What is Digg?211 Comments
- theberlindoctor, on 11/20/2008, -15/+231Guess what: I didn't take out a loan without knowing what I was getting into. I didn't buy a house above my income level. I didn't leverage my mortgage to buy ***** I didnt need. I don't even own a credit card.
So ***** you, its not my fault. - theberlindoctor, on 11/20/2008, -0/+94Getting screwed out of retirement or laid off for other people's bad decisions is quite a personal experience. And then being told its time to take my share of the blame for something I was intelligent enough not to take part in is equally personally offensive.
- FyreGoddess, on 11/20/2008, -6/+53There are several problems with this line of thinking. First, people try to take the easiest way out. Sorting blame between many different areas is not going to work for most people. They need to point at a single group in order to understand it.
Second, the government has more of a role in terms of "blame" than a lot of people realize. Encouraging spending at the expense of saving is irresponsible and reckless, yet it has been going on for a very long time. Also, the borrow and spend example given to us by our government has said to many people that, at the highest levels, this is not only acceptable, but a smart way to manage finances. If it's good enough for the country as a whole, it should be good enough for the smaller-scale individual, no?
Third, predatory lending practices CANNOT be ignored. There is an article in this week's Newsweek that talks about small banks and credit unions that loaned money to high-risk borrowers and have the lowest instances of default across the country. These small banks and credit unions are getting to know the individuals and attempting to give them what will actually be a benefit to the consumer, as opposed to trying to get a bonus for foisting extra fees and dangers on the people who think they're getting the American Dream. In a situation where people are encouraged to not read the fine print and who are made to trust the people who are selling them things they not only don't need, but will cause them harm in the future, predatory lending practices (not just of large banks and mortgage brokers, but also of credit card companies) need to be seriously looked at.
Finally, while I know that there are certainly some people who took advantage of what they saw as a "something for nothing" deal, most people who are affected by the economic situation had little to do with creating it. I'm watching the people around me who have good credit ratings, who spend within their means, who don't take out loans or pay with credit cards (or pay off the credit cards at the end of the month) and who pay their bills on time are the ones losing their jobs and unable to find something else. These are the people who did not exacerbate the situation and, in fact, did everything right.
The problem with putting the blame on the consumers is that the few who helped to create this problem are small in number and don't represent the general population. These are people who either tried to take advantage of the market and the low housing prices, who were ignorant about the realities of home ownership or severe debt or who had their situations change on them with little to no warning. The greater problem is what led to the consumers being taken advantage of or being led to believe that carrying extreme loads of debt was acceptable.
I'm sick and tired of people trying to excuse the government and/or big business because the consumers should take responsibility. The bottom line is that this economic crisis has shown a large number of people the dangers of carrying large burdens of debt and those people are now trying to pay it down. Hopefully we'll also see an increase in Americans saving for the long-term. If those behaviors don't already indicate taking responsibilty for their own actions, nothing will, but to blame the state of the entire country's economy on a very small group of its citizens, even to apportion a great enough portion as to say that people aren't *already* doing this, is not only foolish, it's a dangerous line of thinking. - Autodidaddict, on 11/21/2008, -2/+42I have to be honest when I say "***** You Andy" (Andy = author of this article).
Of course there is blame on people who irresponsibly took out mortgages when they couldn't afford the payments or didn't understand how an ARM works.
What is real ***** is for the millions of Americans who played by the rules...and are now getting ***** by this mess. The kind of people that maintain good credit, and took out a mortgage that was within their means...yet now their whole neighborhood has lost 30% value. They were not the sleazy lenders nor the stupid recipient's. Yet they suffer too...we all do.
The point of blame should be to fix problems. And although the people getting these mortgages and then defaulting is part of the equation, it is hard to fix the problem on this end. Humans will always want more than they can have or afford.
What can be fixed is banks and lenders not caring about whether the mortgage is defaulted on because they are just selling the mortgage as a security to someone else. What can be fixed is these institutions encouraging their employees to rack up as many loans as possible to any random ***** because that means more profit on their pocket.
To cast blame on irresponsible borrowers is obvious. Both the lenders and borrowers were being greedy. The borrowers were being greedy wanting what they couldn't afford. The lenders were being greedy loaning out other people's money not caring if it gets paid back because they still get their cut. But at least the lenders knew better. Ignorance is no defense for criminal acts, but I blame preditory greed more than ignorant greed. - kimsun, on 11/20/2008, -5/+43"If I owe my bank a hundred pounds, I have a problem. If I owe my bank a million pounds, my bank has a problem" - John Maynard Keynes.
The blame falls squarely on the shoulders of central banks and governments. - inactive, on 11/20/2008, -1/+36What consumers were responsible for the bundling/selling of loans, and associated ***** risk management levels that were made up to boost the value?
- BeShirtHappy, on 11/20/2008, -3/+33I don't think the author of the blog meant "you" or those of us that did not buy a home that was more than we could afford, etc. It's those people that did live beyond their means that scream the loudest that it's our government/banks fault.
- Autodidaddict, on 11/21/2008, -3/+32He doesn't have to chill. Many millions of hard-working fair and honest Americans who played by the rules are now the ones being punished by all this crazy *****. When the housing market tanks and home value deflates, it doesn't just happen to the houses that get foreclosed. It affects the whole neighborhood.
It's unfair, and people have a right to be angry. - selmer, on 11/21/2008, -4/+27I blame you.
- swrostmore, on 11/20/2008, -1/+23"It's not our fault we're richer than ever and you're all *****. It's your fault. Now you get to pay our debts."
Love, Wall Street - northwatuppa, on 11/20/2008, -6/+26Oh come on. Just give the blogger some credit for making a good point and stop being so self-righteous.
I lived within my means, avoided buying a condo, invested very conservatively, and don't drive etc., etc., etc., etc. But I live in a town where even 1st year coeds drive SUV's and McMansions sprouted around the outskirts of town like mushrooms after a rain. Overpriced real estate sold like hot cakes.
It isn't hard to see that the blogger in question is not talking about me (or us). But there are plenty of people out there who the shoe does fit. - Cancerkitty, on 11/20/2008, -0/+18I completely understand your frustrations. We've always been prudent too: small home, used cars, etc. However, we're taking it up the ass nonetheless because of the people who weren't.
I think this article is directed all all the people hip-deep in debt that are trying to point fingers elsewhere. And there are a lot of those guys. Hell, I work with about a dozen of them. - Autodidaddict, on 11/21/2008, -0/+16@theberlindoctor:
I just finished writing my post (its a response to the very first post in the comments section) when I read your comment and I couldn't agree more.
The real victims here are the innocent bystanders that played by the rules. - mmijatov, on 11/20/2008, -4/+19Who or what can you blame?
The Federal Government
Blind faith in capitalism
Greedy Predatory lenders
Greedy Wall Street traders selling mortgage backed securities knowing they were bunk just to turn a profit
Greedy investors buying up said securities to make a buck
Greedy homeowners too eager to live the "american dream" not doing their homework on their loans
Lack of regulation
Wait, mortgage backed securities?!?! WTF is this some kind of joke?
Greedy financial executives/CEO's not caring about the long term risks, but more concerned with the next earnings report
The idea that an economy can simply keep growing indefinitely, with no decline, forever and ever and everyone gets rich!!1111 - FyreGoddess, on 11/20/2008, -0/+15Who is "we"?
Not only did I not buy a house I couldn't afford, I don't know anyone personally who did. So what responsibility do I have in this situation? I live within my means, I pay my bills on time, the vast majority of debt I carry is in my student loans (which I make payments on every month), I don't even own a credit card.
Someone needs to explain to me how I, as a fiscally responsible individual, can take "responsibility" for what happened to the country's economy. - AmyVernon, on 11/20/2008, -3/+18Word. When you live above — or almost to the edge of — your means, you can't start freaking out when things go badly. OK, you can, but then you're just an ass.
- FyreGoddess, on 11/20/2008, -0/+14The government isn't fixing ANYTHING for the consumers. Maybe you haven't noticed. So far, what's happening is that the government is REWARDING predatory lenders by giving them money and saying "Now don't be irresponsible with that money" and then looking the other way when they go off on corporate retreats and allowing them to defend massive EOY bonuses because "if we don't give bonuses to our high-tier management, they'll jump ship once the economy recovers".
How, exactly, is this benefiting the general public?
There is a huge difference between reckless spenders and people who default on mortgages. This was a wake up call for most people who have reduced their spending significantly and are making an attempt to change the habits that have been encouraged in them.
For decades, American consumers have been told that it is their patriotic duty to spend money. No money? No worries, here's ANOTHER credit card. Now that people are making the effort to change the habits that they were told made them "good Americans" people are trying to claim that THEY are causing further problems in the economy.
FFS, the Big Three American automakers took separate private jets to Washington to make the claim that they need bailout money. Maybe we should blame the American consumers for not wanting to take on more debt by buying a new car this year.
Very few people are assuming that they've done *NOTHING* wrong, but most people aren't going to take on the blame of a collapsed economic system when their actions were encouraged and endorsed by their own government. The personal responsibility to be taken is to pay down debt, to live within your means and to make a better effort at saving. It is not to take on the failure of the overall economic system that no one person can effect as an individual. - AmyVernon, on 11/20/2008, -11/+23@theberlindoctor - Don't take stuff so personally. Chill.
- emazur, on 11/20/2008, -2/+14You can blame the American people, but don't forget it was the government that encouraged the people to spend recklessly such as by passing the community reinvestment act and by manipulating interest rates - giving cheap credit. Here is what Peter Schiff had to say about it (this was before the Sept. meltdown even occurred):
"What few economic leaders have acknowledged is that the Federal Reserve itself is responsible for the real estate and credit bubbles, which are the source of our current troubles. By keeping interest rates too low for too long, the Fed ignited a speculative fever and engendered a disregard for risk management that pushed asset prices above rational levels. Should we blame the private sector for taking advantage of all the cheap credit, or the Federal Reserve for supplying it? If a kindergarten teacher passes out handfuls of Pixie Sticks, and then leaves her classroom unattended for several hours, should we blame the five year olds for the hysteria that ensues?" - Peter Schiff - PoizonFrog, on 11/21/2008, -0/+11I'm with the doctor on this one. I didn't partake of the activities that caused the demise. The self-indulgent had their fun at everyone else's expense.
- homercles337, on 11/21/2008, -0/+11Agreed. I didnt do any financially stupid things. However, i do have a couple credit cards that i use, but they have low to no balance. My rent is not out of my means by being under 30% (23% actually) and i dont even own a car. Do i get a cookie? I sure as hell am not getting a big chunk of cash because i didnt drive any business into the ground. Maybe a cookie is all i can expect?
- thepoliticalcat, on 11/21/2008, -1/+11I agree with berlindoctor. I bought my house with a loan, but paid more than the minimum downpayment because I did not want to pay mortgage insurance. I bought what I could afford. I took out a HELOC, but paid it all back as quickly as I could. We pay all our bills on time, have no outstanding credit card debt, don't spend on "luxuries" and drive well-maintained old cars, recycle, compost, eat at home, cook everything from scratch. So I refuse to accept any blame. Our spending habits are very moderate and when we both work fulltime, we save approximately one-third or more of our combined income. We don't buy new clothes every season and we don't replace anything that is whole and still usable. A lot of people lived beyond their means for a decade or more. Now they're going to have to learn to live with less.
- torgo112, on 11/20/2008, -2/+11I think there is plenty of blame to go around, between the public, banks, lenders, traders, and government at all levels. I also think there are a lot more reckless spenders out there than you think.
If you ask me, the last thing this Country needs is an already apathetic and lazy public to sit back and assume that they’ve done nothing wrong, and wait for the gub’ment to fix it for them. - BeShirtHappy, on 11/20/2008, -27/+36This is a very good post. It's time to stop the blame game... and take responsibility for our actions.
- apothekari, on 11/21/2008, -1/+10I never bought a House I couldn't afford. And I don't know anyone who has.
I have never owned a new car.
I have lived paycheck to paycheck for my entire life, and I am lower middle class.
I know only one person in my circles who has ran out and bought stuff willy nilly without regard for cost or anything.I only have 1 credit card.
I haven't been able to take a Vacation in almost 7 years and that last one was one my In laws paid for a week at Disney.{we kicked a little in on gas food and hotel}
We live humbly and not exactly by choice, we have for years.
So I have absolutely NO blame in this current mess.
And I am getting REALLY tired of conservatives blaming me and poorer than me for this ***** mess.
Who ran out and bought house after house in order to "flip" them and make gobs of cash???!!!
Hmmmmm?...I remember working my ass off to get the loan I got for my home in early 2001 and had to make sure that I even cleaned up a couple of things before it was approved.So to me personally I think this whole "people went crazy buying ***** they didn't need" stuff is total *****.
You have to have SOME money in order to spend it OR get credit.
Otherwise you are shown the door. - duffman03, on 11/21/2008, -0/+9We, and probably most diggers belong to the (relatively) financially smart side of America. The other side doesn't bother to keep money aside for a rainy day and is financially retard. And now instead of liquidating their bad loans WE get to pay them off, thanks to our politicians. So screw the people who think they can live a lifestyle beyond their means and the politicians who protect them.
- rizzo2008, on 11/21/2008, -0/+8We lived beyond our means and this is what we get. An economic system based entirely on debt always fails
- Nozzle, on 11/21/2008, -1/+9I've never been in debt, and I've been holding off buying a house until I can actually afford it. So I will blame Wall Street, the Feds, Banks, and the dumb*sses who bought houses that clearly could not afford to do so.
- AmyVernon, on 11/20/2008, -0/+6Precisely. My family, too, has lived within its means. And provided I don't lose my job, we've escaped the worst of the downturn — we even bought a house in foreclosure. But the blogger has a good point. Most of the people yelling the loudest for a bailout are the ones who got themselves and this nation into this mess. Yeah, there are predatory lenders. But people who were never able to buy a house before who suddenly were when the prices were twice as high should have recognized they wouldn't be able to pay their bills.
Greed. - onlysc, on 11/20/2008, -6/+12ah, both comments make valid points. blame game or no blame game... who's to say?
- SuperVepr308, on 11/20/2008, -2/+8Many people just went buck ***** wild thinking things would never change. Well, they did and now the ***** has hit the fan. The consumers went nuts spending, the gov'ment encouraged it, and the banks didn't mind at all. The bad part is, the consequences are not spread out as evenly as the blame. Bankers are still rich, Dodd/Frank/Pelosi/Many Republicans got a free pass and the consumer is picking up the bill whether they deserve it or not. Yes, it's ***** up but them's the facts.
- gwolf, on 11/21/2008, -2/+8Some like to blame the Clinton administration for trying to make housing more accessible to the lower middle class. The truth is that current administration did everything it could to make sure the predatory lending practices stayed in place long after things started to get out of hand.
Some states even tried to protect their citizens from these molesters and W intervened on behalf of the lenders to prevent it. We have had laws in place for a long time to prevent these abuses, but they are worthless if the executive branch chooses not to enforce them. In an atmosphere where an avalanche of lies was employed to coax ordinary people into bad decisions, it really doesn't make sense to blame the victims. - inactive, on 11/21/2008, -1/+7*****: The models used in Wallstreet were inherently flawed to begin with by being Gaussian.
The only mistake that were made was believing these charlatans without question like some kind of Religion. - StayCee, on 11/21/2008, -2/+8No one made anyone buy or move into anything. Americans have always have this attitude that someone will just come behind them and clean up whatever mess they make. Everyone wants the government to bail these failing companies out, but if they had of tried to get involved when the getting was good then everyone would have been screaming socialism and freaking out. We can't have it both ways.
If you make your bed you have to lay in it, no matter how many people you're sharing sheets with. - shadovvman, on 11/21/2008, -1/+7I handle mortgage loans for one of America's largest lending institutions, and almost all of the borrowers I deal with every day are in default. Many are in active foreclosure.
The stories I hear every day break my heart. Many of our borrowers bought homes they simply cannot afford, but for the most part, the people defaulting on these loans are average families who had loans they could afford but have lost their jobs or had reduction in hours / income due to the economy. They're doing everything they can to keep afloat, but the economy simply won't let them.
I readily admit a lot of this situation is the fault of both greed and a failure to live within reasonable means. But thousands upon thousands of people who are being hit hardest by this economic crunch really did nothing to deserve it. - slowth, on 11/21/2008, -0/+6Unfortunately, you have no choice in the matter. You will accept the blame and pay the consequences because we live in a global economy. We all appreciate your frugal living, but it doesn't mean jack squat when there is a systemic failure.
- CalmLlama, on 11/21/2008, -1/+7The economy isn't actually doing that bad for consumers, the companies are the ones hurting. I really don't see a need to bail them out either. The people running these companies are making obscene amounts of money and not making a product that sells. Companies shouldn't be bailed out for making poor business decisions.
- Shakermaker83, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5 We live in two Americas. One America, now the minority, functions in a print-based, literate world. It can cope with complexity and has the intellectual tools to separate illusion from truth. The other America, which constitutes the majority, exists in a non-reality-based belief system. This America, dependent on skillfully manipulated images for information, has severed itself from the literate, print-based culture. It cannot differentiate between lies and truth. It is informed by simplistic, childish narratives and clichés. It is thrown into confusion by ambiguity, nuance and self-reflection. This divide, more than race, class or gender, more than rural or urban, believer or nonbeliever, red state or blue state, has split the country into radically distinct, unbridgeable and antagonistic entities.
There are over 42 million American adults, 20 percent of whom hold high school diplomas, who cannot read, as well as the 50 million who read at a fourth- or fifth-grade level. Nearly a third of the nation’s population is illiterate or barely literate. And their numbers are growing by an estimated 2 million a year. But even those who are supposedly literate retreat in huge numbers into this image-based existence. A third of high school graduates, along with 42 percent of college graduates, never read a book after they finish school. Eighty percent of the families in the United States last year did not buy a book.
The illiterate rarely vote, and when they do vote they do so without the ability to make decisions based on textual information. American political campaigns, which have learned to speak in the comforting epistemology of images, eschew real ideas and policy for cheap slogans and reassuring personal narratives. Political propaganda now masquerades as ideology. Political campaigns have become an experience. They do not require cognitive or self-critical skills. They are designed to ignite pseudo-religious feelings of euphoria, empowerment and collective salvation. Campaigns that succeed are carefully constructed psychological instruments that manipulate fickle public moods, emotions and impulses, many of which are subliminal. They create a public ecstasy that annuls individuality and fosters a state of mindlessness. They thrust us into an eternal present. They cater to a nation that now lives in a state of permanent amnesia. It is style and story, not content or history or reality, which inform our politics and our lives. We prefer happy illusions. And it works because so much of the American electorate, including those who should know better, blindly cast ballots for slogans, smiles, the cheerful family tableaux, narratives and the perceived sincerity and the attractiveness of candidates. We confuse how we feel with knowledge.
The illiterate and semi-literate, once the campaigns are over, remain powerless. They still cannot protect their children from dysfunctional public schools. They still cannot understand predatory loan deals, the intricacies of mortgage papers, credit card agreements and equity lines of credit that drive them into foreclosures and bankruptcies. They still struggle with the most basic chores of daily life from reading instructions on medicine bottles to filling out bank forms, car loan documents and unemployment benefit and insurance papers. They watch helplessly and without comprehension as hundreds of thousands of jobs are shed. They are hostages to brands. Brands come with images and slogans. Images and slogans are all they understand. Many eat at fast food restaurants not only because it is cheap but because they can order from pictures rather than menus. And those who serve them, also semi-literate or illiterate, punch in orders on cash registers whose keys are marked with symbols and pictures. This is our brave new world.
Political leaders in our post-literate society no longer need to be competent, sincere or honest. They only need to appear to have these qualities. Most of all they need a story, a narrative. The reality of the narrative is irrelevant. It can be completely at odds with the facts. The consistency and emotional appeal of the story are paramount. The most essential skill in political theater and the consumer culture is artifice. Those who are best at artifice succeed. Those who have not mastered the art of artifice fail. In an age of images and entertainment, in an age of instant emotional gratification, we do not seek or want honesty. We ask to be indulged and entertained by clichés, stereotypes and mythic narratives that tell us we can be whomever we want to be, that we live in the greatest country on Earth, that we are endowed with superior moral and physical qualities and that our glorious future is preordained, either because of our attributes as Americans or because we are blessed by God or both.
The ability to magnify these simple and childish lies, to repeat them and have surrogates repeat them in endless loops of news cycles, gives these lies the aura of an uncontested truth. We are repeatedly fed words or phrases like yes we can, maverick, change, pro-life, hope or war on terror. It feels good not to think. All we have to do is visualize what we want, believe in ourselves and summon those hidden inner resources, whether divine or national, that make the world conform to our desires. Reality is never an impediment to our advancement.
The Princeton Review analyzed the transcripts of the Gore-Bush debates, the Clinton-Bush-Perot debates of 1992, the Kennedy-Nixon debates of 1960 and the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858. It reviewed these transcripts using a standard vocabulary test that indicates the minimum educational standard needed for a reader to grasp the text. During the 2000 debates, George W. Bush spoke at a sixth-grade level (6.7) and Al Gore at a seventh-grade level (7.6). In the 1992 debates, Bill Clinton spoke at a seventh-grade level (7.6), while George H.W. Bush spoke at a sixth-grade level (6.8), as did H. Ross Perot (6.3). In the debates between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, the candidates spoke in language used by 10th-graders. In the debates of Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas the scores were respectively 11.2 and 12.0. In short, today’s political rhetoric is designed to be comprehensible to a 10-year-old child or an adult with a sixth-grade reading level. It is fitted to this level of comprehension because most Americans speak, think and are entertained at this level. This is why serious film and theater and other serious artistic expression, as well as newspapers and books, are being pushed to the margins of American society. Voltaire was the most famous man of the 18th century. Today the most famous “person” is Mickey Mouse.
In our post-literate world, because ideas are inaccessible, there is a need for constant stimulus. News, political debate, theater, art and books are judged not on the power of their ideas but on their ability to entertain. Cultural products that force us to examine ourselves and our society are condemned as elitist and impenetrable. Hannah Arendt warned that the marketization of culture leads to its degradation, that this marketization creates a new celebrity class of intellectuals who, although well read and informed themselves, see their role in society as persuading the masses that “Hamlet” can be as entertaining as “The Lion King” and perhaps as educational. “Culture,” she wrote, “is being destroyed in order to yield entertainment.”
“There are many great authors of the past who have survived centuries of oblivion and neglect,” Arendt wrote, “but it is still an open question whether they will be able to survive an entertaining version of what they have to say.”
The change from a print-based to an image-based society has transformed our nation. Huge segments of our population, especially those who live in the embrace of the Christian right and the consumer culture, are completely unmoored from reality. They lack the capacity to search for truth and cope rationally with our mounting social and economic ills. They seek clarity, entertainment and order. They are willing to use force to impose this clarity on others, especially those who do not speak as they speak and think as they think. All the traditional tools of democracies, including dispassionate scientific and historical truth, facts, news and rational debate, are useless instruments in a world that lacks the capacity to use them.
As we descend into a devastating economic crisis, one that Barack Obama cannot halt, there will be tens of millions of Americans who will be ruthlessly thrust aside. As their houses are foreclosed, as their jobs are lost, as they are forced to declare bankruptcy and watch their communities collapse, they will retreat even further into irrational fantasy. They will be led toward glittering and self-destructive illusions by our modern Pied Pipers—our corporate advertisers, our charlatan preachers, our television news celebrities, our self-help gurus, our entertainment industry and our political demagogues—who will offer increasingly absurd forms of escapism.
The core values of our open society, the ability to think for oneself, to draw independent conclusions, to express dissent when judgment and common sense indicate something is wrong, to be self-critical, to challenge authority, to understand historical facts, to separate truth from lies, to advocate for change and to acknowledge that there are other views, different ways of being, that are morally and socially acceptable, are dying. Obama used hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funds to appeal to and manipulate this illiteracy and irrationalism to his advantage, but these forces will prove to be his most deadly nemesis once they collide with the awful reality that awaits us. - mmijatov, on 11/20/2008, -2/+7Love it!
- ACalcutt, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5no..you can expect nothing as usual.
no cookie for you - Digger1123, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5Wait... Isn't everything Bushs fault?
- splorpdotorg, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5@weeklyworldnews
Do the math, again. $100,000 won't get you anywhere near a million dollar house. With tax and insurance, assuming no down payment and no other bills, you'd need in excess of $300,000 a year to handle a million dollar house. - bryanedds, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5Oh, and I'm also sorry for starting those Iraq and Afghanistan wars while placing occupying troops in 150 countries around the world. I had NO idea that transferring productive wealth from the private economy to non-productive purposes was going to have such a big impact. Even though opposed these wars and the whole imperialist boondoggle, I know I am to blame. I know I am also to blame for the bankrupt welfare state as well, even though I oppose that too.
Well, I am starting to bleed out now.
It sure is cold in here.
- The man formerly known as "Stupid Citizen Who Should Be Blamed For Everything So That The Government and its Corporate Buddies Can Be Excused Completely." - grapheads, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5My mother gave me the best financial advice. She said, "Always live below your means, and you will always have the means. If its not need, its greed". If only the government and people didn't leave beyond their means our lifestyles would be a lot more sustainable.
- Nerys, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5I guess you missed the word ENCOURAGED in all that so I put in in CAPS here for you.
I had 6 Credit card before I was even aware of what a credit card really was. I was 18 and had other things to worry about.
Now I blame no one for my debt except me. Regardless of what I knew I KNOW what spending money means. You have to pay it back.
I am 32 now and STILL working to pay it off.
NOW here is the part where its NOT my fault.
I did not create a system where 30+% interest is legal.
I did not create a system where MILLIONS of percent APR mandatory "micro loans" are legal (over drafting a bank account)
for 6 years my Debit card worked just like it should. If I charged $3.50 for a gallon of milk and only had $3 in the account something interesting happened. It said DECLINED and that was that.
NOW I get a MANDATORY I have no choice about it 50cent MICRO LOAN and am then charged $35 for this UNWANTED loan that I have NO CHOICE and NO real opportunity to turn down. Remember for 6 years it worked JUST fine.
Do the math on what the equivalent APR is on a $35 fee for a 50cent loan.
I was not the one who said it was legal to ERASE 10 days of transactions from my account and change a $12.50 mistake resulting in a $35 fee into a $400 in fees mistake simply by rewriting history so instead of one overdraw they retroactively reorder it and retroactively apply MORE overdraw fees that in reality never happened.
and this is LEGAL.
I did not make it OK and COMPULSORY to charge over 100% interest on a home loan.
I did not do any of that.
YES I am responsible for my debt
NO I am not responsible for the ABUSE of that debt to turn it into a much larger debt than it originally was. - moto526, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5Don't forget the dam news media (CNN, FOX), they have really done a wonderful job of scaring the hell out of me.
- IJstickI, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5wait what? i thought it was all Bush's fault...doesnt he have two buttons on his desk, Create Hurricane, and Ruin Economy?
- darladoon, on 11/21/2008, -1/+5i think most digg users realize that it is not an 'either/or' sort of situation, but a 'both/and' situation. americans are to blame as well as the government.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+4Thank the baby boomers
-
Show 51 - 100 of 219 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is