|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Occupy Wall Street, London and Evereywhere Else | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 829 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Are you counting me? Lol. I actually forgot about you, and you tend to be be either middle of the road or apathetic, both of which are hardly qualities of what would presently be considered a conservative. You may say you are one, but your "actions" (posts) say otherwise.
I asked a lot of questions. And THAT, right there, is primarily why I left you out of the equation. How very un-conservative-like of you. (that sounds condescending, I think, but I assure you I do not mean it that way)
Er, wait, is this one of those 'if you're not with us you're against us' sorta things? Not at all. You will notice that I sincerely asked AE what conservatives have against OWS and how it really differs from the TPers. Coyote and Buz were free to answer as well since, as he proved, AE is unwilling to have adult conversation or provide an actual answer."Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 829 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
But I think we have others, don't we? I think there is a Euro member who doesn't post much that claims to be conservative. However, us Yanks would probably see him as moderate at worst."Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
CS writes: I'm not anti-OWS at all, let alone "very"... I asked a lot of questions. And they got answered. Given what you have heard - Are you now pro the Occupy movement? If not what is it that you disagree with? You are almost certainly one of the much fabled 99% so in what sense do you disagree with the Occupy aims? I am genuinely interested to hear from a conservatively inclined but not entirely lunatic person such as yourself...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
Given what you have heard - Are you now pro the Occupy movement? In what way? I'm not gonna occupy anywhere but my computer chair(s). I get what they're complaining about. I feel sorry for them. But I don't feel like I'm one of them. I don't sympathize with their plight.
If not what is it that you disagree with? We've set-up my life to avoid most of the problems I've heard from them. I don't owe on a student loan, I have a moderately salaried position with benefits, I bought a modest home that I don't have problems affording, I'm purposefully frugal and don't blow a lot of money, own a small amount of diversified investments. In a another post, crashfrog mentioned that "medium chill" thing. That's been me for a while.
You are almost certainly one of the much fabled 99% so in what sense do you disagree with the Occupy aims? I'm with them in that I don't like that the banks got bailed out when it was their fault and they were fucking everybody (but I can understand that the bail out could have been necessary). I do think that the guy who bought a really expensive house that he could barely afford because he thought the value would keep going up took a risk, himself, and is partially to blame for the problem. Too, the kid who owes $50,000 for an education that didn't prepare him for aquiring a job that he could pay back the loan with did something stupid, himself. One of the biggest shocks for me when I grew up (that is, got out of college and into the 'real world') was realizing that nobody is going to hand you anything. I sorta (naively) figured that after I graduated that I would just get in the job line and be handed a position somewhere. But that never happened. I had to go and root through shit and claw my way into and carve out my position. I think that some of the protester still need to learn that lesson that the real world is tough, and it ain't pretty.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined:
|
I do think that the guy who bought a really expensive house that he could barely afford because he thought the value would keep going up took a risk, himself, and is partially to blame for the problem. I don't entirely disagree, but I think the bulk of the blame has to go to the professional "experts" - including the guy who sold him the mortgage - that told him, over and over again, that he could afford it, that home prices would continue to increase, and who profited greatly because that homeowner did exactly what they told him to do. The whole point of having a mortgage broker is that he's not supposed to be your adversary. You're supposed to be able to trust, somewhat, that he's not trying to screw you. A broker is a middleman who tries to negotiate between competing interests. The mortgage broker who has his own agenda - in opposition to yours - is a direct betrayal of what mortgage brokers are supposed to do. And a lot of those brokers did have their own agenda - pushing homeowners into higher interest rate loans than they deserved, larger loans than they could afford, and so on. (Real quick, CS - what's the largest mortgage you could afford with your current projected income? Could you even figure it out without several hours of going over your finances? I have to generate an Excel spreadsheet just to think about a car loan, and I've taken three semesters of calculus.)
Too, the kid who owes $50,000 for an education that didn't prepare him for aquiring a job that he could pay back the loan with did something stupid, himself. Sure, but what if he thought he was preparing himself for a job? What about all the colleges who tell you that a BA comes with a significant wage premium, regardless of your major? What about all the professors who said that it doesn't matter what you study, because the point of a liberal arts education is to make you a better citizen and not a better employee? What about all the parents who told him that working at a McDonalds (or even being a plumber) is demeaning and unworthy of him, and are now telling him what an irresponsible douchebag he is because he won't take a job at McDonalds? Doesn't a culture that demeans trade and vocational school as being for... those people... share any of the blame? I don't see how we can blame kids these days for doing exactly what we told all of them to do if they wanted a good job and security. It's our fault, not theirs, that we live in a world where it's just not enough, now, to have a good education.
One of the biggest shocks for me when I grew up (that is, got out of college and into the 'real world') was realizing that nobody is going to hand you anything. Why do you think it was a shock? Because all the adults you grew up with were telling you that if you got with the program, followed the rules, you would get handed something - the chance to work, to do something that mattered, and to get some kind of security as a result so that you could raise kids and own a home without every day being a fight for mere survival. Weren't all those adults living in the "real world"? Isn't that exactly how it worked for them; they got the grades, got the degrees, got the job and the house and the yard? The question isn't whether or not "kids today" are going to wake up and see how that isn't true, anymore. I think pretty much everybody knows that isn't true anymore. The question is how we, and our parents, let it stop being true.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Hi Catholic Scientist
In what way? I'm not gonna occupy anywhere but my computer chair(s). I get what they're complaining about. I feel sorry for them. Would you put up a sign on your lawn that supports OWS? A bumper sticker on your car?
But I don't feel like I'm one of them. I don't sympathize with their plight. But you admit you are one of the 99%, yes?
We've set-up my life to avoid most of the problems I've heard from them. I don't owe on a student loan, I have a moderately salaried position with benefits, I bought a modest home that I don't have problems affording, I'm purposefully frugal and don't blow a lot of money, own a small amount of diversified investments. In a another post, crashfrog mentioned that "medium chill" thing. That's been me for a while. We also have no loans or debts of any kind, we are in the middle of renovating our fourth house, bought with the cash from selling our third house, I have a small business that, so far, covers expenses and benefits, we're frugal and do not buy frivolous things, my car is 10 years old, my computers are several years old, and we have investments that will ensure a retirement life of comfort. And we are 100% for the OWS protest and approach to resolving social and financial injustice. Not because we would benefit directly from it, but because society as a whole would benefit from it. Do you think it is just for a CEO to "earn" over a million dollars a year, while their lowest paid employee's annual salary is below the poverty line?
I'm with them in that I don't like that the banks got bailed out when it was their fault and they were fucking everybody (but I can understand that the bail out could have been necessary). My opinion is that much better would have been to bail out the people. Note that IF the people had been able to pay their mortgages that the whole financial "crisis" would not have occurred (ie - IF trickle-down HAD worked, people would have gotten the raises that would have allowed them to pay their mortgages).
I do think that the guy who bought a really expensive house that he could barely afford because he thought the value would keep going up took a risk, himself, and is partially to blame for the problem. If it is a primary residence, they should have gotten some help -- they could have been given an interest free loan from the government (due when the house is sold, adjusted for inflation). This would have been an investment in America, rather than an investment in bank profits. If it is a secondary residence, then it is an investment, and should be treated as such.
I do think that the guy who bought a really expensive house that he could barely afford because he thought the value would keep going up took a risk, himself, and is partially to blame for the problem. Why? The bank approved the loan. The problem is not that he bought the house but that the bank approved an overextended mortgage. The mortgage broker is supposed to check and ensure that the person would be capable of paying the mortgage. If they haven't done that, then they have made a bad investment. This is why the banks should NOT have been bailed out. Is an investment in real estate different from an investment in stocks and bonds? You either have the money to pay for them or you don't. If you make an investment, you either make money if the value goes up, or you lose money if the value goes down. When you get a loan, that is someone making an investment in you. If they make a bad investment, then they are also to blame, and they should bear their share of the loss. Consider a person who makes an investment in a second home (not primary residence) by paying cash -- they make a profit/loss when they sell it. Now consider a partnership that makes an investment in real estate -- they make a profit/loss when they sell it. The partnership shares the profit or the loss. A mortgage on the other hand, is an unequal partnership, where one partner, the mortgage company, makes a profit whether the house value increases or decreases, as long as the mortgagee makes payments. They only lose when the mortgage is not paid. If they have made a bad investment, then they need to bear the loss. This is why the banks should NOT have been bailed out: it is not capitalism if they never lose.
Too, the kid who owes $50,000 for an education that didn't prepare him for aquiring a job that he could pay back the loan with did something stupid, himself. When you get a loan, that is someone making an investment in you. If they make a bad investment, then they are to blame. Personally, I feel that an investment in education will pay off in the long run, whether it results in lucrative employment or not, but that this is more of a social program than a money investment issue. I would support an extension of government paid education for those who want to pursue higher education. I would take senior year out of high school and then add an optional three year program that would terminate with an associates degree, fully paid for those who want to take it. This would also replace freshman year and universities, so that a Bachelor's Degree would only take three years instead of four and the kids would be better prepared than they are currently from most high schools.
One of the biggest shocks for me when I grew up (that is, got out of college and into the 'real world') was realizing that nobody is going to hand you anything. I sorta (naively) figured that after I graduated that I would just get in the job line and be handed a position somewhere. But that never happened. I had to go and root through shit and claw my way into and carve out my position. I think that some of the protester still need to learn that lesson that the real world is tough, and it ain't pretty. I don't expect any handouts. I do expect a level playing field. Enjoy.by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3939 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
The question is how we, and our parents, let it stop being true. POTM dude. Where the hell do we get this idiotic notion that every man for himself is some kind of noble sentiment? Oh yea, Ayn Rand.... Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.BUT if objects for gratitude and admiration are our desire, do they not present themselves every hour to our eyes? Do we not see a fair creation prepared to receive us the instant we are born --a world furnished to our hands, that cost us nothing? Is it we that light up the sun; that pour down the rain; and fill the earth with abundance? Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator? --Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Hi Artemis Entreri,
just a parting shot. It is easy to cherry pick photos to suit your biases. I can post a peaceful picture of an Occupy protest for every one of your Tea Party photos. so pictures on their own prove nothing. Obviously, from your links, you are taking this propaganda from a biased source rather than doing your own homework. Nice list of the aggressive tactics of police against Occupy Protesters. Curiously they do not show any wrong behavior by the protesters, just by the police. Unarmed protester/svs Police with riot gear, "weaponized" tear gas, bludgeoning tools, blockades Now let's look at an actual example of an actual protester and the LA police:
quote: More here. Now I don't know about you, but I have a little trouble reading that account without getting very angry at the police behavior. This is the kind of brutal police behavior we see in the (arab etc) dictatorships on the other side of the world, not the kind of behavior we expect to see in America. This is not the kind of America I want to live in, nor is it the kind of America I wish for my children. Do you support this kind of police behavior? Enjoy.by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
Artemis Entreri writes:
Alright I can’t help it. I am a renigger. I just cant lurk and give people cheers/jeers, its not in my makeup.
I'll still lurk, mainly to laugh at the nonsense, but I'll be repsectful and not post anymore, I know there are some fools who are serious about OWS, and I'll leave them to their own discussion. crash writes: I think the bulk of the blame has to go to the professional "experts" - including the guy who sold him the mortgage - that told him, over and over again, that he could afford it, that home prices would continue to increase, and who profited greatly because that homeowner did exactly what they told him to do. Its your money and ultimately your responsibility. To say the bulk of the blame goes on some one who sold you on something that didn’t work is both immature and irresponsible. This irresponsible mindset that you are owed a fair shake, and its not really your fault, but the financial experts is why we are in this mess. Basically a bunch of dumbasses listened to some charlatans, and now they want us to join their dumbass group by admitting we are all in the 99% group. Sorry but I come correct, and I aint part of the 99% because I got my shit together.
The whole point of having a mortgage broker is that he's not supposed to be your adversary. You're supposed to be able to trust, somewhat, that he's not trying to screw you. A broker is a middleman who tries to negotiate between competing interests. The mortgage broker who has his own agenda - in opposition to yours - is a direct betrayal of what mortgage brokers are supposed to do. And a lot of those brokers did have their own agenda - pushing homeowners into higher interest rate loans than they deserved, larger loans than they could afford, and so on.
More of the same. Blah blah blah, its not your fault, you are not responsible for your own money, its everyone else’s fault. Here’s an idea, grow the fuck up. Check yourself before you wreck yourself, and be responsible.
Sure, but what if he thought he was preparing himself for a job? What about all the colleges who tell you that a BA comes with a significant wage premium, regardless of your major? What about all the professors who said that it doesn't matter what you study, because the point of a liberal arts education is to make you a better citizen and not a better employee? What about all the parents who told him that working at a McDonalds (or even being a plumber) is demeaning and unworthy of him, and are now telling him what an irresponsible douchebag he is because he won't take a job at McDonalds? Doesn't a culture that demeans trade and vocational school as being for... those people... share any of the blame? No. It’s your life, and your problems. You can’t blame everything on others, sometimes you get bad advice, deal with it. The way you describe it, America is a culture of whiny bitches. Edited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
Would you put up a sign on your lawn that supports OWS? A bumper sticker on your car?
Never. Nope.
But you admit you are one of the 99%, yes?
Nope. To sit back and not strive to be a one percenter is the same as giving up in my book. The actual percentage of the 99% is probably somewhere around 10%, IMO.
And we are 100% for the OWS protest and approach to resolving social and financial injustice. Not because we would benefit directly from it, but because society as a whole would benefit from it. Oh you are sooooooo altruistic. I am sooooo impressed.LOL Do you think it is just for a CEO to "earn" over a million dollars a year, while their lowest paid employee's annual salary is below the poverty line?
Not sure. I cannot think of any examples, so is this a hypothetical question?
Note that IF the people had been able to pay their mortgages that the whole financial "crisis" would not have occurred (ie - IF trickle-down HAD worked, people would have gotten the raises that would have allowed them to pay their mortgages). Or if people were just responsible, and not so retarded, then they would have purchased things that they could afford, instead of taking a risk, failing and then blaming everyone else.
This is why the banks should NOT have been bailed out. I finally agree with you.
I don't expect any handouts. I do expect a level playing field. That is just it. The playing is not and never was level.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
I don't entirely disagree, but I think the bulk of the blame has to go to the professional "experts" - I tend to ascribe more to personal responsibility than getting duped by a pro.
including the guy who sold him the mortgage - that told him, over and over again, that he could afford it, that home prices would continue to increase, and who profited greatly because that homeowner did exactly what they told him to do. Well that right there, that the guy is selling me something, tells me that I can't fully trust him.
The whole point of having a mortgage broker is that he's not supposed to be your adversary. You're supposed to be able to trust, somewhat, that he's not trying to screw you. A broker is a middleman who tries to negotiate between competing interests. The mortgage broker who has his own agenda - in opposition to yours - is a direct betrayal of what mortgage brokers are supposed to do. And a lot of those brokers did have their own agenda - pushing homeowners into higher interest rate loans than they deserved, larger loans than they could afford, and so on. It was different for me. I didn't consult a morgage borker to determine how much I could afford. I went to a lender and they approved me for a certain maximum amount and then we determined how much different amounts would cost me per month, and then it was up to me to determine how much I was capable/willing to spend each month and that determined how much I was going to borrow. Then I went and found a house within that amount. I didn't talk to the morgage broker until the very end when it came to determining what the exact rate on the loan amount I picked would be.
Sure, but what if he thought he was preparing himself for a job? What about all the colleges who tell you that a BA comes with a significant wage premium, regardless of your major? What about all the professors who said that it doesn't matter what you study, because the point of a liberal arts education is to make you a better citizen and not a better employee? It became apparent to me when I was looking at different colleges, that they were trying to sell their schooling to me. Every place had a similiar pitch of how great they were and how awesome I'd be if I went there. Again, if someone's trying to sell you something, you can't just take their word for everything. I guess you could blame the seller for selling to people, but I just don't have a lot of sympathy for the position: "I got sold on this and they tricked me into buying it" I'm sorry the ShamWow wasn't as absorbant as you were lead to believe, but that's just sales. Sure, you can't outright lie and there should be some accountability to the sellers, but there's personal resposibility of the buyer too. And I realize you said you don't totally disagree with that, but you do seem to want to blame the seller more than I do.
What about all the parents who told him that working at a McDonalds (or even being a plumber) is demeaning and unworthy of him, and are now telling him what an irresponsible douchebag he is because he won't take a job at McDonalds? Doesn't a culture that demeans trade and vocational school as being for... those people... share any of the blame? I suppose, but again it was different for me. One of my best friends knew right away that he wasn't gonna make it through college so he went to welding school and now has a good job. Nobody disrespects him at all for that. In fact, I respect him more for that. Definately more than other friends who just partied instead of educating themselves and now have children on welfare and cry about how bad they have it. They reaped what they sowed.
I don't see how we can blame kids these days for doing exactly what we told all of them to do if they wanted a good job and security. It's our fault, not theirs, that we live in a world where it's just not enough, now, to have a good education. I consider myself more on the victim side than the side with the fault, but I get what you're saying.
Why do you think it was a shock? Because all the adults you grew up with were telling you that if you got with the program, followed the rules, you would get handed something - the chance to work, to do something that mattered, and to get some kind of security as a result so that you could raise kids and own a home without every day being a fight for mere survival. Weren't all those adults living in the "real world"? Isn't that exactly how it worked for them; they got the grades, got the degrees, got the job and the house and the yard? The question isn't whether or not "kids today" are going to wake up and see how that isn't true, anymore. I think pretty much everybody knows that isn't true anymore. The question is how we, and our parents, let it stop being true. And I don't know the answer to that question... Its a good one tho and the right one to be asking. I think that the conservative parents think they're being reactive to the liberals who are trying to spread their hard-won earnings to all 'those other people' who took the easy route or didn't have enough personal responsibility. Them tightening up only fuels the flames and causes more pressure from the other side and I think its all just snowballed into this mess.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
It is easy to cherry pick photos to suit your biases. I can post a peaceful picture of an Occupy protest for every one of your Tea Party photos. so pictures on their own prove nothing.
Never said they did, I just found it amusing.
Obviously, from your links, you are taking this propaganda from a biased source rather than doing your own homework. Obviously you are on that OWS kool-aid. I just took those from a google image search (I had no crazy motive other than making a joke). I am not in the tea party or the flea party. The media double standard on both groups is funny, and prompted me to post them, I find the OWS thing silly, and was shocked that so many intelligent people on here support it. In my first couple posts I was just being an ass, im done with that now.
Nice list of the aggressive tactics of police against Occupy Protesters. Curiously they do not show any wrong behavior by the protesters, just by the police.
I guess you didn’t look at all the pictures. Still that was pages ago, and I’m off that, so whatever man.Unarmed protester/s vs Police with riot gear, "weaponized" tear gas, bludgeoning tools, blockades Y’all should totally be armed at your protests, the police aint stupid, well they aint that stupid. Basically act like a peasant, get treated like one.
Now I don't know about you, but I have a little trouble reading that account without getting very angry at the police behavior. Don’t get it twisted, I dislike the police very much. But sitting in on city hall, after you are asked to leave, sounds like a crime. Resisting arrest, sounds like a crime. I also noticed some errors in the large quote, but it is not important.
This is the kind of brutal police behavior we see in the (arab etc) dictatorships on the other side of the world, not the kind of behavior we expect to see in America.
Really? How many protesters were shot? How many died? How many were locked up and NEVER seen again?Oh yeah, NONE. Only the truly ignorant would compare getting arrested in the US to getting arrested in an Arab dictatorship. This is not the kind of America I want to live in, nor is it the kind of America I wish for my children. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
Do you support this kind of police behavior?
Arresting people who openly and defiantly break the law in front of the police. I think I probably do support police who do their job.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son Member (Idle past 3858 days) Posts: 346 From: France,Paris Joined: |
Yes you are responsible for your own money. But if you are sold poisonous food through deceit, you have a right to complain about it. What the OWS is asking is that the same applies when people sell toxic financial products through lies and deceit. Capitalism should be about selling the better product at the more competitive price, not about who's the best at cheating others out of their money. Think about it, if financial products were known to be untrustworthy and everyone is trying to rip off the other, there would be no (or a very reduced) financial market and the global economy would shrink greatly, that's why there should be laws against this sort of behaviour and that they should be enforced the same way it already is for material products (i'm not only talking about the mortgages and student loans but also about shorting the products you advertise to your clients or the MF fiasco).
Of course, when a bad loan is made while both parties had the same informations, both should eat the consequences (meaning no bailouts for either of them).The essence of an healthy economy is one that is trustworthy, otherwise, exchanges become reduced and the economy goes down the drain. It seems you're advocating that everyone should be looking after himself, but imagine if there were no laws to control the products you buy, since there will always be a number of domains you can verify, would you be able to live well if you can't trust that your next doctor won't rip you off? your next food seller? your next car seller? How would you make competitivity work when you can't compare the products because of the opacity of the system?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Would you put up a sign on your lawn that supports OWS? A bumper sticker on your car? No (more because of those particular methods than any dislike for OWS).
But you admit you are one of the 99%, yes? Sure.
And we are 100% for the OWS protest and approach to resolving social and financial injustice. Not because we would benefit directly from it, but because society as a whole would benefit from it. I tend to focus my efforts on my friends and family directly. I don't trust "society as a whole".
Do you think it is just for a CEO to "earn" over a million dollars a year, while their lowest paid employee's annual salary is below the poverty line? I think it can be. Sure, the floors need to be cleaned, but a CEO who brings in 10 million dollars in new revenue is worth the million he got to do that.
My opinion is that much better would have been to bail out the people. That's how I lean, but I've seen good arguments for needing to bail out the banks too.
Note that IF the people had been able to pay their mortgages that the whole financial "crisis" would not have occurred Yeah, I just don't know about that.
Why? The bank approved the loan. The amount my bank approved to loan me was more than I was comfortable borrowing. I took less than was approved on purpose because I didn't want to risk being unable to afford it.
The problem is not that he bought the house but that the bank approved an overextended mortgage. The mortgage broker is supposed to check and ensure that the person would be capable of paying the mortgage. If they haven't done that, then they have made a bad investment. This is why the banks should NOT have been bailed out. There's still the personal responsibility of the borrower tho. A car-salesman is gonna tell you that you should buy the Corvette, is it his fault if you do?
A mortgage on the other hand, is an unequal partnership, where one partner, the mortgage company, makes a profit whether the house value increases or decreases, as long as the mortgagee makes payments. Well yeah, its their money that you are using to buy something for yourself.
When you get a loan, that is someone making an investment in you. If they make a bad investment, then they are to blame. I dunno, if you enter a contract that says you're gonna pay back a particular amount every month, and they're betting on you fullfilling that contract, then when you don't/can't then that is your fault for violating the contract.
Personally, I feel that an investment in education will pay off in the long run, whether it results in lucrative employment or not, but that this is more of a social program than a money investment issue. I would support an extension of government paid education for those who want to pursue higher education. I would take senior year out of high school and then add an optional three year program that would terminate with an associates degree, fully paid for those who want to take it. This would also replace freshman year and universities, so that a Bachelor's Degree would only take three years instead of four and the kids would be better prepared than they are currently from most high schools. That's cool.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Artemis Entreri
Not sure. I cannot think of any examples, so is this a hypothetical question? Unfortunately, for you, your ignorance of the examples does not mean they don't exist. Try the Wallmart top executives vs employees: HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost
quote: Over a million in annual salary without the "bonus" payoffs. versus Wallmart employees: http://www.campusprogress.org/...art_doesnt_want_you_to_know
quote: So now that this is no longer a hypothetical question ... I repeat: Do you think it is just for a CEO to "earn" over a million dollars a year, while their lowest paid employee's annual salary is below the poverty line?
Or if people were just responsible, and not so retarded, then they would have purchased things that they could afford, instead of taking a risk, failing and then blaming everyone else. How do you know they weren't responsible? How do you know they were "so retarded" in their purchases? It's easy to pin labels on them so you can convince yourself that they are to blame. If a person wants to buy a home, and they go around to all the mortgage companies and NOT ONE turns them down, are they not being responsible in their approach to buying a home?
That is just it. The playing is not and never was level. Just because it isn't level doesn't make it right does it? So should we work to make it more level or less level?
Oh you are sooooooo altruistic. I am sooooo impressed. LOL and then there is this: Page Not Found
quote: That's pretty altruistic too. Curiously, I note that "because society as a whole would benefit from it" is promoting the general welfare. Curiously, the goals of the Occupy Movement are in line with the constitution ... " ... to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ... " ... don't you agree? Enjoy.by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024