4 ms·

> Saying that people intended to default however, is not true. I'm not sure if it's what roymurdock meant, but there's a nugget of truth to what he said. Peopl

by curun1r 10y ago

> Saying that people intended to default however, is not true. I'm not sure if it's what roymurdock meant, but there's a nugget of truth to what he said. People did take on loans that they never planned to pay off personally. They saw the relentlessly upward trajectory of home prices and wanted to benefit. They took on loans with the intention of refinancing or selling the home a few years down the road. It wasn't an intention to defraud anyone, but it was definitely an attempt to get something for nothing. Just because they were trying to copy others who'd made large profits buying and then later selling their homes doesn't make it not greedy behavior.

taeric 10y ago
You can just as easily say that banks were giving out loans they expected to refinance in the coming years. That is, I find it misguided to fault people for defaulting on loan without faulting people for aggressively pushing people to refinance. The cost of the system failure is being pushed to the people with the least control over it. I'm not looking for punishment. But responsible stewardship of the system controls would be nice.
- curun1r 10y ago
  > You can just as easily say that banks were giving out loans they expected to refinance in the coming years. Can't it be both? There's enough blame to go around. My only point was that the narrative of victimized homeowners preyed upon by evil lenders, put forth by a surprisingly large number of people, is misguided.
  - taeric 10y ago
    It can be both. However, the blast radius is different. For every lender that was irresponsible, you hit many lendees. For each lendee, you likely did not increase the number of lenders touched. That is, you fix one lender, and you likely fixed many more lendees.
FireBeyond 10y ago
Except that's not what he said (or perhaps he just said poorly). He didn't mention anything about "personally", he said "making good on". Someone flipping, re-financing or selling the home is inherently going to be making good on their mortgage. He is claiming there were swathes of people who had "no intention of making good" on mortgages.

by curun1r 10y ago

taeric 10y ago

You can just as easily say that banks were giving out loans they expected to refinance in the coming years. That is, I find it misguided to fault people for defaulting on loan without faulting people for aggressively pushing people to refinance. The cost of the system failure is being pushed to the people with the least control over it. I'm not looking for punishment. But responsible stewardship of the system controls would be nice.

curun1r 10y ago
> You can just as easily say that banks were giving out loans they expected to refinance in the coming years. Can't it be both? There's enough blame to go around. My only point was that the narrative of victimized homeowners preyed upon by evil lenders, put forth by a surprisingly large number of people, is misguided.
- taeric 10y ago
  It can be both. However, the blast radius is different. For every lender that was irresponsible, you hit many lendees. For each lendee, you likely did not increase the number of lenders touched. That is, you fix one lender, and you likely fixed many more lendees.

FireBeyond 10y ago

Except that's not what he said (or perhaps he just said poorly). He didn't mention anything about "personally", he said "making good on". Someone flipping, re-financing or selling the home is inherently going to be making good on their mortgage. He is claiming there were swathes of people who had "no intention of making good" on mortgages.