[MomMom]

Originally Posted by mellanieblue

I love all the people who say "This is why you shouldn't buy a house you can't afford."
Honestly, who really can afford a house? People who live in Hollywood and star in movies, that's who.
No one who pays mortgage can "afford" the house, they are being loaned the house while they make payments, and are given that loan because they have what everyone believes is a steady job. Then when they suddenly and unexpectedly lose that job, everyone wants to look down on them.

And if people would buy within their budget, they would have a backup plan to pay their AFFORDABLE mortgage if and when an emergency happens..such as losing their job, medical condition, etc.

Unfortunately, in today's society, most people live on the fringe..spending all income that is left over from paying bills on the nicer and fun things in life, when they should have been putting the dough aside, living economically with an OCCASIONAL treat, and having a nest egg for those "emergencies" that life hands you unexpectedly.

[sholden]

Originally Posted by olecapt

Nah... right up there with debtors prison.

Not only does modern statute prevent that but so does common law.

Can't legally sell your soul to the devil either. Though that one may be out of the reach of case law.

Other than the not being discharged in bankruptcy I see nothing that isn't already the case for basically every other type of debt.

If I buy a TV on a credit card they aren't going to ignore the debt because I move states, or sell the TV, or retire, for example.

[JoeVegas]

Except if they get in a pizzin contest,,, you might get some of it on you.

Reading those contests at least you're protected by the,,,,screen!

But back to the topic,,,,, Did you sign a "moral" contract or a "legal" contract? If it is in the realm of the courts, I guess it ain't a moral issue. If on the other hand you signed a contract that used your "moral" conduct as collateral,, and not the value of the home, (plus what ever else you put down), then I would say you should get tried in the courts of Public Opinion.

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by JoeVegas

Except if they get in a pizzin contest,,, you might get some of it on you.

Reading those contests at least you're protected by the,,,,screen!

But back to the topic,,,,, Did you sign a "moral" contract or a "legal" contract? If it is in the realm of the courts, I guess it ain't a moral issue. If on the other hand you signed a contract that used your "moral" conduct as collateral,, and not the value of the home, (plus what ever else you put down), then I would say you should get tried in the courts of Public Opinion.

The problem with "moral" based contracts is whose "moral" law do you use?

In most cases this simply becomes do what you think is right.

That also makes it a bad bet for the court of public opinion. You end up with a multitude of views with no good way to differentiate..

Legal is cleaner and in keeping with our secular system.

[JoeVegas]

Originally Posted by olecapt

The problem with "moral" based contracts is whose "moral" law do you use?

In most cases this simply becomes do what you think is right.

That also makes it a bad bet for the court of public opinion. You end up with a multitude of views with no good way to differentiate..

Legal is cleaner and in keeping with our secular system.

Exactly! The rules of the contract are spelled out in the beginning. To add a moral clause after the fact won't work. Although it is quite the option for the lender/investor to rely on such tactics when dealing with the general population.

[tony soprano]

Originally Posted by JoeVegas

Exactly! The rules of the contract are spelled out in the beginning. To add a moral clause after the fact won't work. Although it is quite the option for the lender/investor to rely on such tactics when dealing with the general population.

Yes, as much as it's become a common tactic for home buyers that made bad decisions to point at the banks for entering the contract in the first place - "they should have known, it's their fault for lending me the money!" As well, not all people would agree that everything determined to be legal, also meets the definition of ethical.

[clutchcargo777]

And don't forget to ask for your key money. It's perfectly legal.

[orbius]

Originally Posted by MomMom

And if people would buy within their budget, they would have a backup plan to pay their AFFORDABLE mortgage if and when an emergency happens..such as losing their job, medical condition, etc.

Unfortunately, in today's society, most people live on the fringe..spending all income that is left over from paying bills on the nicer and fun things in life, when they should have been putting the dough aside, living economically with an OCCASIONAL treat, and having a nest egg for those "emergencies" that life hands you unexpectedly.

Huh? You're out of touch. The #1 employer in the country is Walmart and they pay nothing to most of their hourly employees. The notion that people are just spendy and thats where all the problems come from is hilarious.

[MomMom]

Originally Posted by orbius

Huh? You're out of touch. The #1 employer in the country is Walmart and they pay nothing to most of their hourly employees. The notion that people are just spendy and thats where all the problems come from is hilarious.

Thanks for your dry sense of humor.

And Wal-Mart employees had no business buying $400,000 homes that they really couldn't afford in Las Vegas either.

[Raisuli]

And Wal-Mart employees had no business buying $400,000 homes that they really couldn't afford in Las Vegas either

And Lenders had no business giving mortgages to Wal Mart employees for $400,000 homes they couldn't afford in Las Vegas either.

My guess is that both the Wall mart employee and mortgage company that loaned the money are both in the same postion today, Busted!