Re: City of Philthadelphia suspends foreclosure sales

Gernot Hassenpflug <gernot@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

"travisgod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <travisgod@xxxxxxx> writes:

The City Council ordered the Sheriff to stop repoing and selling
foreclosed properties.

I know, I know, I can hear the idiots like hal jumping with glee
saying "screw those rich republicans and the banks."

So, what does such a move, if it can be made to stick, do to the
credit markets? It totally fucks them. It drops the value of the
underlying mortgage bond to ZERO. That is FAR WORSE than a default.
Basically, you can sit in the house and stop paying entirely.

All for who, niggers and the "poor"? The so-called subprime
"victims"? Subprimers are NOT victims. They are people who have a
habit of NOT REPAYING THEIR DEBTS, which is why their credit scores
were low in the FIRST PLACE. They deserve NO sympathy whatsoever, and
certainly not to be "protected" by a pandering municipality CHOCK FULL
of the egregiously corrupt.

If Philly makes this last, expect their pension funds, assets,
accounts, etc., to be seized. Good luck running a city.

The people in charge and the people doing all the talking are SO
FUCKING STUPID they are going to kill us all. They are people like
hal, with asininedly misguided impressions of what is right or smart.

Trav, while what you write makes sense to me on one level, I don't see
how this kind of greed is different from what you see in virtually
100% of business: little tricks that *** the customer over slowly a
bit at a time. The classic for me is the point card that shops give
/../

Trav, just to add to what I wrote: so in this case it was the banks
(according to what you and Mr. Sigman wrote) who were "forced" to do
stuff that tehy should never have done. I.e., they chose to do
business on the terms the dishonest fuckers in government at the time
wanted them to. This is what I meant with my closing remarks in the
previous post: that at the end of the day you may find yourself
excluded from a large part of the market if you stay honest. This
sucks.

Some honest questions:

Why was no bank large enough to protest? Don't banking corportations
have enough leverage in government compared to .... who?

Did the larger banks say, OK, we can take these losses, and do
business in the areas the government forced them to; or did some say,
no, this is not what we do, stuff the government (even if we have to
pay fines).

And vice versa, did smaller banking companies say, yes, OK, we'll try
to make money off this and roll; or did some say, no way, for us small
people this is way to risky and unsafe, we need to protest this.


My feeling is that because in most corporations the personal
responsibility does not lie with any particular person in the general
case, individuals are quite happy to make long-term bad decisions
while continuing to be paid for it in the short-term.
--
BOFH excuse #304:

routing problems on the neural net
.

Quantcast