$50,000 Loans that Don't Have to be Repaid

[asdf]

And, just to get this thread back on the rails, we're not talking about people who are poor and starving.

We're talking about people who 1) own houses and 2) whose mortgages are at least $50,000 in the red.

Why should we marginalize the productive members of society to help some individuals poor investment decision. Reallocating resources in this manner reduces the total wealth produced by society which results in more people unable to pay back their mortgages.

They can default, the bank takes a loss, they rent another place, problem solved.

[SgtSpike]

They can default, the bank takes a loss, they rent another place, problem solved.

This.

What are we teaching people by bailing them out of their own financial problems over and over again?  We're teaching them that they don't have to be responsible for the dumb financial decisions that they are making.  We're teaching them to take greater (read: stupider) risks, and live closer to the edge of their means even when they have a job, because the government will always be there to bail them out if they screw up.

People who cannot pay their loan should be foreclosed on, should be forced out of their home, and should try to find a place to rent instead.  They have no one to blame but themselves if they cannot keep a job and don't have enough savings built up to pay for expenses in the event of a job loss.

Heck, if I lost my job now, I'd be screwed.  I have zero savings, am borderline on being able to pay my bills every month, and I blame no one but myself.  I am working hard on bettering my financial position, and because of that, I expect to be rewarded.  Instead, it's the people who screw around with their money every month and grow a deeper and deeper pile of debt that are rewarded.

[Anonymous]

Yes. because people will come to help him. I will certainly feel obliged to help. Human empathy is a powerful instinct.

You will? Does that not go against your objectivist ideals? You believe that the meaning of life is the pursuit of one's own happiness, yes? How would this action benefit you?

Let me take a wild guess here: you're from Europe, right ?

Have these people been desensitized?

[benjamindees]

Have these people been desensitized?

Basically, yes.  I recommend Robert Kagan's essay "Of Paradise and Power" which explains how.

[killer2021]

I don't really see the problem. If you lost your job and couldn't pay your mortgage, I'm sure you wouldn't be whining about this decision.

This is just taxpayer money tunneled to the banks.

Thats exactly right. Banks control everything. Just look at greece.

[Hunterbunter]

This is very interesting. Both what the US is doing in the OP, and the discussion on state enforced slavery.

Atlas: your posts are about as subtle as a sledgehammer, but as vehement as they are, I can't help but agree. I very strongly feel my necessity to look after my fellow man, but I deeply feel that states produce least worst solutions, rather than most best solutions for any problem. It takes but a few voices to set in motion laws that affect everyone, which leads to a situation akin to piercing a full water balloon to stop leaks - as the water empties, more and more holes are made and the shittier everything becomes. I used to believe in state welfare, but now I realize it breeds nothing but apathy. People need help when they're down, and the best way to achieve that, is to not be such an arsehole to your neighbours. If your neighbours know "the state" will welfare people who fall over, the need to interject is lost, as is the need for relationships.

I believe the intentions were great when welfare first came about, but it was simply the least worst solution. This 50k bailout is just another money is worthless statement.

[billyjoeallen]

I don't really see the problem. If you lost your job and couldn't pay your mortgage, I'm sure you wouldn't be whining about this decision.

This makes steam come out of my ears. This is a stinking pile of fail. Who pays for it? Taxpayers, unless theymonetize the debt, in which case everyone who holds dollars or works for an hourly wage pays.  You can't get something for nothing and it doesn't even help homeowners. If you have negative equity, you are not an "owner" in any meaningful sense. This is another back door bank bail-out.  It props up home prices, which makes homes more expensive for buyers. It keeps the "owners" from moving to where the jobs are.

You don't see the problem because you ARE the problem- you and all the other ignorant, slow-witted knuckle-draggers populating this doomed country.

[Gabi]

Didn't the ppl who lost the job pay taxes?  Why they should pay taxes if the government does not help them when they need it?

[raresaturn]

Are you some sort of commie ?

ha ha the 50's ended a long time ago...

[billyjoeallen]

Didn't the ppl who lost the job pay taxes?  Why they should pay taxes if the government does not help them when they need it?

They shouldn't. Nobody should pay taxes. Anything worth paying for doesn't need to be funded involuntarily.

[raresaturn]

Didn't the ppl who lost the job pay taxes?  Why they should pay taxes if the government does not help them when they need it?

They shouldn't. Nobody should pay taxes. Anything worth paying for doesn't need to be funded involuntarily.

so everybody should build their own roads and hospitals?

[BitterTea]

Didn't the ppl who lost the job pay taxes?  Why they should pay taxes if the government does not help them when they need it?

They shouldn't. Nobody should pay taxes. Anything worth paying for doesn't need to be funded involuntarily.

so everybody should build their own roads and hospitals?

Does everybody built their own supermarkets and homes? 

[Hunterbunter]

Didn't the ppl who lost the job pay taxes?  Why they should pay taxes if the government does not help them when they need it?

They shouldn't. Nobody should pay taxes. Anything worth paying for doesn't need to be funded involuntarily.

so everybody should build their own roads and hospitals?

Telecommunications are a parallel analogy to roads, and they work mostly fine privatised. Hospitals will be built if there's profit to be made.

Do you really mean to ask: do we let people who can't pay for healthcare die? Sometimes genius comes from poverty with a hand up - scholorships, for example, rely on this fact. Perhaps it is better to let them die for the sake of better genes and memes, or perhaps it discourages selfishness and greed. Maybe it's religion's fault...seeing as its kind of similar (absolute rule, submission, etc).

I have a separate question for everyone that's kind of related to this thread: How important is the separation of wealth in a society? In a liberty world people's wealth will be separated by their skill, peers, opportunity and starting position, and there will always be a low of the low, and high of the high. A non liberty world tries to close that gap, with minimum wage, welfare, etc, but there is still abject poverty (people buying houses they can't afford). Therefore, the attempts must be ineffective. Most of the wealth is still held by the tiny few, and the rest at some point start worrying about losing their basic needs (food water shelter and security). Sometimes someone from the bottom creates a google or facebook and shoot to the top, but that's extremely rare, and results in lots of other people going down a rank or 10. Things are rejiggled, but that's about it.

I think what most of the human mass wants to know, is how will true liberty bring the poverty line as close to zero as possible, without the risk of them being culled.

[YoYa]

*Sigh*

How can I put this.....

As mentioned, rewarding peoples poor financial decisions and tunneling money to the banks this way is just outright wrong, even more so when you consider that the millions on the street who are discriminated against for just not having made a poor financial decision in the first place.

This borders on the sublimely ridiculous.

Which brings us to the ideological arguments on this thread, in light of the above isn't it fair to say that regardless of where you stand, we have a mountain of a shitpile to move to even just begin fixing the problems of state and society that this OP is a prime example of.

Individualists and Socialists(both inaccurate stereotypes on the basis of how much an individual can customize their beliefs.) have a lot more in common sharing enemies and mutual challenges that must be met before they can even begin to build their common society.

At the moment, it is all of us getting screwed by the fiat statists that only seek to maintain our penury to the banks and the international established gamers. These people toy with the destiny of all humanity for the sake of their own power over everything.

Common enemies first people, there'll be time for arguments later.

[digigalt]

You don't see the problem ?

I don't remember signing anywhere that my neighbor's
mortgage was my problem. Yet it apparently is since my
tax money now pays for it.

Yeah, and in return, your neighbor helps you when you're in trouble. As I said, I don't see the problem.

Uh, so it's all fine and dandy to steal my money, then you can help me out when it's convenient?

FUCK YOU, PARASITE! There's no other way to say it. You have no respect for man! You only have respect when its convenient for your whims and desires!

You're 17 and live with your parents. You ARE a parasite. Come back when you actually pay taxes.

[Anonymous]

You don't see the problem ?

I don't remember signing anywhere that my neighbor's
mortgage was my problem. Yet it apparently is since my
tax money now pays for it.

Yeah, and in return, your neighbor helps you when you're in trouble. As I said, I don't see the problem.

Uh, so it's all fine and dandy to steal my money, then you can help me out when it's convenient?

FUCK YOU, PARASITE! There's no other way to say it. You have no respect for man! You only have respect when its convenient for your whims and desires!

You're 17 and live with your parents. You ARE a parasite. Come back when you actually pay taxes.

Heh. Hardly. It's a consensual relationship.

[billyjoeallen]

Didn't the ppl who lost the job pay taxes?  Why they should pay taxes if the government does not help them when they need it?

They shouldn't. Nobody should pay taxes. Anything worth paying for doesn't need to be funded involuntarily.

so everybody should build their own roads and hospitals?

Public goods can be privately funded through assurance contracts. Really. Honest. I mean it. sincerely.

http://www.thepoint.com/

[billyjoeallen]

I don't own a home. I am saving. My money is being stolen from me through taxes, and the purchasing power of what I have left is being taken through money printing. If these stolen funds go toward the idiots who lent money to the uncreditworthy and to the idiots who borrowed money they couldn't pay back, then the result is that home prices are propped up to the point where I may never be able to afford a house! I am getting screwed THREE DIFFERENT WAYS!! 

Rewarding poor decisions is the surest way to get more of them. Punishing responsible behavior is the surest way to get less of it. 

[Hans0]

I don't own a home. I am saving.

Hope you don't rely on it cause it will be gone soon. Gone with the dollar and EUR.

Nobody is here to help you. All decisions on high levels are made to transfer wealth away from the 95% who cannot defend themselves. Are you among those who cannot defend themselves?

[benjamindees]

If these stolen funds go toward the idiots who lent money to the uncreditworthy and to the idiots who borrowed money they couldn't pay back, then the result is that home prices are propped up to the point where I may never be able to afford a house! I am getting screwed THREE DIFFERENT WAYS!! 

Yep.  That's the point.  Responsible Americans who work within the system and live within their means get screwed six ways to Sunday.  The only way to avoid this is to either escape with enough assets to watch it burn from the sidelines, or join in and participate in the looting.