A lot of good points being made in this thread.

Yeah, when I was in real estate, I wish I had a commission for every buyer who failed to qualify because they wanted more house than the mortgage company said they had income for. And most who did get houses were at the upper limit.

Regarding toys, whether on credit or not, to me that is a sign of workers making good income. We would be wrong to begrudge them that just as it's wrong for Dakota to begrudge business owners healthy profits. Somebody else's good fortune has NO bad effect on one's own situation. That's my nice side talking hahahaha.

Now for my not so nice side: what I SHOULD have said regarding work ethic is that it is an oxymoron. Work is a damn four letter word, and there is nothing ethical about it. The relationship between employer and employee is ADVERSARIAL - the worker does the least and worst he can get away with for the most money he can squeeze out of the boss. Conversely, the boss works the employee's ass off for as little pay as he can get away with giving him. Of course, most people on both sides of that situation are too nice to stick the knife in to the hilt, but that's the nature of the relationship. It's the same with landlord/tenant, policy holder/insurance company, creditor/borrower, etc. Dakota talked about the "abomination of greed"; No - greed is the norm. A bunch of individuals acting in their own greedy self interest will result in maximization of the common good for everybody. That's the theory anyway hahahahaha.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

I don't begrudge someone buying pretty toys. It doesn't make sense to buying everything you own on credit. It may show that a person has a good income but until the collapse most small loans were made irregardless of income. Your name was what got you the loan more than the income.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

You're LEAPING to the assumption that the items on credit get paid for hahahaha. Vehicles as a rule, can be repossessed, but unsecured credit? Let the creditor beware!

I'm anxious to see the reaction of Dakota to this - will the champion of Joe Sixpack get all pious and self-righteous like he does about cheating (or even complaining) on taxes? Or will he come out in favor of sticking it to the rich banker/creditor class?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

Since your baiting, the only debt a person should carry is his mortgage and very low interest school loans. Everything else a person should weigh out it being a need or want.

Sticking it to the banker by defaulting on a loan or filing bankruptcy is unrighteous to say the least. The only real legitimate reason for bankruptcy is huge medical debt do to something tragic. I understand that a lot of people have lost jobs and had to default on mortgages and vehicles, but how far did they extend themselves to the slavery of debt? I've always lived by a simple rule that states that you should have 6 months worth of salary in a savings account to cover your debts should you lose your job.

Yeah Texas, the bank doesn't make a whole lot off me. I usually pay off loans well before they are due.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

OK I guess that tells me what I want to know hahahaha. What you like to rant and whine about - the "rich", the creditor class, the businesses who finance debt, etc. - all those "evil" people and institutions you claim to hate so much, I LIVE what you rant about. Since the early 80s, I have been abusing credit to the best extent I could - I mean intentionally not paying unsecured debt. If you're shocked or want to think of me as "unrighteous", fine, but I'm DOING what you're only talking or fantasizing about - a sharp stick in the eye of the "rich".

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

OK I guess that tells me what I want to know hahahaha. What you like to rant and whine about - the "rich", the creditor class, the businesses who finance debt, etc. - all those "evil" people and institutions you claim to hate so much, I LIVE what you rant about. Since the early 80s, I have been abusing credit to the best extent I could - I mean intentionally not paying unsecured debt. If you're shocked or want to think of me as "unrighteous", fine, but I'm DOING what you're only talking or fantasizing about - a sharp stick in the eye of the "rich".

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

That's quite a douchebaggy way to go about things, but it does show how broken the system is/was.

Like Dakota said, though, that has little to do with standing up for those who need it and more with questionable ethics. If anything, I'd go a step further and make it clear that, especially the lower/middle class, has absolutely no reason to work themselves into debt. A mortgage on a house, that's the only one I get.

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 

In reply to both your post and Dakota's, either those "rich" bastards are evil or they aren't - make up your mind. If they are the kind of asshole Dakota says, then any small dent in their bottom line is a good thing - morally justified. Conversely, if Dakota's more recent take on things is true - "Thou shalt not cheat the cheaters", then there must be a particle of chance that some of them are NOT evil. I'm not gonna worry about that - I'm just gonna do all I can get away with, and feel good about it. As for WWJD, I don't know, maybe something similar to overturning the tables of the money changers in the Temple. Who say ANYTHING about standing up for those who need it. It's all about nipping at the heels of the establishment types. A mortgage on a house is the one thing you DON'T default on because it can get foreclosed. Ditto that for secured debt on vehicles or other repossessable items.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

You're too obtuse to even know what you do is wrong? Cheating a cheater doesn't make your act right, well maybe "right" but certainly not correct. Raping a prostitute is still rape. If you don't get these simple concepts - what makes you think anybody should give you any credibility on complex subjects. Yeah, Texadumbass, people like me really do exist. I don't cheat on my wife, my taxes, and I don't buy shit I can't afford to own. Call me pious all you want to, but I walk tall and can look anybody square in the eye.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

If you're sincerely pious, I applaud you for it too - and you very well may be. However, so MUCH of what you post is based on at best, honest but dense contradiction, and at worst, disingenuous bullshit. In other words, you're just plain WRONG virtually all the time for reasons which are totally unclear.

Frankly, I don't give a damn whether my behavior is considered "right" or "correct" or whatever. Hell yeah, you got the moral high ground as well as the majority opinion on that front. All I say is I am CONSISTENT - Not a walking talking contradiction like you. Of course, people like you exist; Most of them are Tea Partiers, are America-loving Americans, would NEVER be mistaken because of their words for leftists, probably would be too courteous and non-combative to even post in a forum like this. What they WOULD be is the exact kind of people you spew so much hate about - is it a coincidence that you are saturated with sick reverse ethnocentricity? I don't think so.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker