2008, -0/+55 years ago you'd be hard pressed to find home-owners who weren't crowing about how much money they'd made on their homes. Should all those people who turned a 50k home into a 250k home be made to give the money back?

      The ridiculous price of housing is due to relatively ordinary people with slightly more available money than average, buying property instead of getting a pension. Those "speculators" are suffering like everybody else. The only people who made a killing were the realtors who were working on a commission. The banks and mortgage companies are all losing money. Homeowners are getting rimmed. Real estate agents are just reining in their plans to buy solid gold spaceships.
      • Jlaugh, on 03/08/2008, -2/+1With factional reserve banking being at a ratio of 1000:1 the banks certainly aren't loosing money. Every dollar they lend you is loaned out to other people for a $1000. If you get a credit card and spend $3000 you've made the bank $3 000 000 for the price of giving you a check. When people start to default it doesn't matter because the bank has already sold those bonds off on the stock market where eventually they be sold as investment opportunities under safe sounding names. Then when those funds go bad they write it off and the investors and tax payers are left holding the bill.
  • NelsonR, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3We all know what slavery is by the act of servitude while making a master richer.
    Modern slavery is the act of purchasing a home with a mortgage and enslaving yourself over countless years while making the elitist and rich in our society richer. The double whammy comes when our nations infrastructures are financed through unbridled taxes called property assessments. If you cannot pay cash for your dwelling do not become just another slave for your lifetime, there are alternatives.
    • Goldbricker, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2That wasn't true over the past ten years. The middle class in this country were given a HUGE gift in the form of an immense amount of equity that suddenly appeared in their homes as one of the largest booms in real estate history occurred. Unfortunately too many of them have used this boon to buy big screen TVs and spinning rims.
    • bdbr, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Non-farm home mortgages are actually a fairly recent thing - it started with government-backed loans in 1934. Before that, home loans were mainly designed to promote foreclosure. Not surprisingly, home ownership was fairly rare. I really don't think that people want to go back to the days when only the rich own property.
  • Mier, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Totally correct which is surprising these days. No bailouts. It's greed, greed from the banks and the consumer overreaching himself, all around that caused this mess and it may feel like 1929 again but they survived and so can we. Coming out the other side of this we'll probably be even stronger and smarter about our money.
    • LokitheComplex, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2Who survived?
      People in the future will be just as clever as they were dumb in the past.
  • golfguy6, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3Nobody should have any sympathy for people that bought into variable mortgages out of greed. The only person we should all have sympathy for is the taxpayer who in the end is going to fit the bill for this mess.
  • michlibrarian, on 03/08/2008, -0/+6I stopped going to banks and am a member of a Credit Union. They make it a point to educate and counsel members who apply for loans, including mortgages. The Credit Union loan officers work to help their members. If someone can't afford a house, the loan officers tell them. But they go the second mile and teach them to get into the place to be able to afford a house. There are a lot of predatory lenders who were interested in the fees they got immediately and did not care whether the person defaulted in two years. Lenders have a social responsibility and many of them ignored it to line their own pockets. My Credit Union does have adjustable rate mortgages, after 1, 3, 5, or 7 years, but they never go up more than 2% in any year or over 6% in the life of the loan. One person from a bank mortgage shifted to the Credit Union after he discovered that after one year his bank adjustable rate mortgage adjusted monthly. Yes there are people who are buying speculatively, but a lender can figure out that as well. It is unbelievable to let predatory lenders off the hook. How many mortgages defaulted at my Credit Union out of thousands (in the past 5 years)? Two. One of those was when both adults lost their jobs and couldn't find another.
  • Andia83, on 03/08/2008, -1/+7While I realize a lot of people were trying to live beyond their means, that wasn't always the case. When my parents bought their home they could afford it quite comfortably, but then my stepdad's company gave everyone a paycut, my grandmother had to come live with us so we could take care of her, their original home owners insurance company bailed out of the state because of possible hurricane damage costs, I could go on really. Point is, unforeseen events kept taking place and they had to file for chapter 13 bankrupcy and now the whole family has to budget very carefully so we can just buy groceries after all the other bills are paid. So really, all you people saying "let them sleep under bridges, greedy bastards," ***** you.
    • Andia83, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5My point was that sometimes things happen even when people live within their means. For the record, we weren't stupid enough to get an ARM or anything. Just wanted to clear that up.
      • zacharytelschow, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5You were hit by bad circumstances and aren't the type of people who get most of us ticked off; you're obviously being responsible citizens. I'm personally made mad by people who take out a mortgage on a house worth ten times their annual salary and just think someday they'll figure out a way to make payments.
    • byrdgang, on 03/08/2008, -0/+2That's real talk. The author of this article would like you to think that you can plan for everything, but how's that possible? If your doctor tells you that you have cancer after buying a house, how could you have planned for this? You'd have to spend a lot of money on the treatment.

      Sure, you shouldn't buy an expensive car, but you can't plan everything. My mother is a safe driver, and just this week, she got into a car accident because someone dumped a tire on the road. If the accident was really bad, how would she have covered everything?

      You can try your best, but no plan is perfect.
  • d03boy, on 03/08/2008, -1/+3I didn't ***** do it.
  • Goldbricker, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5As a real estate appraiser I have seen two things that I think should be done by the government in order to improve the lending process. The first is that mortgage brokers and loan officers should be regulated and licensed by either the federal or state governments. Included in this regulation should be extensive background checks to get some of the shadier characters out of the lending business. Another thing that should definitely be done is to formulate a plan for providing true appraiser independence from mortgage companies. Something modeled along the lines of appraisal service companies as they operate today, however, without the middle man taking a piece from the appraiser.
    • diggerphelps, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Well, the forces of gravity have already taken care of a lot of this, and hopefully will be allowed to finish the job.
      Banks now know they can't just throw money out there willy-nilly and expect it to come back, so they're starting to be much more diligent in vetting borrowers again.
      It's likely the pendulum will swing too far the other way, but that's life.
  • greevar, on 03/08/2008, -0/+5This is the stock market crash all over again. People were allowed to invest on a margin (10% from you, 90% from the bank) and greed got the better of them. Then, when the market crashed, these people still owed the margin they borrowed in addition to the money they lost on the market. Sound familiar?
  • light65733, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2Everyone forgets what the problem really is. The problem is that homes are too expensive. We live in a global economy and we, the workers, are now getting paid at the global rate, which incidentally sucks. Home prices are too high for our wages.
    • vermax, on 03/08/2008, -1/+2"price" is whatever you can get someone to give you for it. as long as someone's willing to fork over outrageous cash, then that's the market rate, and if you sell it for less than that you're stupid. the problem is gullible acquisitive morons that are so hungry for the trappings of success that they overextend themselves, and then go down in flames. if it's a few people, who cares, good riddance. but when it's a few million, well, it turns into the giant bowl of ***** we're all swimming in now.
  • alexthekidd, on 03/08/2008, -7/+1stupidest thing i've ever read. economy is sustained by increased consumer spending, if they didn't do it, the whole thing would collapse long time ago.. thats what capitalism is all about.. the author should study a bit of economics first
  • vermax, on 03/08/2008, -3/+1i have zero sympathy for the retards that got themselves into these messes, and I don't care if Darwin takes them all. I'm glad someone is pointing the finger at them, but it's a lot like blaming a retard for shooting themselves in the face (as well as blasting holes in the rest of us bystanders who had the sense not to pick up the gun, and who now have to suffer through the tanked economy), when who was it that offered them the free gun? the ***** bankers who took their bonusses and ran, and the crappy politicians who created the laws that let them do it. you can say it's knee jerk to blame Bush, but who is about to get yet another great big scary national crisis that we need more radically ***** solutions to save us from? seems pretty ***** convenient to me...
  • krnldmp, on 03/08/2008, -0/+3Here's the deal kids. Capitalism is an engine that winds out and burns itself up without government regulation. You can cry about it if you want, but that's the way it is. Class dismissed.
  • vermax, on 03/08/2008, -1/+1the US economy is like some douchebag that pumped himself full of HGH and steroids for years, looking all sassy and macho, but now it's got droopy boobs, no testicles, and pancreatic cancer.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.