Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The People's Bailout

howtosharpenpencils.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 323 posts

Re: The People's Bailout

#241

Post by lmm »

malandrew wrote: post #147
SeoxyS wrote: post #121

Instead of operating this as a charity (doesn't scale), why not sell the debt back to the original lendees at face value. (Buy back your $15k loan for $500.) I guess that wouldn't be legal, though?

Personally I think they should try to recoup the face value from the debtor. If my debt was among the debt bought by OWS and they contacted me giving me the option to pay it off at face value so they could move forward with helping others, I'd pay it off in a second.

Which means you're probably not the kind of person who gets into this kind of debt.

Re: The People's Bailout

#242

Post by hnal943 »

intended wrote: post #133
marknutter wrote: post #19

How does OWS think this debt accumulated? Debt isn't some random accident like getting hit by a car while crossing the street. You have to get yourself into debt. It used to be taboo, but it's acceptable to get into debt these days and worse yet, walk away from it. OWS, to me, represents an entitled generation.

Yeah I can get behind that people should have known. But in the case of the Mortgage Market prior to the crash I can't - simply because it wasn't an equal/level playing field. In brief 1) CDOs => Mortgage Origniators no longer held back by their risk levels. CDOs can just offset it. 2) MOs incentives are now drastically different - Incentive now entirely to generate as many mortgages as possible, whatever the risk pr…

Politicians and citizens alike were pounding on the banks to lower their standards before the crash. Everywhere there was rhetoric about home ownership being a right, and that the evil banks were standing in the way. It's not like this was an evil scheme that the banks cooked up.

Re: The People's Bailout

#243

Post by hnal943 »

elemenohpee wrote: post #200
bo1024 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not much of an OWS supporter, but a lot of the criticism of it really bothers me. Just a lot of hypocrisy to be frank. - This entitlement thing. I don't see what's entitled about giving one's own time or money to a cause you believe in, to go camp out for weeks or whatever. It seems like a lot of criticism of OWS centers on them acting like they deserve to be given jobs, but I have trouble taking this seriously w…

> Civil liberties and free speech are supposed to be the cornerstone of American democracy and yada yada, but people suddenly feel extremely threatened when people want to exercise them. Notice the government doesn't get their panties in a bunch over the Westboro church, or Tea Party townhalls, but turn your attention towards the plutocrats and suddenly there's riot police in the street. The fact that the government…

There's no reports of rampant drug use and rape at tea party rallies.

Re: The People's Bailout

#244

Post by intended »

hnal943 wrote: post #242
intended wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I can get behind that people should have known. But in the case of the Mortgage Market prior to the crash I can't - simply because it wasn't an equal/level playing field. In brief 1) CDOs => Mortgage Origniators no longer held back by their risk levels. CDOs can just offset it. 2) MOs incentives are now drastically different - Incentive now entirely to generate as many mortgages as possible, whatever the risk pr…

Politicians and citizens alike were pounding on the banks to lower their standards before the crash. Everywhere there was rhetoric about home ownership being a right, and that the evil banks were standing in the way. It's not like this was an evil scheme that the banks cooked up.

Erm - The politicians were being funded by banks and focus groups?

Heck de facto end/death of Glass Steagal was when Citi went ahead and merged with Travelers, even when they knew it would precipitate in a court case and most likely an end to the regulation

Re: The People's Bailout

#245

Post by hnal943 »

potatolicious wrote: post #225
greedo wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then set up a charity where people with medical bills can submit them and ask for some assistance. That way they stay out of debt/bankruptcy, have a cleaner credit report, and can focus on their health issues not financial issues.

So... universal health care then :P An organization that receives all your medical bills, keeps you out of debt/bankruptcy, and charges you an amount that it determines would not cause undue hardship? Like insurance, except everyone qualifies! Slight side note: this whole discussion is somewhat depressing, but I've come to expect this from HN lately. This whole thread is divided into two rough parts: people addressin…

The difference is that in universal health care, the government puts a gun to your head and forces you to "help."

Re: The People's Bailout

#246

Post by mkr-hn »

hnal943 wrote: post #245
potatolicious wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... universal health care then :P An organization that receives all your medical bills, keeps you out of debt/bankruptcy, and charges you an amount that it determines would not cause undue hardship? Like insurance, except everyone qualifies! Slight side note: this whole discussion is somewhat depressing, but I've come to expect this from HN lately. This whole thread is divided into two rough parts: people addressin…

The difference is that in universal health care, the government puts a gun to your head and forces you to "help."

National government using its superior capacity for organized action to ensure that its most vulnerable citizens are taken care of is truly the greatest crime of this century.

Re: The People's Bailout

#247

Post by greedo »

mkr-hn wrote: post #239
greedo wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a society, we expect people to follow norms of behavior; we usually call them laws. Driving without insurance is breaking the law. Driving impaired in the case of alcohol is against the law. Driving impaired because you're tired and exhausted and stressed about life and then striking a pedestrian is usually going to result in either criminal charges or civil charges at the minimum. You might even have to wear a si…

Patronizing someone and linking to fox news to support a nonsense narrative isn't helping your case. Edit on your edit: Selecting a single extraordinary instance to support your case isn't helping your case. This is no different from someone looking at the idiotic things on Fox News' prime time shows and saying they represent all conservatives. I know many decent conservatives who think Fox News is for idiots, just a…

Really? The sentence the judge imposed might be extraordinary, but you can't believe idiotic driving is unusual.

Re: The People's Bailout

#248

Post by mkr-hn »

greedo wrote: post #247
mkr-hn wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patronizing someone and linking to fox news to support a nonsense narrative isn't helping your case. Edit on your edit: Selecting a single extraordinary instance to support your case isn't helping your case. This is no different from someone looking at the idiotic things on Fox News' prime time shows and saying they represent all conservatives. I know many decent conservatives who think Fox News is for idiots, just a…

Really? The sentence the judge imposed might be extraordinary, but you can't believe idiotic driving is unusual.

You linked that in response to elemenohpee arguing that debt is not always, or even often, a result of irresponsibility. What exactly are you arguing? What was your goal in linking to that?

Re: The People's Bailout

#249

Post by mkr-hn »

hnal943 wrote: post #243
elemenohpee wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Civil liberties and free speech are supposed to be the cornerstone of American democracy and yada yada, but people suddenly feel extremely threatened when people want to exercise them. Notice the government doesn't get their panties in a bunch over the Westboro church, or Tea Party townhalls, but turn your attention towards the plutocrats and suddenly there's riot police in the street. The fact that the government…

There's no reports of rampant drug use and rape at tea party rallies.

You're saying something doesn't exist on one side of a thing and implying it does on another without explicitly stating it. What do you hope to achieve with this?

Re: The People's Bailout

#250

Post by aarondf »

shiftpgdn wrote: post #186
aarondf wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually 13,000 per individual, so 26,000 to the household if married. And 52,000 if given from one couple to another (think parents to child+spouse.) (CPA in Texas)

Hopefully you see this but can you send me an email? J@squid.nu . I am in dire need of a competent CPA.

emailed
Post reply on HN