Iceland forgives mortgage debt of its population

[Yieu]

What about those who settled with less so as to avoid debt? They still have to settle with less, while the debt-bearers enjoy the fruits of their debt, while the debt (responsibility to pay) disappears.

 

[slamhead]

It's theft when bankers get bailouts at the expense of the people.

It's theft when the people get bailouts at the expense of the bankers.

It has already started in our country. Believe me the banks are being made whole on any principle they write off. In the first bailout the money for the banks was in foreclosures and short sales as the feds reimbursed the banks. The feds have now restructured it so the banks now benefit from restructuring loans. It is all smoke and mirrors.

 

[WilliamC]

What about those who settled with less so as to avoid debt? They still have to settle with less, while the debt-bearers enjoy the fruits of their debt, while the debt (responsibility to pay) dissapears.

That would be me. What's your question?

 

[Yieu]

That would be me. What's your question?

The point was the economic harm to that group of people. This would be a government bailout, causing inflation and hardship on the prudent, while some live it up in their free houses.

If such a bailout were to occur, the wisest thing to do would be to immediately buy an expensive house just before it, so that you can get something free from the government.

But that would also be immoral and irresponsible.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Quick, give me enough time to be irresponsible as all hell and go buy a house that I cannot afford. So that the mean bankers who lent me the money that I asked them to lend me, can be forced to give me the house for FREE.

YAY! I always knew that money grew on trees. YIPPEE!!!

/sarcasm

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Start listening at 57 min 30 seconds.

I don't think Ron Paul will ever support such a socialist measure that promotes irresponsible economic behavior, in fact, he's the guy who always talks about LIVING WITHIN ONE'S MEANS so if people themselves aren't willing to do that then how they pontificate the same to the government? That would be pot calling the kettle black! If people want a better & freer system then they must first learn to take responsibility for their OWN behavior

You ignore or belittle the premise that the system itself is deliberately set up to create debt slaves, even if it is via manufactured consent.

Irrespective of the system, is theft justifiable? I think not! One thieve can't just point finger at another & expect to be absolved of the consequences of HIS own actions

You ignore the fact that most of the moneysupply consists of commercial-bank-money which is created when people borrow, they increase the moneysupply & are essentially taking purchasing-power from the savers so they must produce & repay it & reduce the moneysupply back & thereby increase the savers' moneysupply again

I don't know how someone who's been here since 2007 doesn't know such a basic thing about the system!

Banks are skimming the savers by interest which is tiny compared to a defaulting borrower who's effectively STEALING purchasing-power from savers to the extent of unpaid amount so if any borrower wants to point fingers towards bankers then they must first repay their loan & give back the system, the purchasing-power they've consumed

You want personal responsibility? Let's start with arresting and trying those responsible for the current corrupt system for the crimes they have committed, and see where the mortgage problem falls out from there eh?

Go right ahead, I don't have any problems but don't pretend that banks would've been able to lend without borrowers borrowing from them!

Until then I'll not judge too harshly those who were mislead into some level of excessive debt, even though I fully agree that anyone willfully using the system to take on more debt than they knew they could repay are just as criminally liable as those who knew they were selling a fraudulent product to begin with.

It's IRRELEVANT whether someone did it "willfully" or not, they made CHOICE to borrow, nobody forced them, they didn't live within their means, they wanted to sell their future (which is always uncertain) for their present, they must repay & pay back the purchasing-power they took from the savers otherwise they'd be thieves as much as the bankers

What about those who settled with less so as to avoid debt? They still have to settle with less, while the debt-bearers enjoy the fruits of their debt, while the debt (responsibility to pay) disappears.

The point was the economic harm to that group of people. This would be a government bailout, causing inflation and hardship on the prudent, while some live it up in their free houses.

If such a bailout were to occur, the wisest thing to do would be to immediately buy an expensive house just before it, so that you can get something free from the government.

But that would also be immoral and irresponsible.

Quick, give me enough time to be irresponsible as all hell and go buy a house that I cannot afford. So that the mean bankers who lent me the money that I asked them to lend me, can be forced to give me the house for FREE.

YAY! I always knew that money grew on trees. YIPPEE!!!

/sarcasm

+1

Yup, those who made bad economic decisions get free stuff at the expense of those who made good economic decisions & there's no shortage of justifications so why would there ever be a just system?

There isn't a fair system because most people just don't care about a fair system, they want a favored system, specifically, a system that favors them at the expense of others & in turn, they're willing to trade in their & others' freedoms to the facilitators of such system, that's why world is so full of tyranny because people don't want to take responsibility for themselves; if people are angry about the mess the world is then, most of the time, they only need to look in the mirror, & they might just find the answer why it is so

 

[WilliamC]

I don't think Ron Paul will ever support such a socialist measure that promotes irresponsible economic behavior, in fact, he's the guy who always talks about LIVING WITHIN ONE'S MEANS so if people themselves aren't willing to do that then how they pontificate the same to the government? That would be pot calling the kettle black! If people want a better & freer system then they must first learn to take responsibility for their OWN behavior

Irrespective of the system, is theft justifiable? I think not! One thieve can't just point finger at another & expect to be absolved of the consequences of HIS own actions

You ignore the fact that most of the moneysupply consists of commercial-bank-money which is created when people borrow, they increase the moneysupply & are essentially taking purchasing-power from the savers so they must produce & repay it & reduce the moneysupply back & thereby increase the savers' moneysupply again

I don't know how someone who's been here since 2007 doesn't know such a basic thing about the system!

Banks are skimming the savers by interest which is tiny compared to a defaulting borrower who's effectively STEALING purchasing-power from savers to the extent of unpaid amount so if any borrower wants to point fingers towards bankers then they must first repay their loan & give back the system, the purchasing-power they've consumed

Go right ahead, I don't have any problems but don't pretend that banks would've been able to lend without borrowers borrowing from them!

It's IRRELEVANT whether someone did it "willfully" or not, they made CHOICE to borrow, nobody forced them, they didn't live within their means, they wanted to sell their future (which is always uncertain) for their present, they must repay & pay back the purchasing-power they took from the savers otherwise they'd be thieves as much as the bankers

+1

Yup, those who made bad economic decisions get free stuff at the expense of those who made good economic decisions & there's no shortage of justifications so why would there ever be a just system?

There isn't a fair system because most people just don't care about a fair system, they want a favored system, specifically, a system that favors them at the expense of others & in turn, they're willing to trade in their & others' freedoms to the facilitators of such system, that's why world is so full of tyranny because people don't want to take responsibility for themselves; if people are angry about the mess the world is then, most of the time, they only need to look in the mirror, & they might just find the answer why it is so

Thank you for your continued vociferous support of the current system, it is good to know the arguments those wishing to propagate the debt-based nature of our society make to themselves to justify their theft.

 

[WilliamC]

The point was the economic harm to that group of people. This would be a government bailout, causing inflation and hardship on the prudent, while some live it up in their free houses.

Personally I am much more concerned that the government will change the conditions of my current mortgage to steal my equity from me than I am that they will somehow give me my house free and clear.

I guess if one knew absolutely nothing about me or my history one could falsely come to some conclusion that I support free riders or socialism or such, but that's not it at all.

When the entire basis of our monetary system is a lie, then it becomes very difficult to determine who is and isn't responsible for some specific 'debt' measured in 'dollars'.

Anyone who willfully engages in borrowing money for the purpose of trying to defraud the lender is committing a criminal offense.

Anyone who willfully engages in loaning money for the purpose of trying to defraud the borrower is also committing a criminal offense.

What I am suggesting is that in a reset of the global economic power structure there could very well be unleashed such a torrent of wealth that fixing the mortgage problems of some people may be such a trivial expense that your concerns of somehow becoming impoverished or damaged is non-existant.

There is no justification from stealing from 'savers' to repay 'borrowers', but there is much justification from taking illegally obtained wealth from some debt holders and putting them in jail. If this causes certain 'debts' to be forgiven I am not adverse to this as it does not harm me.

If such a bailout were to occur, the wisest thing to do would be to immediately buy an expensive house just before it, so that you can get something free from the government.

Yes, and that would be a criminal act if one had the intent to defraud the taxpayer or the lender. That's not what I'm talking about.

But that would also be immoral and irresponsible.

But when the very basis of the monetary system we are forced into using by the same government is itself immoral and irresponsible, then claiming that every single person who finds themselves owing more money on a house than the house is ever going to be worth is morally required to pay back every 'dollar' is insane.

There is no definition of a 'dollar', it is an imaginary unit of account, that's the truth that must be accepted before any of our economic problems are to be rationally addressed, much less solved.

 

[Thom1776]

Everyone should watch what Iceland has done in the last year. They basically told England, IMF, EU, and all of the other globalists to FUCK OFF!

Well said.

I have been following the Iceland situation since it all started a few years ago. I admire them immensely.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Thank you for your continued vociferous support of the current system, it is good to know the arguments those wishing to propagate the debt-based nature of our society make to themselves to justify their theft.

So now you're just going to resort to false-accusations? That's really pathetic!

Paying your debt does NOT equal to "propagating the current system"; it means NOT STEALING from the savers but as I've said before, most people don't mind stealing as long as it benefits them, which is why there isn't a fair system in the first place!

 

[Zippyjuan]

They didn't forgive loans they revalued them. One, was outstanding mortgages over 110% of present value, and the other were mortgages pegged to foreign currencies. People from iceland have confirmed this as well.

Thanks. I could not find anything to support the original story that Iceland was forgiving mortgages either.

 

[WilliamC]

So now you're just going to resort to false-accusations? That's really pathetic!

Paying your debt does NOT equal to "propagating the current system"; it means NOT STEALING from the savers but as I've said before, most people don't mind stealing as long as it benefits them, which is why there isn't a fair system in the first place!

Failing to recognize that it is actually impossible to 'pay your debt' when there is not even a definition of what the unit of accounting for said debt is, that is the dollar;this is the basis for your inaccurate restating of my position.

When the value of the money you are using to pay with changes over time, then by definition so too must the debt.

So you pretend that I am arguing for people to get a free ride at the expense of savers, when in reality I am arguing for restoration of a sound money based on a unit of account that is linked to a real commodity or set of commodities and all of the resulting fallout thereof, including the possibility that some number of individuals would end up having to pay a lessor amount of 'dollars' than they are currently obligated to do so.

Deliberately conflating my proposition of a mass reset in global finances and a possible debt jubilee of some nature with stealing only works if you think the ones who run and benefit from the fraudulent monetary system somehow deserve to keep their wealth.

I do not argue for future taxes to be collected to pay off past debt, I argue for criminals who have robbed the public at large for decades to be exposed and stripped of their positions, power, and prestige.

You seem to argue that everyone must pay back every 'dollar' they owe to these same individuals instead, and let them keep it.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Failing to recognize that it is actually impossible to 'pay your debt' when there is not even a definition of what the unit of accounting for said debt is, that is the dollar;this is the basis for your inaccurate restating of my position.

It's IRRELEVANT, you borrow, you increase moneysupply, inflation is caused & savers lose purchasing-power, when you pay back moneysupply decreases, purchasing-power of the savers goes back up

When the value of the money you are using to pay with changes over time, then by definition so too must the debt.

Value of money ALWAYS changes, depending on supply & demand, irrespective of the system so that's not a good excuse at all

So you pretend that I am arguing for people to get a free ride at the expense of savers,

There's nothing to "pretend", when you borrow, you increase moneysupply cause inflation & are essentially taking purchasing-power from savers so it's only meet that you pay back & then moneysupply will decrease & theire purchasing-power increases

when in reality I am arguing for restoration of a sound money based on a unit of account that is linked to a real commodity

That's a separate where I agree but that has little to do with the fact that borrowers have already consumed at the expense of the savers & increased moneysupply & taken purchasing-power from savers

including the possibility that some number of individuals would end up having to pay a lessor amount of 'dollars' than they are currently obligated to do so.

If you borrow $100000, you will have increased moneysupply by that much if you only pay 50000 back then the 50000 remains in circulation & thereby the you'll have robbed savers of 50000 worth of purchasing-power

Deliberately conflating my proposition of a mass reset in global finances and a possible debt jubilee of some nature with stealing only works if you think the ones who run and benefit from the fraudulent monetary system somehow deserve to keep their wealth.

Again, you're under this delusion that what you pay back goes only to the bank, NO, they only get the interest, which was pretty low anyway, rest gets liquidated but decrease in moneysupply caused by paying back the loan returns purchasing-power the borrowers had borrowed indirectly from the savers

I do not argue for future taxes to be collected to pay off past debt, I argue for criminals who have robbed the public at large for decades to be exposed and stripped of their positions, power, and prestige.

The inflation is already created when borrowers borrow & savers are ALREADY robbed off their purchasing-power & the only to mitigate that is to repay & thereby decrease moneysupply

You seem to argue that everyone must pay back every 'dollar' they owe to these same individuals instead, and let them keep it.

And you seem to argue that people should get free stuff at the expense of savers, which is just another form of socialism & theft

 

[alucard13mmfmj]

you gotta admire the icelanders... they even told the bankers to piss off.

 

[WilliamC]

It's IRRELEVANT, you borrow, you increase moneysupply, inflation is caused & savers lose purchasing-power, when you pay back moneysupply decreases, purchasing-power of the savers goes back up



Value of money ALWAYS changes, depending on supply & demand, irrespective of the system so that's not a good excuse at all



There's nothing to "pretend", when you borrow, you increase moneysupply cause inflation & are essentially taking purchasing-power from savers so it's only meet that you pay back & then moneysupply will decrease & theire purchasing-power increases



That's a separate where I agree but that has little to do with the fact that borrowers have already consumed at the expense of the savers & increased moneysupply & taken purchasing-power from savers



If you borrow $100000, you will have increased moneysupply by that much if you only pay 50000 back then the 50000 remains in circulation & thereby the you'll have robbed savers of 50000 worth of purchasing-power



Again, you're under this delusion that what you pay back goes only to the bank, NO, they only get the interest, which was pretty low anyway, rest gets liquidated but decrease in moneysupply caused by paying back the loan returns purchasing-power the borrowers had borrowed indirectly from the savers



The inflation is already created when borrowers borrow & savers are ALREADY robbed off their purchasing-power & the only to mitigate that is to repay & thereby decrease moneysupply



And you seem to argue that people should get free stuff at the expense of savers, which is just another form of socialism & theft

No, at the expense of criminals.

Why do you insist that I wish to punish savers when it is the bankers who would be held responsible for paying back fraudulent debts with their own personal wealth, not the wealth of taxpayers or other individuals.

If you can't get bast debt forgiveness not being identical to stealing from savers then all you sound like is an apologist for the bankers, not an advocate for savers.

Besides, tell me exactly how much interest savers are being paid by banks?

Oh that's right, when you take into account inflation they actually lose wealth over time.

Maybe if the monetary system was reformed to one based on sound money your argument would have some merit, as it is it is only based on the imaginary value of a dollar.

That's why much of the debt in existence is imaginary as well, and should be treated as such.

 

[The Gold Standard]

No, at the expense of criminals.

Why do you insist that I wish to punish savers when it is the bankers who would be held responsible for paying back fraudulent debts with their own personal wealth, not the wealth of taxpayers or other individuals.

If you can't get bast debt forgiveness not being identical to stealing from savers then all you sound like is an apologist for the bankers, not an advocate for savers.

Besides, tell me exactly how much interest savers are being paid by banks?

Oh that's right, when you take into account inflation they actually lose wealth over time.

Maybe if the monetary system was reformed to one based on sound money your argument would have some merit, as it is it is only based on the imaginary value of a dollar.

That's why much of the debt in existence is imaginary as well, and should be treated as such.

Do you believe they are going to bankrupt the banks to give people free homes?

If not, then how will the banks stay in business?

The government will print the money to pay off these mortgages. Guess who suffers then? Not the bankers who get that freshly created money first. Not the people who just got free homes. Oh, that's right, everyone else who got nothing out of the deal but higher prices for food and gas and housing. Sounds like a great deal.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

you gotta admire the icelanders... they even told the bankers to piss off.

It's not JUST the bankers that they told to piss off, those borrowers ripped off the SAVERS as well
Because guess what, when you borrow, it bring NEW MONEY into existence, creates inflation & dilutes the purchasing-power of the money held by others, you're essentially taking purchasing-power from savers; on the other hand, when you pay back your loan, you decrease the moneysupply which you'd earlier caused to rise when you borrowed & thereby savers are returned their purchasing-powers
If you don't pay back then the increase in moneysupply you'd caused remains as it is, which means you stole the purchasing-power from the savers but didn't return it back

No, at the expense of criminals.

Why do you insist that I wish to punish savers when it is the bankers who would be held responsible for paying back fraudulent debts with their own personal wealth, not the wealth of taxpayers or other individuals.

If you can't get bast debt forgiveness not being identical to stealing from savers then all you sound like is an apologist for the bankers, not an advocate for savers.

Besides, tell me exactly how much interest savers are being paid by banks?

Oh that's right, when you take into account inflation they actually lose wealth over time.

Maybe if the monetary system was reformed to one based on sound money your argument would have some merit, as it is it is only based on the imaginary value of a dollar.

That's why much of the debt in existence is imaginary as well, and should be treated as such.

Ok, either are you're just really ignorant of how the system works or you're just putting a front of ignorance just to justify freeloading at the expense of the savers

Ok, let's go slowly!

When new money is created, it increases moneysupply, right?
It causes inflation, right?
Meaning people are able to buy fewer things with it that they otherwise could've (loss of purchasing-power), right?

So read carefully - under the current system, most of the money is CREATED when people borrow from banks & when they repay, it DESTROYES the money which was created earlier; bankers are only left with the differential interest, that's all

So when you borrow, you're causing INFLATION, essentially, ripping off the savers so it's your duty to repay & thereby decrease the moneysupply; if you don't then inflation that YOU'D CAUSED by borrowing remains as it is & savers must continue paying higher prices, essentially, you'll INDIRECTLY stolen purchasing-power from the savers

Here's the bottomline - bankers CAN'T increase moneysupply if borrowers don't borrow & there's no inflation on that count!

 

[WilliamC]

Do you believe they are going to bankrupt the banks to give people free homes?

I don't know exactly what the government of Iceland is going to do, not any details, nor am I arguing for any specific plan.

I am merely stating that what ever process is used to restore the US economy, and by implication the global economy as well, to a sound money system based on defined commodities that can be physically quantified and exhibit a countable relation between the number of units of said money and some physically extant substance, I can easily imagine rearrangements of wealth such that large amounts of current debt would be simply abolished, forgiven, eliminated, ignored, or whatever.

As it is our money system has no connections between the numbers used as dollars, which are nothing more than a 'unit of accounting' according to the Fed, so our monetary system is not linked to anything tangible in the physical world. Indirectly this implies that mortgage contracts, which are valued in dollars, are not measured in any tangible, physical way either, even though a mortgage is tied to a specific parcel of real estate.

Add on top of this the securitization of mortgages by secondary markets to the extent that many people being are being foreclosed on by banks which do not even hold the original paperwork of the mortgage itself, and you begin to get a feeling for how far the deception goes.

If one cannot accept that this needs to happen to even begin to make real, humanitarian progress towards a better future and blindly insists that every single individual who has ever signed their name to a piece of paper is obligated to pay back some undefined number of dollars as a result and if that doesn't happen in every case then some undefined 'saver' is being extorted, then I can't see how that is any different than simply arguing for the status quo.

And we all know who does that...

If not, then how will the banks stay in business?

By having their assets re-valued at true market value through open, public auction to pay off depositors, including any assets obtained illegally by employees of the banks or of the bank holding corporations or of the government regulators charged with overseeing said corporations.

There will be plenty of people willing to act as honest bankers in a sound money system so long as they have the security to do so but not the ability to do otherwise, the trick is to get most people to understand when they are being ripped off, and who is ripping them off.

The government will print the money to pay off these mortgages.

Not if the corrupt politicians who try to pass such legislation are either voted out of office or arrested and jailed for actual crimes they have already committed.

If the system doesn't change from the top down, and those responsible for the problems held accountable and forced to pay for their crimes, then of course any sort of government passed so called debt reduction plan would be the exact opposite and I would be agreeing with you.

Guess who suffers then? Not the bankers who get that freshly created money first. Not the people who just got free homes. Oh, that's right, everyone else who got nothing out of the deal but higher prices for food and gas and housing. Sounds like a great deal.

Not at all. If the corrupt bankers, politicians, lawyers, lobbyists, businessmen and so forth don't go to jail then I am not advocating debt forgiveness. That would be more likely a socialist/communist takeover as you and I would fear.

No free rides for anyone, especially anyone who knowing tried to milk the system by borrowing more than they knew they could repay to try to fraudulently default on it. But when that starts from the top down the rules will change too, and the zero-sum game that most people have been stuck in all their lives will finally come to an end and we can get about the work of liberating our species and our planet.

We can't do that if the core of the world's wealth and power is held largely (not completely though by any means, NO ONE knows the future) by a few thousand psychopathic parasites who honestly believe it is their god-given or self obvious destiny to control all the rest of us. For most of us that's so incredulous a statement that one simply rejects it out of hand, but any cursory study of history will show that wars are always about the greed and power and wealth, and that's as true today as it was 10,000 years ago.

But most people don't want WWIII, even most people who for their entire working lives have supported the psychopathic wanna-be rulers with delusions of godhood, so I tend to be optimistic that we won't destroy ourselves and that there won't be some cataclysmic end to world history and that we can actually make things better as time goes on instead of worse.

Others seem to think that if the bankers don't get paid back every 'dollar' they are owed then somehow we are all going to end up being the poorer for it. Well the way I see it we are already the poorer for it now and the bankers got the government to give them taxpayer money instead, and still some argue that it is all the fault of the borrower so we should just suck it up and let them keep it.

I think most people will make the right choice most of the time, but we'll see

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Do you believe they are going to bankrupt the banks to give people free homes?

If not, then how will the banks stay in business?

The government will print the money to pay off these mortgages. Guess who suffers then? Not the bankers who get that freshly created money first. Not the people who just got free homes. Oh, that's right, everyone else who got nothing out of the deal but higher prices for food and gas and housing. Sounds like a great deal.

+1

What you say will likely happen but the other side of the coin is that even if they do let more banks go bankrupt, it still hurts the savers (who did NOT act irresponsibly) because borrowing will become harder because so much capital will have been destroyed & production will slow down & prices of things might go up radically so either way, those who made bad decisions benefit at the expense of those who acted responsibly

Any such catastrophic depression might likely lead to more government & more socialism & totalitarianism, it won't necessarily lead to sound money because most people don't even know what it is, the "leaders" might offer another fraudulent system & things will only worsen, that's why it's only meet that those who acted irresponsibly take responsibility for their actions

The only path to sound money is persuasion & people aren't always in the mood to listen or be persuaded when conditions are really bad, they usually make all the wrong choices! Great Depression is proof of that, FDR stole people's gold, he gave America misery & more misery & still more misery through his socialist policies & America kept re-electing him until he died

 

[Travlyr]

The only path to sound money is persuasion & people aren't always in the mood to listen or be persuaded when conditions are really bad, they usually make all the wrong choices! Great Depression is proof of that, FDR stole people's gold, he gave America misery & more misery & still more misery through his socialist policies & America kept re-electing him until he died

Sound money policy is coming with Ron Paul's election and his supporters. Colorado is considering sound monetary policy, Utah has already voted for it, and IIRC there are several other States considering it. As far as FDR, I agree with you with one exception. They didn't have the Internet. They didn't have access to the right information.