Is It Wrong To Strip Everything From Your House In Revenge Against Your Bank?

[Meatwasp]

Why is he heartless? Seriously, I really don't understand.

Why is it so nuts to believe a person should take responsibility for their own decisions and actions?

I mean, I feel sorry for the people who lost their houses. I also feel sorry for people who lost money in the stock market, or in failed businesses.

I realize we don't have a free market, but isn't something we tell people that malinvestment has to be allowed to wash out of the system? And that is what the people did (malinvestment), who bought houses they could not afford.

What am I missing here? I must be missing something, because there are a bunch of people in this thread who are sounding a lot more like socialists to me than libertarians.

Ditto Kiddo

 

[s35wf]

my point is, you took out the loan. You made the deal. They were your friend when you got the money to buy the house. People will get pissed off when the bank won't lend them the money - tell them they can't afford it. Then get pissed off when they get foreclosed on.

If your mortgage was your only debt then you should have been able to ride this out. You should have had some reserve to get through some unemployment. If you took out a mortgage that was so high it did not allow you to do that, then you should not have taken out that size of a mortgage. Continue to rent until you can put enough down to get the payment down to where you have the ability to put some in savings every month. You had ten years to do that.

honey when this downturn started & when i got sick i had 50k in my bank account; i pulled all $$$ out of banks right when i got sick & when the economy started to go to crap!

All this used to be basic "rules of thumb" with finances. But the attitude over the last 10 years as been spend, spend, spend. The good times will never end.

honey you don't know me; up until this last year with little to no income i've burned thru almost all of savings; i never spent, spent, spent, and i always had extra $$$ stashed! I never refied or pulled cash out!

look, i know that there was mortgage fraud out there. And i don't think anyone here supported the bailouts. But there was fraud and greed on the consumer side also. Someone earlier posted that customers would get pissed off with a capital p when not given a loan. This is true. Then what would they do? They would to to the next broker until they found the one that would "make the deal work".

My mil does some work with low income families in our area. These families would have 1% government loans for homes. They would come in with these deals from mortgage companies to refinance and take the equity in the home as cash. The refinance was usually for 1% for the first 6 months and then convert to an arm. She would beg them not to do it. They would do it anyway. Why? Because they wanted the cash to buy that big plasma t.v. Now they can't afford their payment.

i dont own a plasma tv; as a matter of fact since getting sick 2 years ago i read and hardly ever watch tv; i pay for internet access, but no cable tv here!

anyone that went along with the false statements on income and balance sheets was just as guilty of the fraud.

[i]my income & balance sheet was fine 10 years ago! My loan is the standard fixed interest rate w/30 year term which in a way sucks cuz im paying 7.6%[/i]

if the mortgage company had to figure out how to "make the deal work" then that person should have never applied for that size of a loan in the first place. You should know what you can afford. Again, it does not matter what the home was valued at or what they said you could afford or whether or not they could "make the deal work".

It took two to tango here. And no doubt there are a lot of innocent people that made the right decisions caught up in it now. But again, i put the blame on bad lending and bad consumer decisions.

my bad decision was getting older, becoming ill & having my income go to sh*t!

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

my bad decision was getting older, becoming ill & having my income go to sh*t!

So, that gives you the right to damage property you don't own? When you foreclose and cannot afford the payments anymore, it ceases to be your property and returns to the owners; the banks. What gives you the right to damage property that isn't yours? Isn't the basis for this whole movement private property?!

Yes, it sucks. Yes, shit happens. You still do not obtain the right however, to damage property that doesn't belong to you. It's a simple fact of life. If you cannot afford the payment anymore then you should sell the property, and either rent or buy another cheaper property that you can afford.

I guess it really shows who is a true libertarian or not when tough times hit. My guess would be Dr. Paul would not be espousing destroying property that isn't yours.

 

[Feenix566]

Except it's not the banks that take the punishment, rather the government that now owns them, and the Fed, which supplies the "money".

You're delusional.

 

[PrairieQueen]

my bad decision was getting older, becoming ill & having my income go to sh*t!

Well, I am not trying to sound heartless. Really I am not. Unfortunately you are hit with a lot all at once.

I guess I just get irritated when I hear the "F*ck the Banks" comments because you all had to know when going into the deal that not paying back the loan meant foreclosure. When you couldn't have purchased the home without those same banks to start with. If you hated the bank so much and the idea of borrowing money and didn't want to face the reality that you may someday be foreclosed on, why did you take out the loan? I just don't get it. Rent then.

If you have a loan on your home - you may very well someday be foreclosed on. Period. You BORROWED the money. Do you not expect to have to pay it back? That it was gift? Yes, the banks are in it to make money. Duh. We hate borrowing money, but like many others, we had to. BUT I am not getting too attached to this home until it is paid off. I realize someday we may have to walk away. So be it.

It is still not the banks fault that you cannot pay the mortgage. It's not.

And not to sound heartless again, but it is just a house. It's material.

 

[tmosley]

sometime between bouts of dishing out pity for others, maybe you can plant a seed or two of personal responsibility and stop living the remainder of your existence like a victim that has been terribly wronged by the world.

Or if that is too much to ask, maybe you could at least wait for debtors prisons to exist in this country before complaining about how screwed you were to take on excess debt.

It doesn't matter how responsible or irresponsible the cow is when he's being taken to the slaughterhouse.

 

[s35wf]

So, that gives you the right to damage property you don't own? When you foreclose and cannot afford the payments anymore, it ceases to be your property and returns to the owners; the banks. What gives you the right to damage property that isn't yours? Isn't the basis for this whole movement private property?!

I NEVER said I'd damage the property, Only that i'd take whatever was not nailed down when/if that event happens!

Yes, it sucks. Yes, shit happens. You still do not obtain the right however, to damage property that doesn't belong to you. It's a simple fact of life. If you cannot afford the payment anymore then you should sell the property, and either rent or buy another cheaper property that you can afford.

There are NO properties anywhere I could "buy" or "rent" in this area that are cheaper than my mortgage payment. Hell 1 Bedroom apartments rent for More than my Mortgage Payment on my 3 bedroom duplex

I guess it really shows who is a true libertarian or not when tough times hit. My guess would be Dr. Paul would not be espousing destroying property that isn't yours.

I NEVER SAID I'd DESTROY the House! Only would take ALL improvements I've made to it & ALL appliances I'd replaced!

 

[ARealConservative]

It doesn't matter how responsible or irresponsible the cow is when he's being taken to the slaughterhouse.

your cow analogy is pretty poor.

Just because the Fed inflates heavily, triggering for the cows to spend massively, doesn't mean you have to.

You're not a cow, you have the sensibility to break off from the herd and be responsible for yourself.

Start today! Leave the herd now.

 

[PrairieQueen]

I NEVER SAID I'd DESTROY the House! Only would take ALL improvements I've made to it & ALL appliances I'd replaced!

If you leave it in the same condition that it was in when the loan was made then I don't have a problem with that. But the Deed of Trust may very well have secured the appliances and heater etc that was there at the time. So take the new ones and put the old ones back

I know you didn't say you would destroy the house. That is not the comment of yours I was addressing.

 

[amy31416]

Obviously, lots of disagreements here, and I don't think they'll be worked out anytime soon. I see the points on both sides of the argument.

But how about this--what if a homeowner has paid off their property, but the city is taking it because they can't pay their taxes? Do those of you who think it's wrong to strip a foreclosed home also think it's wrong to strip your property when you have paid for it but are having it stolen from you in other ways? Or is it still okay because there's some sort of nebulous "contract?"

 

[tmosley]

You're delusional.

You're a dumbass.

Don't you know ANYTHING? Every bank in this nation is an extension of the Fed. The large mortgage-holders have been outright NATIONALIZED.

What are you, posting from 1995?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I NEVER SAID I'd DESTROY the House! Only would take ALL improvements I've made to it & ALL appliances I'd replaced!

That's reasonable. I would do the same. Other's here though are advocating destruction of property that isn't theirs.

Lastly, then if you can't afford the mortgage anymore, nor any in the area, that means you will have to move somewhere where you can afford to live. Tough times, call for tough decisions. If we didn't have such burdening taxes there would be more opportunities for charitable organizations and people, as it is, Government siphons our wealth.

Perhaps it would behoove everyone here to remember the gargoyle in our midst; the Federal Government. Take your anger and frustration out on the abominations on Capitol Hill, not the institutions that we will need in a Laissez-Faire society (Remember, without the Government the moral hazards wouldn't exist).

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Obviously, lots of disagreements here, and I don't think they'll be worked out anytime soon. I see the points on both sides of the argument.

But how about this--what if a homeowner has paid off their property, but the city is taking it because they can't pay their taxes? Do those of you who think it's wrong to strip a foreclosed home also think it's wrong to strip your property when you have paid for it but are having it stolen from you in other ways? Or is it still okay because there's some sort of nebulous "contract?"

Taxation is theft, a criminal act, therefore illegal. I wouldn't leave my property if I couldn't afford the taxes anymore, they would have to drag my dead body from it.

The two situations couldn't be more different. There is no contract with taxation. You do not voluntarily pay your taxes do you? You are forced at gun-point.

 

[tmosley]

your cow analogy is pretty poor.

Just because the Fed inflates heavily, triggering for the cows to spend massively, doesn't mean you have to.

You're not a cow, you have the sensibility to break off from the herd and be responsible for yourself.

Start today! Leave the herd now.

That's the thing. People that are waking up, or have woken up in the last two years (99% of RP supporters) are already on the truck to the slaughterhouse. The only way to fight it is violence. Sure, if we could all time travel, as some in this thread have apparently achieved (I'm looking at you, Feenix), we could avoid being rounded up with the promise of green grass and hay for free with protection from predators and hunters, and still be running wild and free. No-one could stand up to that propaganda, not without more detailed knowledge.

Some might be able to jump off the back of the truck, damaging themselves in the process, but you would have them continue on to the slaugterhouse because they "signed a contract". Well, they have already modified the contract, and they no longer have any reason to work with you. They just want to gobble us up, bones and all.

THIS IS WAR YOU FOOLS.

 

[PrairieQueen]

Obviously, lots of disagreements here, and I don't think they'll be worked out anytime soon. I see the points on both sides of the argument.

But how about this--what if a homeowner has paid off their property, but the city is taking it because they can't pay their taxes? Do those of you who think it's wrong to strip a foreclosed home also think it's wrong to strip your property when you have paid for it but are having it stolen from you in other ways? Or is it still okay because there's some sort of nebulous "contract?"

Again, you bought the property knowing full well, or should have, that you would have to pay property taxes. Like them or not, it's the rules of the game. Don't like it, don't play. Rent.

BTW - I don't believe they just "take it". There is probably a tax sale. Someone will "buy" the right to the property at some point in the future as long as the owner does not pay the taxes within a certain period of time. Here I believe it is three years.

So if your property goes to tax sale, here, you actually have three years before the "buyer" can take possession. In that time, you can make your tax payments

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Again, you bought the property knowing full well, or should have, that you would have to pay property taxes. Like them or not, it's the rules of the game. Don't like it, don't play. Rent.

BTW - I don't believe they just "take it". There is probably a tax sale. Someone will "buy" the right to the property at some point in the future as long as the owner does not pay the taxes within a certain period of time. Here I believe it is three years.

So if your property goes to tax sale, here, you actually have three years before the "buyer" can take possession. In that time, you can make your tax payments

Wrong. All taxation is necessarily theft. All theft is necessarily crime. What happens if where you live when you buy your house there is no property taxation, and then 10 years later, or 30 years later, they enact property taxes? Did you voluntarily agree to these taxes? Did they force you at gun-point? If you believe in taxation, then you don't believe in private property, because you don't own the title to the property, the State does. This means that the State owns all land. THIS IS ANTITHESIS TO THE FOUNDING OF THIS COUNTRY. I will not stand for it, nor should you.

 

[s35wf]

Perhaps it would behoove everyone here to remember the gargoyle in our midst; the Federal Government. Take your anger and frustration out on the abominations on Capitol Hill, not the institutions that we will need in a Laissez-Faire society (Remember, without the Government the moral hazards wouldn't exist).

THANK YOU for THAT ^^^.

 

[amy31416]

Again, you bought the property knowing full well, or should have, that you would have to pay property taxes. Like them or not, it's the rules of the game. Don't like it, don't play. Rent.

BTW - I don't believe they just "take it". There is probably a tax sale. Someone will "buy" the right to the property at some point in the future as long as the owner does not pay the taxes within a certain period of time. Here I believe it is three years.

So if your property goes to tax sale, here, you actually have three years before the "buyer" can take possession. In that time, you can make your tax payments

But the house is mine, 100% mine. Why could I not sell every last timber before they dragged me off the land? Why could I not sell the dirt and the sod? Do I not allegedly own it?

I can sell my water heater and furnace right now if I want to, and that's perfectly legal. I can strip the inside of the house and it's perfectly legal. I can sell the grass if I want to. Why is it suddenly wrong for me to do so if I can no longer pay the taxes? Would it be wrong for me to strip the house to pay for the taxes?

So, in other words, you're taking the side that because I can no longer pay the taxes, that I should give the city a free, pristine house.

I disagree.

 

[PrairieQueen]

Wrong. All taxation is necessarily theft. All theft is necessarily crime. What happens if where you live when you buy your house there is no property taxation, and then 10 years later, or 30 years later, they enact property taxes? Did you voluntarily agree to these taxes? Did they force you at gun-point? If you believe in taxation, then you don't believe in private property, because you don't own the title to the property, the State does. This means that the State owns all land. THIS IS ANTITHESIS TO THE FOUNDING OF THIS COUNTRY. I will not stand for it, nor should you.

I didn't say I agreed with it, only that was the game at the time you purchased the property. Right. Don't like it, don't buy property. Let someone else take the risk.

 

[PrairieQueen]

But the house is mine, 100% mine. Why could I not sell every last timber before they dragged me off the land? Why could I not sell the dirt and the sod? Do I not allegedly own it?

I can sell my water heater and furnace right now if I want to, and that's perfectly legal. I can strip the inside of the house and it's perfectly legal. I can sell the grass if I want to. Why is it suddenly wrong for me to do so if I can no longer pay the taxes? Would it be wrong for me to strip the house to pay for the taxes?

So, in other words, you're taking the side that because I can no longer pay the taxes, that I should give the city a free, pristine house.

I disagree.

I wouldn't have a problem with stripping a house going to tax sale no. You can bulldoze a house down if you want to, as long as you don't have insurance on it.

I thought you were just disagreeing that the property was going to tax sale. Sorry, not reading very carefully.