I really don't know why we are spending any time worrying about these "victims" of the sub-prime crisis. Also, I really don't want to be bailing out borrowers stupid enough to be under contract on new real-estate with financial plans that call for them to have 80% occupancy 2 months after closing, a 7% down payment and 7.5% interest rates.
So now their take-home falls 15%, their down payment requirement doubles and they have to pay 9.5% and I'm suppose to feel bad?
You will have to excuse me for not wanting to give taxpayer support for a borrower who wants to own a 160,000 square foot building to keep up with the Jones' on a mere $41 million budget.
Housing Crisis Hits Its Own [Washington Post]
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 3:46PM
"Anytime is a good time to buy"
Absolutely priceless! Step away from the Kool Aid.
Posted by Lowly Assistant , Apr 07, 2008 3:50PM
@3:46,
Agreed. I can't believe they got those words on record.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 3:53PM
If this guy worked for me he would already have his personal items packed and security would be escorting him out of the building. The capitalist in me wants to come up with something to sell him.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 3:54PM
Eliminating Teleprompters at the annual meeting? Oh the horrah!
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 3:57PM
Equity Private my darling little road apple.
Your smug judgments on the idiocy of the people of this nation would be harmless if they weren't insidious. You're exactly right. Most people in this nation are stupid. Only roughly half of them go to college and even then they study something useless, like telecommunications.... or finance.
How then given their undeveloped intellect can you hold them accountable when they don't understand complex contracts, and when they think if they can't afford something then the bank would tell so. Really why would a bank let someone borrow money if they couldn't pay it back, the people must have thought.
Not everyone has an MBA from wharton and a law degree. If only the nation were as well educated as you then everyone would be solvent, of course then there'd be no one to do any manual labor or anything actually useful for that matter. But hey at least they could read a contract.
Really have you ever seen the Suze Orman show? I rest my case, you can't hold these people's idiocy against them any more than you hold it against your dog when he eats his own shit.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 3:58PM
this is the best post of the last 2 weeks. Could use a better caption on the picture though. :)
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 4:18PM
"Over a 10-year horizon, [the purchase] looks great."
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 4:21PM
@ 3:46 - the quote was actually even more priceless than you gave credit for:
"Anytime is the best time to buy"
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 4:21PM
@4:18, this comment is from the same retard who brought us "anytime is a good time to buy."
I have nothing else to add.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 4:23PM
@4:18 Apparently the MBAs at the MBA can foretell the future. Then again, perhaps they're all just blathering idiots.
Thadius R. Juniper
Mortgage Lender/Evaluator of Talent
Posted by Lowly Assistant , Apr 07, 2008 4:23PM
Random Banker,
I usually don't like to meddle with opinions of posters, but I believe it's everyone's responsibility to make sound decisions. Libraries are free, and dictionaries aren't exactly expensive (Webster's paperback for $9.95). If there's complicated language on any sort of legal document, the individual signing their name is "recognizing" all the information as true...thereby legally binding them to the information found within. Due diligence is extremely important when making a decision. I understand your longing for a utopia where no one tries to fuck eachother over. However, the human condition allows for no such setting.
Just as individuals sued the tobacco companies a decade ago when they were shocked to find that lighting something on fire and inhaling the fumes was in poor health, I find it remarkable to hold such an affinity and deep pain for people not doing the research, while calling "foul" when shitted upon. As Dennis Leary once said, "No shit? I thought these were good for you. I thought they had vitamin-C and shit!" No dice.
When people are shocked to find their APR shoot from a very modest 0% to 23.5% after a year, you need say nothing more than, "Should've looked at the contract before you made that first swipe."
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 4:33PM
"half of them go to college"?? Closer to 25 or 30%, actually.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 4:36PM
I don't long for any such utopia. I just don't blame monkeys for liking bananas and i don't blame stupid people for being stupid.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 4:38PM
RB - you don't blame the Mortgage Bankers' Association for making a poor decision re: its own mortgage?
Really??
Posted by Suits , Apr 07, 2008 4:42PM
That article was a little slice of awesome.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 4:44PM
No I do, but its the exception that proves the rule. If these guys can't manage their mortgage then how can you expect at short order cook or an English major to do so.
Posted by Debter , Apr 07, 2008 4:49PM
I get what RB is saying, but that's similar saying "it's society's fault" that you turned into a crook. It's lack of personal responsibility that has gotten us to where we are (and the moral hazard, or lack of punishment for making foolish decisions). I certainly don't have all the answers, but I'm not gonna just let'em off the hook either.
Posted by Lowly Assistant , Apr 07, 2008 4:57PM
I, too, get what Random Banker is saying, and quite honestly find many of his rants intriguing and well-written. However, life is full of consequences. The point of consequences is receiving an opportunity to learn. People have been ripping us off since we were kids. I'm sorry, but no one has ever given me anything that hasn't come with a price...be it financial, emotional, blah, blah, etc. There is no such thing as "no strings attached."
---cynical English major who worked as a short-cook while paying tuition for my shit degree.
Posted by diablo , Apr 07, 2008 5:02PM
Of course anytime is the best time to by. Just read the CURRENT public awareness campaign of the NAR:
Over the past 30 years, the median price of existing homes has increased an average of more than 6 percent every year, and home values nearly double every 10 years, according to historical data from NAR’s existing home-sales series. Thanks to the power of leverage, a homeowner’s return on investment is even more impressive over time.
For example, over 10 years, a $10,000 investment in the stock market at a normal 10 percent market rate of return would yield $23,600. The same investment as a down payment on a $200,000 home at a normal appreciation rate of 5 percent would return nearly 5 times the stock market return, at $110,300.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 5:02PM
RB your socialist views, and willingness to completely ignore the personal accountability for the speculators in this mess shows a clear misunderstanding off life in general.
I guess this to be expected from someone who has read EPs blog for over two years and just realized it was written by a woman.
You should be banned from posting here until the $40 CFC calls you bragged about buying come into the money.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 5:05PM
The NAR shoudn't be allowed to post that kind of BS. I don't buy an arugment that they don't know any better - because they most certainly do.
Posted by diablo , Apr 07, 2008 5:07PM
RB, I get your point. But don't pick on short order cooks, many have college degrees (unless they come from Central America). Also, I've heard many English majors (and history majors) posing as economists (on CNBC).
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 5:07PM
RB,
As an associate at a BB and an english major, your ability to mindlessly follow sterotypes astounds me... the horror the horror. Smart is smart and studpd is stupid just leave it at that.
Posted by HAM05 , Apr 07, 2008 5:18PM
RB, you and EP just need to get together and bang already - you can cut the pseudointellectualbutdefinitelysexual tension with a knife
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 5:21PM
@5:07:
Don't get your panties in a bunch Mr. Kurtz, I was kidding about the english majors.
@5:02:
Yeah i definitely blew that CFC call, I never thought the mortgage situation was this bad honestly.
Its true I don't necessarily believe in social responsibility. After all people are not rational. And if they are unable to reach logical conclusions then how can you hold them accountable?
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 5:32PM
@4.57. Don't worry, the fine print also says in big bold letters that someone who's interest rate goes from 6% to 15% walks away, make that walks away and thanks the bank for a few good years......the only ones i hear whining are the bankers, who have been telling everyone what smart guys they are for the last few years, maybe they should have read the fine print.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 5:37PM
RB - 5:02 here.
The key difference is that you think that these people didn't know what they were doing, where as I think they assumed that the values of the properties would continue to increase and that when the ARMs reset they would be able to refi with the easy credit environment.
Honestly both of us are making blanket assumptions as to the motives of the individual homeowners that can never be validated. I just hope that you’re looking at this with a glass half full attitude and assuming most people weren’t speculators, and were duped by unscrupulous brokers. As opposed to saying that the speculators should be bailed out.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 5:37PM
@RB, I want lots of money. I emotionally want it. I am not rational about it. I'm going to come to your house and get from you, OK? And if I beat you up in the process (because you will rationally want to hold onto your cash) Please don't mind me, because I don't deserve to be held accountable because I didn't go to college. I worked in a bakery in high school. It's not my fault if I beat you up to get your money. I'm just impulsive that way, not responsible for my actions at all......where do you live? Give me your address please -- emotionally yours, the baker
Posted by Anal_yst , Apr 07, 2008 5:47PM
Can the MBA (or anyone for that matter) maybe Random Banker, bail out my student loans as well? I irrationally decided that going to college even though myself or my parents (selfish siblings wanting the same!) didn't have the cash on hand to finance such a decision. I don't want to pay these loans, besides its not fair, its just not! Why should I have to pay back money I borrowed? Isn't a college education a divine right, just like home ownership?
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 5:48PM
Well I think they were speculating but didn't know it. I think the brokers told them they'd be able to refinance once the value of the home went up in a year. So I think you're right, but I don't think the average person is even aware of the concept of a financial bubble.
As Barton Biggs likes to say, when his mother in law starts to inquire about stocks then he knows its time to get out of the market. Like the aforementioned mother in law, by the time the average person becomes aware of a trend it is most likely over. Worse still, that person won't know what they're observing is a trend but rather they are likely to think its the new status quo. Couple with that complex legal documents that they can't understand, and you have the makings of a massacre.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 5:53PM
Anal_yst:
I totally agree with you. I think we should move to European system where higher education is essentially free. Of course the premier schools over there are steadily trying to move to an America system, something about competition for talent and resources. None the less, I believe if you become a public school teacher for 10 years then your loans will be forgiven. Or you could simply refuse to pay. I'm quite sure they can't foreclose on your education. Those are your options.
Posted by diablo , Apr 07, 2008 5:53PM
@5:37
Don't assume that the buyers were the only ones who bought into the ever rising home value story. The lenders did too, and the securitizers, and the Norwegian villagers, etc.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 5:59PM
Never had a student loan, but from what I recall payments are deferred until you graduate. Basically, the loan is subsidized (i.e. someone else pays the interest) while you're still in school and therefore unable to do so yourself. So why anal are you being so smug about the whole thing. How is that different from housing loan workouts. The later in fact offer an additional benefit: avoiding mass foreclosures, which is bad for the real estate that's still standing.
Posted by diablo , Apr 07, 2008 6:00PM
If everyone with a student loan refuses to pay, the lenders will get a bailout from Congress (because no one is going to bail out a guy with a name like Anal_yst). No matter what, the tax payer is always screwed.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:01PM
@ diablo and Random Banker....if people are so stupid in America, let's find something really dumb to sell them all and make a mint....
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:03PM
@6:01 You're too late: its the Republican vote. The public bought it and the oil industry is reaping a fortune.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:04PM
@Diablo - exactly, that's my point. We as taxpayers are always bailing everyone out...what up!!!
And RB - don't you think people who sign contracts read them? I was 23 when I bought my first house. I hired a lawyer, even though I could read. Because people tell you you need a lawyer. My mom told me. And lawyers can 'splain things to us hicks real good. (that's why I've always had fixed mortgages)
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:04PM
Pet insurance
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 6:05PM
@5:59
they're also secured by the federal government so that someone with no income can borrow the money in the first place.
Anal_yst is sounding more and more like a commi every minute.
Since his entire education and all subsequent prosperity is dependent on government subsidy I don't think he'll be chiming in like this in the future.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:08PM
Damn it. I make too much money for me to be able to rip off the taxpayers....and I'm too rational to buy something I can't pay for....sucks to be me.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 6:16PM
@6:08:
Might I suggest you start an ethanol farm. That way you can make lots of money and rip off the American tax payers.
Posted by Anal_yst , Apr 07, 2008 6:18PM
Perhaps my sarcasm was too deep and went completely over your head (RB, etc).
The point is, I don't like student loans, especially the private ones I have because the government decided my parents arbitrarily make "too much money" so I have to pay significantly higher rates than "poorer" kids, but I digress...
Anyway, I knew what I was in for, it didn't require a degree in finance, or working on wall street. I didn't need a freaking lawyer to understand the premise that I had floating-rate loans that were going to take me some time to pay back. Was I, and am I constantly pitched refinancing deals? Of course. Would I have liked to refinance my loans at some sweet low rate? Of course. Did I take out the loans based on some pipe dream, or minus the sarcasm, some pitch by the loan company that I'd be able to lower my payments into perpetuity since as a college graduate I'm a good credit (or some such BS?) Of course NOT.
Look, if you're too dense, or too gullible to realize that you take out a loan, you're a pwned man/woman until you've paid back your obligation. If you bought into the bullsh!t than I have zero sympathy for you. This isn't the 1880's, and these brokers, contrary to popular belief, WERE NOT snake oil salesmen. If you can't figure out how to navigate to the Mortgage Professor, or even f'ing wikipedia to learn the basics of how mortgages work, you deserve your misery. End of story.
Fin.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 6:31PM
Anal_yst:
The thing is everyone isn't smart like you, guy. You were going to college in the first place, after all. And you had the financial acumen to become a banker. That puts you in the top .01% of people in this nation.
You should feel sorry for these people exactly people because they are too stupid to do what you are so readily capable of.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:31PM
I agree with Anal_yst. Regardless of how much money the bank is willing to give you, it doesn't take much intelligence to know how much house you can afford. Just like I didn't buy a flat screen tv in college because I knew I couldn't afford one (even though credit card companies told me I could), I expect homebuyers to know whether or not they can't afford the 5,000 sq. ft. house with the Viking range.
Personal responsibility is what made America successful. A lack of it is what causes most of our problems.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:32PM
"...and you have the makings of a massacre...."
Once again, WHAT FUCKING MASSACRE?
These guys did not put a penny into the houses and lied on the application form. Now that they cannot pay, they get to stay for free in a house for the period of foreclosure and then move back to where they belonged - renting. Its like you are used to driving a beat-up car, and then your get to drive a new one for free for some time and then you go back to you beat up car.
So where is the massacre and why the bailout? If anything, it has been a massacre for the investors who loaned the money out and who have ACTUALLY lost hard money, which has been passed on to the people who managed to sell their homes and get out in time. And we surely are not talking about bailing out the investors here, are we?
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:38PM
Hey Random Banker, I am all for feeling sorry for these 'stupid people.' And by 'feeling sorry', I am assuming you mean that I should open out more of my wallet and shell out my hard earned money for their benefit (lets not use euphemisms here).
Which is fine. But then lets do away with this equal opportunity BS. I am smarter and they are stupid so I should get to decide and do more things and I should be able to dictate what they do. For starters, we need to do away with this democracy thing. If 90% of the people are stupid (as per you) then there is no way in hell that they will know what is good for them. So let us 'smart people' set up the super-government which will rule these retards and decide what is good and what is not for them. Let us also tell them what jobs they can have, when they are allowed to have kids (BIG issue, they screw without care and dump these kids onto the rest of us for upbringing).
So let us 'smart people' get together and create a plan. I can see where this is going. Should work out great for everyone (ahem, especially for me).
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 6:44PM
Random banker is so smart because he lives an hour outside of NY....
Posted by StupidEquityGuy , Apr 07, 2008 6:50PM
Random "Bleeding Heart" Banker,
I call Bull Shit on your misery statement for the Stupid people.
~SEG
Who almost burned down his hovel on the hill this last weekend. I had to grab a garden hose out in the garden, charge into my house and put out the fire in my fireplace to build a steam bath to put out the fire in my flue that I had started...
It has been 10 years since I was a professional firefighter and the 20 seconds while I had to remember what the fuck I needed to do to save my house... reminded me... of just how STUPID I AM...
total damage to the house was some glass and my ego... the look on my face when I could hear the fire raging inside the walls of my house...
Priceless...
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 6:51PM
@6:38:
Uh... that's the system we already have. Except we call it "representative" democracy, where the representatives are all millionaires. And if you if 50% of urban high school students don't graduate, well we've pretty much dictated what jobs they'll be doing in the future.
So your wish is my command, open your eyes, it has been done.
Posted by diablo , Apr 07, 2008 6:52PM
@6:32
I don't care to bailout stupid investors. They bought CDOs that they didn't understand. They were told house prices are going up, there's no better time, it's AAA rated, etc., etc.
However homebuilders are getting a bailout in the form of a $25 billion dollar tax break. Figure that one out and get back to me.
Now, a fair question is what's going to happen to those who were not stupid and knew better? You should knew exactly who I mean.
Diablo
Posted by Lowly Assistant , Apr 07, 2008 6:59PM
How the fuck did Jello Biafra become a banker?
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 7:17PM
Look brohiem, the only difference between me and you is that I don't pretend this shit is a meritocracy. It clearly is not. If you think the country wasn't designed to be run by an elite then you haven't studied US history. There's a reason we have an electoral college and representatives rather than direct democracy. To say otherwise is simply ludicrous.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 7:26PM
"...And if you if 50% of urban high school students don't graduate, ...."
You seriously do not know what you are talking about here, do you? Most of the ones who do not pass the drastically watered down tests after public investment running into hundred of thousands of dollars into them are the results of acts by 'stupid people' (their biological sources, somehow I feel calling them parents is insulting that word) who didnt realize that using certain organs for physical pleasure had consequences that come with responsibilities (the second part is alien to them anyway).
These dropouts are future versions of their biological sources. And guess what - the very fact that these people exist, have avg life spans greater than 80% of humanity, live 'gangsta' lifestyles and can maintain their buff bodies off of the welfare rolls (and then demand free healthcare) is proof of the fact that we still live in a 'democracy' and not in a system run by the 'smart people'.
In a system run by the 'elites', such scum would have been eliminated long ago given the unacceptable risk and ROI levels.
Posted by GinNTonic , Apr 07, 2008 7:40PM
Why people still bother arguing with Random Banker is beyond me. Although I would love to ship all of the people who think like Random Banker to Cuba, there is no right or wrong in this argument. Do you beleive in Locke or Hobbes? Are you a fan of Marx or Smith? No matter how many facts, statistics, or anecdotes, either side throws out, neither Random Banker or anyone else is going to change their positions.
Just fing give up already of trying to convince the other side. You're all more likely to convince Bess, EP, and Muffie to have a 3-way than Random to beleive in personal responsibility
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 7:41PM
RB,
I find it amusing the way you sneer at the "stupids" in one breath and then tell us all how much your heart bleeds for them in the next. And when somebody calls you on it, you were just joking of course. Except that you weren't. By expecting nothing at all from them in the form of rational thought, you insult and denigrate the masses to a much greater extent than any of the heartless, greedy, kitten-beating conservatives do.
But I know, you are the insightful shepherd (a position you admittedly gained through sheer luck) and they are your ignorant flock, so you need to look after them. Because, as you say, if you don't look after them they will come after you (and me) with the pitchforks and torches and whatnot.
But what you continue to omit in all of this is that incentives matter. I'm sure you know this, but you conveniently leave it out of the discussion. Maybe if the next generation of "stupids" hears from its parents how awful it was to move out of the house they "owned" and back into a (shudder) apartment, an important lesson will have been imparted to your flock. And maybe if the next generation hears instead that its fine to catch up on your backlog of American Idol episodes rather than read the effing mortgage contract because Charlie Rangel and Chris Dodd will bail you out, then you will continue to get the same bubble-inducing behavior from your flock. After all, if you aren't going to provide them with any guidance, what is the point of your existence, good shepherd?
Publius
Posted by Anal_yst , Apr 07, 2008 7:42PM
I think, to sum up alot of what I hope is at least 1/2 sarcastic blabber, we need a wholesale effort in this country to return to some state of personal responsibility. Unfortunately, every indicator suggests we are moving in the opposite direction. So, I pose it to you, fellow DB readers, to come up with some way(s) to slow this regression, and to move us back towards a productive system of accepting the consequences of our own actions.
drop em here or email its.the.anal.yst@gmail.com
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 7:42PM
@7:26:
Well you're entirely poor parenting is an issue here. But is it the fault of the children that their parents don't know what they're doing?
They tried that "elimination" shtick in Germany remember, this is the country that is supposed to stand against such things.
But fine if you get to eliminate them, I can't wait to eliminate you.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 7:56PM
Publius:
No I openly sneer at the stupid. I just don't count english majors among them per se. And i don't think it the fault of the stupid that they are, stupid.
As for incentives, can you incent a chimpanzee into dong algebra?
I am not their shepherd or their keeper. I'm just Jane Goodall dispassionately observing the native fona and reporting back on what can and cannot be expected from it. But to the extent that you believe the public to be sheep, they can be sheered many times but skinned only once. Someone must be left to consume all the goods to drive the economy upon which the securities industry is based.
G&T:
come on man i'm just trying to push people outside of their comfort zone. There're a lot of faulty assumptions underlying the Ayn Rand view of the universe.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 8:26PM
RB,
OK, I get it. So you are a dispassionate observer of the ignorant beasts. But your heart bleeds for them and their plight. And are they stupid, or just uneducated? In one post, you seem to indicate that they could be "just like us" if only they had access to the same education, but then you derisively imply that they are no more capable of changing their behavior than a sh*t-eating dog or a banana-eating monkey. So which is it?
Are you the detached scientist observing the *fauna* in the wild, or are you the PETA activist hyperventilating over our mistreatment of your herd? I'm never sure which version of Random Banker is going to appear in the next post (keeps it exciting, though). Do you quixotically change the tenor of your argument because of a mood disorder, or because somebody has backed you into a logical corner and you don't think anyone will notice the deceit?
Publius
Posted by diablo , Apr 07, 2008 8:31PM
Anal_yst @7:42
The "Ownership Society" goes hand in hand with personal responsibility according to the Cato ideologues. However, don't you agree that it has been a non-event except for the disaster of the subprime meltdown? Expanding home ownership was one of the White House's major objectives (whitehouse.gov). Sounded like a good idea but promoting such a thing in the middle of a speculative housing bubble was just as stupid as those who fell for it. (Of course the realtors and mortage brokers/lenders who collected around $40 billion in fees from subprime borrowers didn't feel so bad at the time, except now they can't play that game and are looking for other jobs. No more botox for them).
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 8:38PM
RB you think you are a smart fucker dont you?
"They tried that "elimination" shtick in Germany remember, this is the country that is supposed to stand against such things. "
It is not 'this country' but ANY country based upon the principles of human equality the equal democratic representation that is supposed to stand against such things.
However, your self professed theory of inequality is in direct contradiction with the above mentioned values. Countries which follow your proffessed '5% intelligent / 95% schmucks' social theory are the ones where an elite arises which then chooses to model the population as per its own 'elite' agenda.
I just took your professed philosophy to its logical conclusion. I find it surprising that that conclusion all of a sudden awakened you to the virtues of human equality and individual freedom and liberty!
So I take that you are either REALLY dumb (which in itself negates your very 95/5 theory) or you are just a patheric liar. Choose a viewpoint - are some people 'more equal' than others or not? And if not, then do not reflexively fall back upon the 'values of this country' becuase this country fundamentally (though it also has been through its phases and issues) was not designed with the 'unequal' philosophy in mind.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 8:58PM
People don't speculate and try to flip their student loans... big difference.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 9:03PM
Publius:
How clever you are. But are there no scientists in Peta? The two positions are one in the same. It is precisely because I consider myself a superior specimen that I don't hold the nature of the beasts against them. The plebeians are not capable of changing their behavior because they do not have access to the educational resources which people like Equity Private take for granted.
P.S. I also have a mood disorder.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 9:09PM
@8:38
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. My position is that all people are equal though most are stupid, yet equal.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 10:06PM
First Random Banker said
"You should feel sorry for these people exactly people because they are too stupid to do what you are so readily capable of. "
and
"As for incentives, can you incent a chimpanzee into dong algebra? "
and then he said
"My position is that all people are equal though most are stupid, yet equal."
If some are stupid and cannot be incentivized to learn 'dong algebra' no matter what - while others can learn it even without incentives, doesnt it make them 'unequal'???
Wtf man. You give a new meaning to 'All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others'! I cant believe that someone actually went out and repeated one of the most ironic (and ridiculed) socialist statements of all time.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 10:19PM
You missed my point. It was not that people can not be incentivized in to learning algebra. Its that people with out the required skills already are not going to be able to properly asses the risks and benefits associated with various financing packages. The teaching monkeys algebra statement was merely an analogy.
And wow i typed "dong" instead of "doing". you got me there.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 07, 2008 10:20PM
P.S. 2 legs bad 4 legs good
Posted by Anal_yst , Apr 07, 2008 10:31PM
@ 8:58
Wait, are you saying that I could have speculated on my student loans? REALLY? I see a fail-proof business plan here, who's with me?!?!
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 11:12PM
@rb - look, letting people off the hook for bad decisions is more disrespectful of them then having them take responsibility for their actions. If you say with your "I'm smarter and better than everyone else" attitude that "ok, you're stupid, you don't have to lose your house and go rent" then you're far more disrespectful of them then us Libertarians could ever be. We respect people to the level that we realize they are smart enough to make their own mistakes. And to pay for them themselves, because that's the "man-up" kind of thing to do.
But I think it's pointless to argue with you, you're far too superior in your own head to deal with mere mortals.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 11:14PM
@10:31 Send youe student loan invoices to Random Banker. Just tell him you're too stupid to pay them (doesn't have to be true, he's not looking) and he'll surely pay them, he feels sorry for everyone.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 11:15PM
@7:27pm -- A few observations. It's a principle of our democracy that the child is not punished for the sins of the parent.
Teaching birth control to economically disadvantaged people is a good thing. Limiting family size is a key factor in being able to lift yourself out of poverty. But have you noticed birth control being emphasized as a public health concern in the last eight years? No, it's been all about the "sanctity of life," whether life is lived in the squalor of poverty or not.
Despite some of your beliefs, teen pregnancies among African-Americans have actually been declining in recent years. Due to increased literacy and greater access to information, the word about the disadvantages of early unwed pregnancy among this population has actually gotten out.
Posted by guest , Apr 07, 2008 11:35PM
@11:15, you are preaching to the choir. I am TOTALLY against forcing birth control or any such thing. I think that a person should have the freedom to have as many kids as he/she wants.
However I totally disagree liberals claiming 'individual freedom' during procreation and childbirth while simulataneously hoisting all responsibility (healthcare, nutrition, education) of the child onto the broader society.
Hey, you are either 'free to choose' or you are 'bound to others' and hence not free to choose. If you will look to others to pay for the life of your child then sure as hell those people will have control over your child as well as when and how you have children.
The modern day American liberal notion of selective freedom is most disgusting. When it comes to actions - they are all for 'freedom of the individual.' But when it comes to receiving priveleges or taking responsibility for one's actions - it is all collective thinking and group action. At least true blue communists are honest about one thing - they are about collectivism throughout. The local brand of liberalism (not to be confused with classical liberalism) is intellectually the most dishonest.
Posted by Cov Lite , Apr 07, 2008 11:56PM
Now that Ron Paul is out of the running, it's time for personal responsibility?
Come on, had Doctor Representative Ron Paul been Prsesident 4 years ago, we would not be in this mess, nor would we need the Fed playing Wall St. socialist.
Posted by Cov Lite , Apr 07, 2008 11:56PM
Now that Ron Paul is out of the running, it's time for personal responsibility?
Come on, had Doctor Representative Ron Paul been Prsesident 4 years ago, we would not be in this mess, nor would we need the Fed playing Wall St. socialist.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 12:08AM
RB are you being serious when you quote the 50% graduation rate in schools? Did you check back to see where this was happening?
That stunning failure is almost 100% the result of the very kind of super flawed government driven socialist policies that you espouse. Kind of ironic that you would bring that up.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 12:13AM
panic buying is the same as panic selling.
i just made that up but damn if doesn't sound good.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 08, 2008 12:15AM
yes, i know where its happening and I disagree with your analysis. I'd say its more likely the product of poverty and systemic racism.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 12:16AM
RB,
Being the supposed moral authority/self-promoting sociologist, how is it you've fallen into a profession that goes against everything you've brought to case? --- Inequality? Meritocracy being a farce? Capitalism working against the blue-collar workers of the nation unwilling/unable to decipher a good decision from a bad one?
It's laughable you're working so hard at ridiculing the very basis which your profession is based on. You remind me of all the petulant Greenwich trust-fund kids denouncing their family's riches, while taking another handout from Daddy. I applaud you for taking a few anthropology and sociology courses in your top-tier University, but your very handle speaks against everything you're working to denounce.
Go work for Adbusters, or shut the fuck up. I'm a 42K/year monkey worker, and I follow this blog because it interests me. Some snotty CT kid bullshitting about the plight of those less-fortunate is silly coming from a random BANKER.
Posted by StupidEquityGuy , Apr 08, 2008 12:28AM
I am really getting tired of smart people feeling sorry for stupid people. We feel sorry enough about ourselves that we don't need your pity.
Random Banker I feel sorry for you, it must be horrible carrying the weight of a nation of fools who don't care a wit about your pain for us...
~Stupid Equity Guy
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 08, 2008 12:32AM
I like capitalism. As my personal hero once said, Greed is right; greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
And once everyone starts on an equal playing field I will drop my populist leanings.
Further I never said that capitalists work against the blue collar workers.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 12:49AM
I am all for eating shit. As my personal hero SlimJim said, errr.. he said something about docking and wating shit.
However I currently do not. But once shit stops smelling so bad, I will drop my pretensions and start gobbling it down like I never needed got enough.
Further I never said that shit does not contain germs.
Rain falls down and if there is a wind it may not, but I still carry an umbrella and wear a trenchcoat as well.
If you run into a wall, then it hurts but is the wall is made of foam then it may not, unless there are some hard fasteners which may bruise you. Hence you should not wear dark glasses while walking at night.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 12:54AM
"yes, i know where its happening and I disagree with your analysis. I'd say its more likely the product of poverty and systemic racism. "
Wow. Somehow black teachers in black majority schools discriminate in favor of Asian kids against Black kids. Who wouldv'e thunk?
Oh and $10,000+ per i-pod rocking, Macbook cradling, nike wearing kids are so 'poverty'. Damn, those Asian kids getting $10 per kid and a bowl of cheap rice mustn't even know how to count till 5!
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 12:57AM
You're right. You didn't say "capitalists work against the blue collar workers."
So you want to start all over again and see what happens? It's wonderful you're arguing for the impossible. Like I suggested, frame your transcripts from [insert top-tier university], and feel ultra-proud you've adopted a humanitarian sense of zen while attending to the daily grind of your office. And no matter your stance on capitalism, you have the chance to work against everything your position represents. You can be fine with capitalism, but change venues. Until you do exactly that, you're a naggy yuppie, feeling extra self-important tonight. Congratulations. Now take your bipolar medicine and gear up for another day of contradictory behavior.
If you're feeling ultra ambitious, drop your CV at http://www.adbusters.org/network/contact.php
or check out http://www.crimethinc.com/ for submission information.
---old punk rock guy, turned realist
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 08, 2008 1:04AM
That's a very narrow view of racism. The reason those students are trapped in such failing schools is because the school's funding is tied to property value and for decades African Americans were victims of red lining which meant they couldn't move out of the cities when other immigrants groups moved to the suburbs. As the those property values collapsed so too did their home equity.
Most of the disparity in wealth in this country is institutionalized and passed from one generation to another. No one has to be actively racist now for students in inner city class rooms feel this effect.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 1:16AM
By the way, 12:16 & 12:57 is from the lowliest of assistants. While enjoying libations, I like to fight via the internet and, apparently, not log in. I just hope to god the guy I'm picking up coffee for tomorrow isn't Random Banker. Fucking bummer.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 1:31AM
"Most of the disparity in wealth in this country is institutionalized and passed from one generation to another."
There you go trying to deceive once again. It is like saying shit stinks. Of course it does!
My whole point was that even the worst inner city school students have better facilities and funding that some of the best public schools in other developing countries. If the only thing that determined educational success were to be 'funding' (which is what you are claiming) then why would - on a relative basis - these kids who go to a better school and come from more prosperous families* not do better than those underfunded inpoverished (relatively) kids?
* On my walk to work I pass kids going to a nearby school in the city. I checked online - it has a TERRIBLE academic record. Yet I do not see a single kid who is not listening to a $300 i-pod on the way to work. Poverty indeed!
And do once again are you hence inferring that if we were to triple school budgets tomorrow then all these kids would go straight to the honor roll? How about quadruple? Quintuple? Is your point that $10k+ is not ENUF? If school budgets were taken to $100k per student tomorrow, that would you spend it on?
More importantly, if you instead dimantled the whole public schooling system and instead gave all the kids $100k conditional to it being spent on education, would that be a better outcome? IF not why not? If not then why the hell did you oppose my 'analysis' in your 12:15 post?
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 08, 2008 1:42AM
I have stated here that I am in favor of a school voucher system. I disagree with your analysis that racism is not part of the problem.
And by your logic parents would send their kids to Thailand instead of Exeter for boarding school. And yet Exeter is still in business.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 1:43AM
Your bullshit about incentivizing is utter bullshit.
Even the French have realized that when unemployment benefits exceed that of entry level jobs - people PREFER to remain unemployed. That is the 'stupid folks' responding to incentives.
Mexicans do not have jobs in their own country but then know that coming to America and working as janitor, gardners or share-sroppers will offer them a better lifestyle than that in their homeland. Hence they travel thousands of miles, jump over fences, cross deserts, evade Minutemena and pay human traffickers to get to this country to work at low wage jobs. THAT is 'stupid people' reacting to incentives.
On the other hand, the 'poors' in this country realize that the welfare schemes pay more that what low end jobs do. Hence they are happy to let the mexicans stand outside home depot to take day jobs, mow garden, deliver food and pick crops while they claim unemployment benefits, free healthcare and righteous angst at not being able to find a job. That AGAIN is an example of 'poor folks' responding to incentives.
I have to assume that you are retarded to have misses all of this. Never ceases to amaze me that NYC has one of the biggest welfare rolls in the country - yet all the delivery guys, cab drivers, street vendors are illegals or recent immigrants from other countries (south asia, east europe, africa etc) while the native 'poors' who were born here scream racism, inequality and lack of job opportunities at every step and are not
to be seen at any of these jobs, probably because they can rely on a welfare system and on guilty liberals who will continue to claim that the welfare schemes are not enough.
THAT is 'stupid folks' responding to incentives.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 1:49AM
"And by your logic parents would send their kids to Thailand instead of Exeter for boarding school. And yet Exeter is still in business. "
Parents who can pay the full cost are free to send their kids wherever they wish!! We are talking of artificial subsidies here.
Yes, if the parents were forced to pay the TRUE cost instead of relying on subsidized loans and taxpayer grants, then they would most certainly rather send their kids to Univ of Thailand than Univ of Bumblefuck, Iowa.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 08, 2008 1:52AM
I would never say incentives don't matter man they clearly do. I think air bag are the reason for increased auto accident rates. I'm just saying that the person has to understand the incentive structure in order for it to be effective.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 1:54AM
RB,
Why are you a banker? Why do you keep straying from this question? I seriously am sweating at the palms for your justification, and I'm beginning to feel neglected. I feel like I'm in an interview at a PE, completely unqualified. Your Michael Douglas quote was deep, but I need further clarification on why/how you're going to wake up in 4 hours to get ready for your big job at the root of all capitalism.
Gracias,
---non-gringo, cutting your lawn tomorrow at 1:30 pm.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 08, 2008 1:57AM
Of course they're free to send their kids where ever they want. That's not the issue. The issue is that if funding is such a non issue then why do people pay huge sums of money to send their kids to boarding school?
Also, let me get this straight you're against universities now too? You've truly jumped the shark on that one my friend.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 08, 2008 1:59AM
@1:54:
The intellectual challenge of doing the greatest job in the world?
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 2:09AM
@1:59,
That's enlightening. Why don't you pick up me and the crew up on 3rd Ave. and 20th St. in Brooklyn tomorrow morning at, say, 6:30 am? We'll be eating croissants under the BQE.
We'd love to be intellectually challenged/stimulated. (So tired of installing circuit chargers and nailing supporter beams.) If you could send an email to the security desk at 85 broad, that would be great. Less hassle, faster elevator rides.
Best,
Guy who mows your lawn, but you don't remember my name. Herein, you can call me "guy."
P.S. Thanks for telling me about all the things you received in your youth that I never got. It makes me feel better knowing there's a rich person out there that knows what we don't have. Good looking out.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 2:13AM
"The issue is that if funding is such a non issue then why do people pay huge sums of money to send their kids to boarding school?"
Why do people fuck $5000 an hour hookers? Why do people wear $5k suits? Why do people eat $200 steaks?
Because they have the god damned money to do so!
Dude, I need to get this thing out for tomorrow and this is enough. I apologize, it was my mistake trying to argue with a liar.
As per you,
- All people are equal but some are more stupid than others, and apparently we can do nothing to remedy their stupidity but once that is taken care of they will be equal but there is not way to do it.
- People do not react to incentives, but the incentives are not clear, but they can be clear but still people are not smart enought to figure incentives out because they are stupid but (see point about 'stupidity' above'
I gave a laundry list of incentive 'stupid people' respond to but you took no pains to debate even one of them - which I take to mean that you agree. Hence - my point about welfare. Severely curtail all the welfare schemes and all the lazy poors will be working their asses out like those Mexicans and we will have solved the problems of poverty/unemployment, illegal immigration and out of control entitlement spending in one stroke. I am yet to see how the 'no welfare' incentive will be too complex for people to understand (because they clearly get the 'presence of welfare' incentive.)
Divert a good portion of those savings to the shcool education budget and hand it out as vouchers. When the poors have to stick it out, they will beat their kids into attending school seriously. Immigrants who get the absence of welfare incentive as well as their brethren in the developing countries get this incentive very clearly.
I dont see where stupidity plays a role in this. If people are smart enough to figure out that they will rather sit at home and collect unemployment than compete with the mexican for the day jobs, they will also very quickly come out to compete with that mexican once they realize that there is no welfare to be drawn upon.
Posted by Random Banker , Apr 08, 2008 3:27AM
Look i can't take you seriously when you're calling people "poors". Also I did respond to you. Incentives do matter. I'm just saying that the person has to understand the incentive structure in order for it to be effective. However most poor people aren't on welfare so you're barking up the wrong tree anyway.
All people are equal, period. Whether they're stupid or not has no bearing on their equality. They're just equal and also separately stupid.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 7:24AM
@Random Bankerfag-- If someone lives closer to NY than 1 hour, does that make them smarter than you? Richer? Or just plain better. My vote goes for all three. Now, go photocopy this stuff, collate it and bring me some breakfast. Oh, and the toilet in the 3rd floor bathroom overflowed from all the fag condoms in it, so clean it up.
Posted by Debter , Apr 08, 2008 10:08AM
Damn, RB has been on all night defending his positions...f that, I need my beauty sleep.
Anyway, Diablo, the ownership society that was pushed (wrongly for the most part), was never realized since the real problem is that many didn't own (equity) any part of their homes. Those that have upwards of 10-20% equity, typically made through a down payment, are not the ones with adjustable mortgages and in fear of losing their homes.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 10:27AM
Apparently, this is the sound of one individual arguing with the personalities in his/her head.
Posted by diablo , Apr 08, 2008 10:35AM
Hey Debter, good comments. Here's what I just read at Yves Smith's blog, from an interview with Joshua Rosner:
The IRA: But haven't we already largely nationalized the home market already? Our interview with Bob Feinberg (GSE Nation: Interview with Bob Feinberg) illustrated that point. During the Joint Economic Committee hearing last week, when Chairman Bernanke appeared prior to the BSC session, Senator John Sununu (R-NH) talked about the various federal government programs already in place for housing. It took him almost five minutes of soliloquy to go through them all.
Rosner: That's right. We have a universe of government programs to encourage home ownership, but we need to reconsider the benefits of getting people into homes and how to craft government policies to make these markets more rather than less stable. Historically home ownership was seen as a way to make better neighbors and stronger communities. We need to go back and look at what aspects of home ownership were responsible for conferring these benefits.
The IRA: For example?
Since the late 1930, home owners generally took out 30-year fixed rate mortgages which were illiquid instruments tied to illiquid assets, namely the home, which required the borrower to make monthly payments of principal and interest into what was effectively a forced savings plan.
The IRA: You're talking about our grandparents. And they basically could not modify the mortgage or even move easily.
Rosner: Correct. Other than moving, they could not extract equity. And when they purchased the house, they could not do so without having a substantial amount of equity going into the transaction. I would argue that it was those features that benefit society and support, from a Washington policy perspective, the social importance of home ownership.
The IRA: And not the ability to turn a house into a speculative vehicle? The folks at the National Association of Realtors will be disappointed to hear you say that. The NAR is running TV ads that claim homes double in value on average every ten years.
Rosner: Right. And there is an aspect of this that nobody in Washington is talking about. Let's go back to the prior model of home ownership. Typically a family bought a home around the time of family formation. So you got married and then you and your wife bought a house. You had your kids in that house. And you had a 30-year fixed rate mortgage and every month you made a payment of principal and interest. That process usually began in the late-twenties to early thirties of a person's life. That meant that at about the age of 60, the home owner was able to have a mortgage burning party. So as they retired, their expenses fell and the value of their unencumbered assets had risen. They had a real asset to supplement their pension, pay for grandchildren's college, etc. Because we have allowed this model to change, the US faces a huge burden in the future that we have not yet even begun to talk about in Washington.
Posted by guest , Apr 08, 2008 10:50AM
@10.35 - You fag! I've always wondered if 'Leave it to beaver' was really about the social phenomena of the in-roads that lesbianism and plumbers fucking housewives had. Thats the issue no one talks about.
Posted by guest , Apr 09, 2008 10:49AM
From the WSJ today
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120734275438190825.html?mod=hps_us_inside_today
Gems from the article -
"..But when ABFS went under, Mr. Magnon, who is 81, says he was out $761,000, or 80% of his liquid assets.....You could call that greed, but I don't think it's greed. It's trying to get more for your money....." (and greed is ...?)
"...The front page contained a bold-face warning: "You should only invest in these securities if you can afford to lose your entire investment...." (Yup, they were just kidding... i mean seriously.. that cant happen.. can it?)
"Ms. Deravedisian says she had never heard of a subprime mortgage until a few weeks ago while watching the news on television. "I wonder if ABFS was involved in this?" she thought to herself. "That's when it clicked." (Ahem, so she thought she was buying paper of a candy manufacturer?)
After reading all this, I am conviced that I have been shafted by Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy all these years. I demand restitution for all the pain and misery. Will some kind trial lawyer please take up my case?
Posted by guest , Apr 09, 2008 11:40AM
@10:35 A few important points are lost in that conversation that seems to pine for the good old days: 1) it was a less mobile society in the time he's speaking about. 2) Sunbelt not yet developed, suburbs young, most homeowners white and middle class. 3) Interest rates were essentially fixed, mortgages funded by and issued through the savings industry
Posted by Cov Lite , Apr 09, 2008 6:23PM
10:49 - You forgot my favorite re not reading the prospectus
"Some investors admit they never read the prospectuses, or didn't understand them. 'There was a lot of mumbo jumbo there,'..."
Personally, when I don't understand something, I invest my life savings in it anyway.
fucking pikers
Posted by guest , Apr 10, 2008 11:45AM
I want a smart people super-government to rule the retards
Posted by guest , Apr 12, 2008 10:06AM
@11:40, right, But I thought the whole point of the "ownership society" was to help minorities and other disadvantaged peoples to jump into the middle class. Part of middle class-ness used to be about being responsible and paying your bills on time, building good credit and generally being a good citizen. That's what home ownership was supposed to create.
One of the problems with this country is no one saves money, they just buy SUVs, huge houses, flat screen TVs and whatever. Poor people in this country have these things. Credit card debt is the next thing to go...watch. The culture of this country is messed up.
Posted by guest , Apr 13, 2008 10:57PM
@10:06 The explosion of credit card debt came in the 1980's, with a change in usury laws. Before that credit cards were a convenience - don't carry cash, us em to get you through a peak spending period like holidays or back to school. The 1980's changed that and there was an EXPLOSION of activity which significantly goosed the consumer economy and created the 80s boom. Reagan and Kudlow tricked everyone into thinking it was because of tax cuts. The reality is that the consumer for the first time went deeply into hock. All to buy more shit.