Oil prices spike $25

[IAMX 3,055]

Not only that, alot of people are driving SUV with just the driver inside. Gas Guzzlers! Waste of HP, space, and especially gas if it's used for anything other than cargo. Combined this with the high speed and you get a super gas guzzler.

So what? If they can afford it, they can drive whatever they want.

Gas guzzlers raise the price for everyone, regardless of how gas saving Joe Liberal's vehicle is.

So do the Chinese and Indians. Whatcha gonna do about it.

Find something more energy independent. BEV's + at-home charging kit = success.

[Ilya R. 0]

Blame Canada, Blame Canada!!

[mawilson 2,133]

Not only that, alot of people are driving SUV with just the driver inside. Gas Guzzlers! Waste of HP, space, and especially gas if it's used for anything other than cargo. Combined this with the high speed and you get a super gas guzzler.

So what? If they can afford it, they can drive whatever they want.

Gas guzzlers raise the price for everyone, regardless of how gas saving Joe Liberal's vehicle is.

So do the Chinese and Indians. Whatcha gonna do about it.

Find something more energy independent. BEV's + at-home charging kit = success.

So you're ok with their guzzling but not ours? I say better us than them.

[rebeccajo 14]

It's really a shame. We are getting the shaft big time. Screw the idiots who made this mess.

You mean the American people who borrowed more than they could afford?

No, the idiots who lent them more than they should have on overinflated real estate values. And with payments higher than they could realistically afford. And the speculators who drove oil thru the ceiling and put a bite on the economy. Greed, just plain greed. And now we have to pay to bail them out. There is blame on both sides and greed on both sides.

No-one forced these loans down their throats. They wanted something for nothing, got screwed,

and now we're stuck with the bill.

True and False.

True, consumers applied for mortgages.

But many didn't realize the terms of the loans. I understand that people should read before they sign, but I bet most of you have never seen a stack of papers from a predatory lender. I have. The mish-mash of confusing information that consumers were given would have been challenging reading for even the most savvy consumer.

Most predatory lenders also didn't use attorneys to close the loans. The had a notary public take the documents to the borrower for what is called a 'witness' closing. These persons were usually not employees of the lender, nor were they able (or qualified) to answer any questions at the closing table.

Bait-and-switch tactics were also used by these lenders. They would 'pre-qualify' folks for a loan and the consumers then thought they were safe to go house shopping. After they found a home; fell in love with it'; and written an offer, these lenders would THEN pull the credit history. If the credit was problematic, the lender would offer the borrower 'another' loan product which could get them into the house. The alternative products were ALWAYS at less desirable terms than what the consumer was given a Good Faith Estimate on.

It isn't so simple to say these consumers were all greedy. Many, many of them were ram-rodded right into a house.

Edited September 23, 2008 by rebeccajo

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I understand that people should read before they sign, but I bet most of you have never seen a stack of papers from a predatory lender. I have. The mish-mash of confusing information that consumers were given would have been challenging reading for even the most savvy consumer.

One can always walk away if the terms are unclear.

If one does not do that, then one is an idiot and deserves no sympathy. None.

Bait-and-switch tactics were also used by these lenders. They would 'pre-qualify' folks for a loan and the consumers then thought they were safe to go house shopping. After they found a home; fell in love with it'; and written an offer, these lenders would THEN pull the credit history. If the credit was problematic, the lender would offer the borrower 'another' loan product which could get them into the house. The alternative products were ALWAYS at less desirable terms than what the consumer was given a Good Faith Estimate on.

Yes, some customers make emotional decisions. They're called morons. Fall in love with a house that isn't yours and consequently get ram roaded into signing a note you either don't understand or can't afford? Moron. Pure moron. ** em.

[rebeccajo 14]

I understand that people should read before they sign, but I bet most of you have never seen a stack of papers from a predatory lender. I have. The mish-mash of confusing information that consumers were given would have been challenging reading for even the most savvy consumer.

One can always walk away if the terms are unclear.

If one does not do that, then one is an idiot and deserves no sympathy. None.

Bait-and-switch tactics were also used by these lenders. They would 'pre-qualify' folks for a loan and the consumers then thought they were safe to go house shopping. After they found a home; fell in love with it'; and written an offer, these lenders would THEN pull the credit history. If the credit was problematic, the lender would offer the borrower 'another' loan product which could get them into the house. The alternative products were ALWAYS at less desirable terms than what the consumer was given a Good Faith Estimate on.

Yes, some customers make emotional decisions. They're called morons. Fall in love with a house that isn't yours and consequently get ram roaded into signing a note you either don't understand or can't afford? Moron. Pure moron. ** em.

LOL...........oh I understand and kind of agree with you.

It's just because of the business I was in (law/banking/real estate) that I kind of defend these people. And it even happened with the sale of my own house last summer. The borrower who was at the head of our daisy-chain had bad credit. The pressure was all over her to find financing (mostly by the realtors who didn't want a three-house deal to go down the toilet). And I was shocked to see how one lender in particular bait-and-switched her.

Edited September 23, 2008 by rebeccajo

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

It's just because of the business I was in (law/banking/real estate) that I kind of defend these people. And it even happened with the sale of my own house last summer. The borrower who was at the head of our daisy-chain had bad credit. The pressure was all over her to find financing (mostly by the realtors who didn't want a three-house deal to go down the toilet). And I was shocked to see how one lender in particular bait-and-switched her.

Most people who work in the real estate industry are vultures. It's worse than buying a used car. But that doesn't absolve a customer from his/her responsibility. If you don't think you can sufficiently detach yourself from the home you're going to buy before you buy it, then don't buy. Rent. You're a loser.

This is why shows on HGTV piss me off. They show people walking into homes and giggling "oh my god i love this place i gotta have it, i just gotta"! ** that ####. You don't show your cards. ####### is wrong with people? It's called a negotiation, assh0les.

[rebeccajo 14]

It's just because of the business I was in (law/banking/real estate) that I kind of defend these people. And it even happened with the sale of my own house last summer. The borrower who was at the head of our daisy-chain had bad credit. The pressure was all over her to find financing (mostly by the realtors who didn't want a three-house deal to go down the toilet). And I was shocked to see how one lender in particular bait-and-switched her.

Most people who work in the real estate industry are vultures. It's worse than buying a used car. But that doesn't absolve a customer from his/her responsibility. If you don't think you can sufficiently detach yourself from the home you're going to buy before you buy it, then don't buy. Rent. You're a loser.

This is why shows on HGTV piss me off. They show people walking into homes and giggling "oh my god i love this place i gotta have it, i just gotta"! ** that ####. You don't show your cards. ####### is wrong with people? It's called a negotiation, assh0les.

AJ - the same realtors who pressured my buyer's buyer (not a typo) were the same realtors who took her out house shopping without asking her if she had been pre-qualified for a loan. If they had, they would have known (from the name of the lender) that writing a contract with her MIGHT be risky.

All the dumbness of certain borrowers aside, there were illegal and edge-of-legal things done by these lenders. My boss sued a title company that had absconded with the money which was supposed to have paid off a debt in a refi-debt consolidation transaction. This is just an example of how it wasn't just predatory originating lenders pulling stunts.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

It's just because of the business I was in (law/banking/real estate) that I kind of defend these people. And it even happened with the sale of my own house last summer. The borrower who was at the head of our daisy-chain had bad credit. The pressure was all over her to find financing (mostly by the realtors who didn't want a three-house deal to go down the toilet). And I was shocked to see how one lender in particular bait-and-switched her.

Most people who work in the real estate industry are vultures. It's worse than buying a used car. But that doesn't absolve a customer from his/her responsibility. If you don't think you can sufficiently detach yourself from the home you're going to buy before you buy it, then don't buy. Rent. You're a loser.

This is why shows on HGTV piss me off. They show people walking into homes and giggling "oh my god i love this place i gotta have it, i just gotta"! ** that ####. You don't show your cards. ####### is wrong with people? It's called a negotiation, assh0les.

AJ - the same realtors who pressured my buyer's buyer (not a typo) were the same realtors who took her out house shopping without asking her if she had been pre-qualified for a loan. If they had, they would have known (from the name of the lender) that writing a contract with her MIGHT be risky.

All the dumbness of certain borrowers aside, there were illegal and edge-of-legal things done by these lenders. My boss sued a title company that had absconded with the money which was supposed to have paid off a debt in a refi-debt consolidation transaction. This is just an example of how it wasn't just predatory originating lenders pulling stunts.

If you're saying there was some fraud, ok. I am sure that's true.

But do you think fraudulent cases exceed in number the number of cases where borrowers were simply over leveraged?

[rebeccajo 14]

It's just because of the business I was in (law/banking/real estate) that I kind of defend these people. And it even happened with the sale of my own house last summer. The borrower who was at the head of our daisy-chain had bad credit. The pressure was all over her to find financing (mostly by the realtors who didn't want a three-house deal to go down the toilet). And I was shocked to see how one lender in particular bait-and-switched her.

Most people who work in the real estate industry are vultures. It's worse than buying a used car. But that doesn't absolve a customer from his/her responsibility. If you don't think you can sufficiently detach yourself from the home you're going to buy before you buy it, then don't buy. Rent. You're a loser.

This is why shows on HGTV piss me off. They show people walking into homes and giggling "oh my god i love this place i gotta have it, i just gotta"! ** that ####. You don't show your cards. ####### is wrong with people? It's called a negotiation, assh0les.

AJ - the same realtors who pressured my buyer's buyer (not a typo) were the same realtors who took her out house shopping without asking her if she had been pre-qualified for a loan. If they had, they would have known (from the name of the lender) that writing a contract with her MIGHT be risky.

All the dumbness of certain borrowers aside, there were illegal and edge-of-legal things done by these lenders. My boss sued a title company that had absconded with the money which was supposed to have paid off a debt in a refi-debt consolidation transaction. This is just an example of how it wasn't just predatory originating lenders pulling stunts.

If you're saying there was some fraud, ok. I am sure that's true.

But do you think fraudulent cases exceed in number the number of cases where borrowers were simply over leveraged?

That I don't know.

You'd have to take into account the 'no-doc' loans which weren't called 'liars loans' for nothing. Oftentimes, it wasn't the borrower who 'lied' to the lender about his job, assets, etc. It was the lenders and realtors suggesting to borrowers that a no-doc loan could get them into the house. If a lender or realtor led those borrowers to that trough (and they knew that borrower couldn't qualify for another product), that is fraud on those entities part.

Edited September 23, 2008 by rebeccajo

[spookyturtle 9,466]

If you're saying there was some fraud, ok. I am sure that's true.

But do you think fraudulent cases exceed in number the number of cases where borrowers were simply over leveraged?

I would think that the fraudulent cases were nowhere near the number of over extended buyers. We agree again.

[IAMX 3,055]

Not only that, alot of people are driving SUV with just the driver inside. Gas Guzzlers! Waste of HP, space, and especially gas if it's used for anything other than cargo. Combined this with the high speed and you get a super gas guzzler.

So what? If they can afford it, they can drive whatever they want.

Gas guzzlers raise the price for everyone, regardless of how gas saving Joe Liberal's vehicle is.

So do the Chinese and Indians. Whatcha gonna do about it.

Find something more energy independent. BEV's + at-home charging kit = success.

So you're ok with their guzzling but not ours? I say better us than them.

Our gas guzzling = far, far beyond any country's in this world. We consume 3 times more than China, with less than 1/3 of their population. If you can find a feasible or logical way to convince or stop them from doing so, I'd love to hear it. Otherwise, being energy independent skips over that question entirely and is indeed more feasible.

Edited September 24, 2008 by SRVT

[Niels Bohr 72]

China and India are emerging oil consumers due to their increase in economic development.

Reports have shown that India will have a 10 fold increase on cars on the road - from 11 million to 115 million - by 2030 according to IEA.

But, we can all start by just raising the price of oil higher, therefore, forcing manufacturers to push out more econ-cars for use.

[Big Papa Zone 93]

I liken it to a parent/child scenario: the child asks for the Earth, and it's the parent's responsibilty to say "NO." Just like the irresponsible lenders should have said "NO" to deabeats with crappy credit ratings wanting mortgages.

Sorry, but people aren't children and banks aren't our parents. I don't have to do what the banks tell me and they don't have to make sure I'm properly fed and clothed either.

If you want to make like an infant and go ga-ga-goo-goo, that's your problem. That's not how the world works.

What an incredibly ####### response, A.J. (the highlighted bit especially). I was simply using an anology, that's all. I'm well aware that you don't have to do what banks tell you, and they don't have to make sure that you're, "clothed and fed" - I never suggested otherwise. I simply implied that lenders have a responsibility to lend, well, responsibly, to those with a better than average chance of actually paying the money back, rather than just paying out on demand.

I'm sorry if my little analogy didn't meet with your approval, A.J. Jesus, could you be any more condescending?

Edited September 24, 2008 by Damian P