Which is where we come back to the barman analogy - does he now not share any of the responsibility because "the barman let me be a dumb fuck" is not a valid plea?lowing wrote:
Oh I know who is blaming who for this mess. My point is I find utterly rediculous to allow an argument that --It ain't my fault the bank let me be a dumb fuck-- to stand.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But, in the context of the discussion in hand, one of the responsible parties is the Government (for it is they that define the rules by which the banks operate), and the Government doesn't have any money of its own, it only has your tax-dollars, and no matter how much you wish it will, that ain't never going to change.lowing wrote:
Then both parties should figure it themselves and leave me ( my tax dollars) out of it. The thing is and you are not wrong here, until people take blame for their own actions and stop pointing fingers at those that let them be stupid, this sort of thing will continue.
We are not talking about committing a crime here, and death is not involved, so I am not sure it is a fair anology since the issues and circumstances and results are completely different.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Which is where we come back to the barman analogy - does he now not share any of the responsibility because "the barman let me be a dumb fuck" is not a valid plea?lowing wrote:
Oh I know who is blaming who for this mess. My point is I find utterly rediculous to allow an argument that --It ain't my fault the bank let me be a dumb fuck-- to stand.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But, in the context of the discussion in hand, one of the responsible parties is the Government (for it is they that define the rules by which the banks operate), and the Government doesn't have any money of its own, it only has your tax-dollars, and no matter how much you wish it will, that ain't never going to change.
We aretalking about business and contracts, and one party did not hold up to their end of that transaction. THAT party is to blame in any court.lowing wrote:
We are not talking about committing a crime here, and death is not involved, so I am not sure it is a fair anology since the issues and circumstances and results are completely different.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Which is where we come back to the barman analogy - does he now not share any of the responsibility because "the barman let me be a dumb fuck" is not a valid plea?lowing wrote:
Oh I know who is blaming who for this mess. My point is I find utterly rediculous to allow an argument that --It ain't my fault the bank let me be a dumb fuck-- to stand.
OK, lets go with your car salesman analogy then.lowing wrote:
We are not talking about committing a crime here, and death is not involved, so I am not sure it is a fair anology since the issues and circumstances and results are completely different.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Which is where we come back to the barman analogy - does he now not share any of the responsibility because "the barman let me be a dumb fuck" is not a valid plea?lowing wrote:
Oh I know who is blaming who for this mess. My point is I find utterly rediculous to allow an argument that --It ain't my fault the bank let me be a dumb fuck-- to stand.
If a car salesman sells a car, to a pensioner (i.e. someone who clearly can't afford to buy said car), on HP say, and the pensioner then can't afford the repayments, does the salesman share any of the responsibility?
Nope, the fact is it has never been a salesment job t otalk you OUT of spending your money, keeping your money is your problem not everyone elses.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
OK, lets go with your car salesman analogy then.lowing wrote:
We are not talking about committing a crime here, and death is not involved, so I am not sure it is a fair anology since the issues and circumstances and results are completely different.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Which is where we come back to the barman analogy - does he now not share any of the responsibility because "the barman let me be a dumb fuck" is not a valid plea?
If a car salesman sells a car, to a pensioner (i.e. someone who clearly can't afford to buy said car), on HP say, and the pensioner then can't afford the repayments, does the salesman share any of the responsibility?
Last edited by lowing (2008-10-06 21:07:27)
I guess you we are all supposed to take on the added responsibility to make sure individuals do the right thing with their finances. So what govt. program do you suggest we impliment to do this? Since LORD KNOWS to expect anyone to be responsible nowadays is apparently absurd, cruel and unjust.
I'd love to see someone try to run a business based on doing what's best for the consumer.
Well, now we come back to the context of the discussion - the money never belonged to the people spending it in the first place, it didn't even belong to those that lent it. The money belonged to the depositors.lowing wrote:
Nope, the fact is it has never been a salesment job t otalk you OUT of spending your money, keeping your money is your problem not everyone elses.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
OK, lets go with your car salesman analogy then.lowing wrote:
We are not talking about committing a crime here, and death is not involved, so I am not sure it is a fair anology since the issues and circumstances and results are completely different.
If a car salesman sells a car, to a pensioner (i.e. someone who clearly can't afford to buy said car), on HP say, and the pensioner then can't afford the repayments, does the salesman share any of the responsibility?
So, say you (depositor) lend me (bank) $100. And, according to rules set down by usmarine (the government), I (bank) then lend that $100 to ATG (borrower). But ATG never pays me back.
Would you accept me saying "Ah, but it's ATG's fault - he shouldn't have borrowed the money from me if he couldn't pay it back!"?
No, you wouldn't - it would be my fault for lending your money out without due care and attention.
Now, who allowed me (the banks) to lend the money to ATG (the borrowers) so irresponsibly ('cos it was clear he was never gonna pay it back)?
Usmarine (the Government), that's who.
So, 1) ATG (the borrower) is responsible for not paying me (the banks) back, 2) I (the banks) am responsible for lending it to ATG (the borrower), 3) usmarine (the government) is responsible for letting me (the banks) do that, and finally, 4) you (the depositors) are responsible for believing that usmarine (the government) and I (the banks) had your best interests at heart (which we didn't).
It would be nice to think so, however it wil be open until the last minute of voting.And, finally, he has made such a disaster of the republican party that Obama will be catapulted into office in a Reaganesqe landslide
That kind of landslide and 'mandate' is dangerous for any govt.
Fuck Israel
Equal hyperbole in both directions does not equate to "no spin".ATG wrote:
I am DSTees no spin zone.FEOS wrote:
Someone can't read polls and/or maps.ATG wrote:
And, finally, he has made such a disaster of the republican party that Obama will be catapulted into office in a Reaganesqe landslide
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/nati … ?year=1980
The polls are bunk.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Na, think your being a tad paranoid ATG. Its heading towards a police state because Bush is a Neo Con and follows that doctorate of strong (white rich)men controlling the masses. Obama is clearly not a Neo Con. Plus. If liberties are infringed and he goes against his electioneering, even black voters won't touch him second time around. Unless there is another major terrorist attack there is no reason to go all Adolf.ATG wrote:
I go on record here; Obama the "uber-liberal" will use the " bush recession " to usher in a new and as yet unimagined police state and world events will make him the war time president of war time presidents.
Nope, if you really wanna know the solution, it is the person who"borrowed" the money and never paid it back who is at fault. In fact I will go as far as to say to take something under the provision that you are going to give it back ( with interest) and you do not, you have just stolen the money, and theft is a crime.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Well, now we come back to the context of the discussion - the money never belonged to the people spending it in the first place, it didn't even belong to those that lent it. The money belonged to the depositors.lowing wrote:
Nope, the fact is it has never been a salesment job t otalk you OUT of spending your money, keeping your money is your problem not everyone elses.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
OK, lets go with your car salesman analogy then.
If a car salesman sells a car, to a pensioner (i.e. someone who clearly can't afford to buy said car), on HP say, and the pensioner then can't afford the repayments, does the salesman share any of the responsibility?
So, say you (depositor) lend me (bank) $100. And, according to rules set down by usmarine (the government), I (bank) then lend that $100 to ATG (borrower). But ATG never pays me back.
Would you accept me saying "Ah, but it's ATG's fault - he shouldn't have borrowed the money from me if he couldn't pay it back!"?
No, you wouldn't - it would be my fault for lending your money out without due care and attention.
Now, who allowed me (the banks) to lend the money to ATG (the borrowers) so irresponsibly ('cos it was clear he was never gonna pay it back)?
Usmarine (the Government), that's who.
So, 1) ATG (the borrower) is responsible for not paying me (the banks) back, 2) I (the banks) am responsible for lending it to ATG (the borrower), 3) usmarine (the government) is responsible for letting me (the banks) do that, and finally, 4) you (the depositors) are responsible for believing that usmarine (the government) and I (the banks) had your best interests at heart (which we didn't).
Why are there dozens and dozens of cases in court relating to mortgage writters defrauding people?
Why is B of A having to reset tens of thousands of loans written by Countrywide because they were predatory criminal loans?
Why is it that 20% of people that qualified for non sub-prime loans were given sub-prime loans with option arms?
It is because that was all that was being written.
I like how conservative are saying something to the effect ;
" you should have known that under republican deregulation you should have known the banks were going to fuck you and just kept renting."
There were some homeowners that never should have bought. I know some.
You are also talking about small business owners that have seen a massive decrease in income during this Bush debacle who are now losing their homes.
I think you have a very bright future as a white house spokesperson as your ability to unswervingly spin for the republicans, even in defiance of common knowledge and obvious facts. Your almost Hannityesqe.
Exactly.ATG wrote:
http://i16.tinypic.com/4hwi9n4.gif
Why are there dozens and dozens of cases in court relating to mortgage writters defrauding people?
Why is B of A having to reset tens of thousands of loans written by Countrywide because they were predatory criminal loans?
Why is it that 20% of people that qualified for non sub-prime loans were given sub-prime loans with option arms?
It is because that was all that was being written.
I like how conservative are saying something to the effect ;
" you should have known that under republican deregulation you should have known the banks were going to fuck you and just kept renting."
There were some homeowners that never should have bought. I know some.
You are also talking about small business owners that have seen a massive decrease in income during this Bush debacle who are now losing their homes.
I think you have a very bright future as a white house spokesperson as your ability to unswervingly spin for the republicans, even in defiance of common knowledge and obvious facts. Your almost Hannityesqe.
You see, lowing, it's usmarine (the government) that makes the rules.
ATG (the borrowers) and I (the banks) will work things in our favour if at all possible, but we still have to play by their rules.
You (the depositor) get screwed and theirs nothing you can do about it.
Then, as you're not only the depositor, but also the tax payer, you then get screwed over yet again because usmarine (the government) has to bail out mine (the banks) and ATGs (the borrowers) asses.
And, again, you may not like it, but that's the way the real world works.
It's like me and my idealistic ideas of a world without borders - a nice idea, but the real world doesn't work that way.
But see, Obama's not a neocon nutjob with war-profiteering friends, doesn't have a father with "hookups," and won't go all "crusades" on the middle east.
Maybe he'll inherit this power, but I'm voting for him because I know he won't abuse it.
If he does, needless to say I will be very, very disappointed.
But I'm not worried.
Maybe he'll inherit this power, but I'm voting for him because I know he won't abuse it.
If he does, needless to say I will be very, very disappointed.
But I'm not worried.
Fraud is a crime, I doubt however these '"dozens and dozens" of court cases has toppled the world economy, sorry.ATG wrote:
http://i16.tinypic.com/4hwi9n4.gif
Why are there dozens and dozens of cases in court relating to mortgage writters defrauding people?
Why is B of A having to reset tens of thousands of loans written by Countrywide because they were predatory criminal loans?
Why is it that 20% of people that qualified for non sub-prime loans were given sub-prime loans with option arms?
It is because that was all that was being written.
I like how conservative are saying something to the effect ;
" you should have known that under republican deregulation you should have known the banks were going to fuck you and just kept renting."
There were some homeowners that never should have bought. I know some.
You are also talking about small business owners that have seen a massive decrease in income during this Bush debacle who are now losing their homes.
I think you have a very bright future as a white house spokesperson as your ability to unswervingly spin for the republicans, even in defiance of common knowledge and obvious facts. Your almost Hannityesqe.
I dunno, maybe the question should be, why would 20% of the people who qualified for non-subprime loans ACCEPT and SIGN for a sub-prime loan? Greed perhaps? No that is not all that is being written, I also am ahomeowner and I did not buy into the sub prime bullshit. I like my loans fixed.
The banks fucked no one, they wrote loans that people signed up for due to democratic lead pressure from the govt. Bottomline, people accepted a loan, pay the fucking thing back or go into forclosure.
This is not a Bush Debacle, this is a nation full of debtors who finally figured out the hard way that credit and debt is not the way to achieve the American dream.
I love it, everything from the weather to personal finances has always been Bush's fault. Get real.
At what point will any of you actually blame the individual for the choices, and results of those choices in their lives?
Also, you mentioned the small business owners who are in trouble, is it not odd that it is the small business owners that Obama is going to nail with taxes? Ya know the guys that provide jobs? If that happens, and now the small business owners are paying more, what do you think happens to the employees? Oops, you got it. So, so much for Obama as your savior.
Last edited by lowing (2008-10-07 14:35:48)
Bottom line: the world is full of people incapable of making what would seem to you and I as sensible decisions based on the known facts and logical, intelligent forethought.lowing wrote:
Fraud is a crime, I doubt however these '"dozens and dozens" of court cases has toppled the world economy, sorry.ATG wrote:
http://i16.tinypic.com/4hwi9n4.gif
Why are there dozens and dozens of cases in court relating to mortgage writters defrauding people?
Why is B of A having to reset tens of thousands of loans written by Countrywide because they were predatory criminal loans?
Why is it that 20% of people that qualified for non sub-prime loans were given sub-prime loans with option arms?
It is because that was all that was being written.
I like how conservative are saying something to the effect ;
" you should have known that under republican deregulation you should have known the banks were going to fuck you and just kept renting."
There were some homeowners that never should have bought. I know some.
You are also talking about small business owners that have seen a massive decrease in income during this Bush debacle who are now losing their homes.
I think you have a very bright future as a white house spokesperson as your ability to unswervingly spin for the republicans, even in defiance of common knowledge and obvious facts. Your almost Hannityesqe.
I dunno, maybe the question should be, why would 20% of the people who qualified for non-subprime loans ACCEPT and SIGN for a sub-prime loan? Greed perhaps? No that is not all that is being written, I also am ahomeowner and I did not buy into the sub prime bullshit. I like my loans fixed.
The banks fucked no one, they wrote loans that people signed up for due to democratic lead pressure from the govt. Bottomline, people accepted a loan, pay the fucking thing back or go into forclosure.
This is not a Bush Debacle, this is a nation full of debtors who finally figured out the hard way that credit and debt is not the way to achieve the American dream.
I love it, everything from the weather to personal finances has always been Bush's fault. Get real.
At what point will any of you actually blame the individual for the choices, and results of those choices in their lives?
The question then comes down to how to deal with these people - let them rot or help them out?
Oh well by all means lets fuck me over so as to keep people from taking responsibility for themselves and why? Because we are all in this together and everything has gotta be "fair". Individuality is taboo...typical liberal thinking.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Bottom line: the world is full of people incapable of making what would seem to you and I as sensible decisions based on the known facts and logical, intelligent forethought.lowing wrote:
Fraud is a crime, I doubt however these '"dozens and dozens" of court cases has toppled the world economy, sorry.ATG wrote:
http://i16.tinypic.com/4hwi9n4.gif
Why are there dozens and dozens of cases in court relating to mortgage writters defrauding people?
Why is B of A having to reset tens of thousands of loans written by Countrywide because they were predatory criminal loans?
Why is it that 20% of people that qualified for non sub-prime loans were given sub-prime loans with option arms?
It is because that was all that was being written.
I like how conservative are saying something to the effect ;
" you should have known that under republican deregulation you should have known the banks were going to fuck you and just kept renting."
There were some homeowners that never should have bought. I know some.
You are also talking about small business owners that have seen a massive decrease in income during this Bush debacle who are now losing their homes.
I think you have a very bright future as a white house spokesperson as your ability to unswervingly spin for the republicans, even in defiance of common knowledge and obvious facts. Your almost Hannityesqe.
I dunno, maybe the question should be, why would 20% of the people who qualified for non-subprime loans ACCEPT and SIGN for a sub-prime loan? Greed perhaps? No that is not all that is being written, I also am ahomeowner and I did not buy into the sub prime bullshit. I like my loans fixed.
The banks fucked no one, they wrote loans that people signed up for due to democratic lead pressure from the govt. Bottomline, people accepted a loan, pay the fucking thing back or go into forclosure.
This is not a Bush Debacle, this is a nation full of debtors who finally figured out the hard way that credit and debt is not the way to achieve the American dream.
I love it, everything from the weather to personal finances has always been Bush's fault. Get real.
At what point will any of you actually blame the individual for the choices, and results of those choices in their lives?
The question then comes down to how to deal with these people - let them rot or help them out?
as for your analogy, yes the barman shares responsibility....idk about where you live, but here they have a nice little law against "over serving"Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Which is where we come back to the barman analogy - does he now not share any of the responsibility because "the barman let me be a dumb fuck" is not a valid plea?lowing wrote:
Oh I know who is blaming who for this mess. My point is I find utterly rediculous to allow an argument that --It ain't my fault the bank let me be a dumb fuck-- to stand.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But, in the context of the discussion in hand, one of the responsible parties is the Government (for it is they that define the rules by which the banks operate), and the Government doesn't have any money of its own, it only has your tax-dollars, and no matter how much you wish it will, that ain't never going to change.
ive seen many bartenders get canned for serving a person that "last drink"
Intelligence is like athletic ability. Some have it, some don't.lowing wrote:
Oh well by all means lets fuck me over so as to keep people from taking responsibility for themselves and why? Because we are all in this together and everything has gotta be "fair". Individuality is taboo...typical liberal thinking.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Bottom line: the world is full of people incapable of making what would seem to you and I as sensible decisions based on the known facts and logical, intelligent forethought.lowing wrote:
Fraud is a crime, I doubt however these '"dozens and dozens" of court cases has toppled the world economy, sorry.
I dunno, maybe the question should be, why would 20% of the people who qualified for non-subprime loans ACCEPT and SIGN for a sub-prime loan? Greed perhaps? No that is not all that is being written, I also am ahomeowner and I did not buy into the sub prime bullshit. I like my loans fixed.
The banks fucked no one, they wrote loans that people signed up for due to democratic lead pressure from the govt. Bottomline, people accepted a loan, pay the fucking thing back or go into forclosure.
This is not a Bush Debacle, this is a nation full of debtors who finally figured out the hard way that credit and debt is not the way to achieve the American dream.
I love it, everything from the weather to personal finances has always been Bush's fault. Get real.
At what point will any of you actually blame the individual for the choices, and results of those choices in their lives?
The question then comes down to how to deal with these people - let them rot or help them out?
If a volcano erupts near an urban population centre, should those who can not run fast enough be left to be consumed by lava, or should the authorities provide buses to evacuate those that can not get away from it under their own steam?
That is a terrible analogy and you know it.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Intelligence is like athletic ability. Some have it, some don't.lowing wrote:
Oh well by all means lets fuck me over so as to keep people from taking responsibility for themselves and why? Because we are all in this together and everything has gotta be "fair". Individuality is taboo...typical liberal thinking.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Bottom line: the world is full of people incapable of making what would seem to you and I as sensible decisions based on the known facts and logical, intelligent forethought.
The question then comes down to how to deal with these people - let them rot or help them out?
If a volcano erupts near an urban population centre, should those who can not run fast enough be left to be consumed by lava, or should the authorities provide buses to evacuate those that can not get away from it under their own steam?
How so?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
That is a terrible analogy and you know it.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Intelligence is like athletic ability. Some have it, some don't.lowing wrote:
Oh well by all means lets fuck me over so as to keep people from taking responsibility for themselves and why? Because we are all in this together and everything has gotta be "fair". Individuality is taboo...typical liberal thinking.
If a volcano erupts near an urban population centre, should those who can not run fast enough be left to be consumed by lava, or should the authorities provide buses to evacuate those that can not get away from it under their own steam?
I loled.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Intelligence is like athletic ability. Some have it, some don't.lowing wrote:
Oh well by all means lets fuck me over so as to keep people from taking responsibility for themselves and why? Because we are all in this together and everything has gotta be "fair". Individuality is taboo...typical liberal thinking.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Bottom line: the world is full of people incapable of making what would seem to you and I as sensible decisions based on the known facts and logical, intelligent forethought.
The question then comes down to how to deal with these people - let them rot or help them out?
If a volcano erupts near an urban population centre, should those who can not run fast enough be left to be consumed by lava, or should the authorities provide buses to evacuate those that can not get away from it under their own steam?
Really though, this is an awful analogy.
Again, how so?Miggle wrote:
I loled.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Intelligence is like athletic ability. Some have it, some don't.lowing wrote:
Oh well by all means lets fuck me over so as to keep people from taking responsibility for themselves and why? Because we are all in this together and everything has gotta be "fair". Individuality is taboo...typical liberal thinking.
If a volcano erupts near an urban population centre, should those who can not run fast enough be left to be consumed by lava, or should the authorities provide buses to evacuate those that can not get away from it under their own steam?
Really though, this is an awful analogy.
First of all, because the personal trait in question is not intelligence but ignorance, and the latter is certainly not determined by your genetic disposition.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
How so?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
That is a terrible analogy and you know it.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Intelligence is like athletic ability. Some have it, some don't.
If a volcano erupts near an urban population centre, should those who can not run fast enough be left to be consumed by lava, or should the authorities provide buses to evacuate those that can not get away from it under their own steam?
Secondly, because this is a slow, gradual problem. If you were notified of the volcano a month beforehand, everyone but a cripple could get away in time under their own power, and even a cripple could find and pay someone to carry them in that time. If they're still sticking around after a month...let them burn.