Understanding the Issues: Education

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

We keep talking about needing guidance in order to make decisions.

Aren't most decisions made with basic common sense? How much guidance do you need for that? That's my whole thing here, how much do parents REALLY affect your upbringing? Plenty, I'm not saying it plays no role, but it doesn't play a big enough that it excuses away a lack of common sense.

If you go into a lender, and they tell you you're going to have an adjustable rate mortgage and your payment will be $500 a month for a $300,000 house, shouldn't a red flag be going up in your head? You mean to tell me you need a good home and a good upbringing to be able to tell when something seems too good to be true?

When someone tells you $500 payment on a $300,000 house, your first question should be OK what's the catch? If they say no catch, you have a legal case.

You don't have to know financing or know how real estate works. But you should be able to follow your nose when you smell something rotten. And at the very least, you should be able to ask "How is it possible for me to pay $500 a month on a $300,000 house?" Ask the basic questions until you understand it, even if they seem stupid. If you can't understand how it works on a basic level, then you shouldn't be making that deal. Isn't that just basic common sense/street smarts? I don't think you need a tremendous support system to exercise common sense and decent judgment.

Not everyone is like you or as smart as you. No one really knows what percentage were duped by lenders and what percentage knew what they were getting into. What you can't do is tell me all of them are f*ck'ups.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by dmek25

the mortgage crisis is a bad example. this is something my wife called, almost 20 years ago. times were good, and rates the best ever. lenders were doing anything they could to get people into housing that would make them " house" poor. all but guaranteeing the rates wouldn't creep back up. all the big money players in this got rich, and now the every day Joe's are out. that probably sounds pretty fair to you, schneed. screw the little guy. make him fend for himself. and if he cant, its his problem. this is politics at its worse

I can't say I understand what you're saying about a mortgage crisis 20 years ago? Rates were great in the 80s. I'd like to comment further but I can't say I understand what you're talking about.

As for the little guy comment, I perceive myself to be one of the little guys. I'm a guy just like anybody else. I just take responsibility for my actions and do what needs to be done to make good decisions.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by saden1

Not everyone is like you or as smart as you. No one really knows what percentage were duped by lenders and what percentage knew what they were getting into. What you can't do is tell me all of them are f*ck'ups.

Ones who were victims of criminal behavior, no, definitely not fuck-ups.

Ones who weren't, I can't call them fuck-ups because lenders still behaved unscrupulously. But they still could have done more to protect themselves.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

My last post was getting more to the heart of the matter. As for the direct response to your point here, you are absolutely right. That's why I've been saying throughout the thread that I'm all for helping kids with after-care (I recognize the thread is long and you may not have read every post).

The kids cannot help the situation they were born into, I'm fine with giving them after-care programs to keep them out of trouble and help guide them. Once they're provided these types of things though, if they're still making bad decisions as adults and showing no signs of learning from it, those are the folks I'd like to see cut loose from the social programs.

It is long, and I have missed a couple of things along the way (see my earlier post to firstdown), but this one I think I'm tracking.

The difference I am exploring is that we agree on the ends, but not the means. I think the parents deserve the help, while you believe it's the kids who deserve the break. That's what my comments have been geared toward. I do recognize that you are for the proposal, assuming the conditions you stated.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

It is long, and I have missed a couple of things along the way (see my earlier post to firstdown), but this one I think I'm tracking.

The difference I am exploring is that we agree on the ends, but not the means. I think the parents deserve the help, while you believe it's the kids who deserve the break. That's what my comments have been geared toward. I do recognize that you are for the proposal, assuming the conditions you stated.

So the parents that have shown that they make the bad choices and have the social programs allready need more help? What has the billions of dollars that we have allready spent done to correct the problem? Nothing. Sure you can go out and find examples of how people have used the social programs and bettered their life and then contributed back to the community but there are far more that just keep using the system for every penny they can get. The one good thing about after school programs is that it does go directly to the children and not to the parent. I just feel its a jod that is better delt with on a local level than depended on the fed gov. and having to play by their rules to receive the funding. Also if the money is not just a hand out from the fed gov the local community will do a better job on using the money wisely.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I can't say I understand what you're saying about a mortgage crisis 20 years ago? Rates were great in the 80s. I'd like to comment further but I can't say I understand what you're talking about.

As for the little guy comment, I perceive myself to be one of the little guys. I'm a guy just like anybody else. I just take responsibility for my actions and do what needs to be done to make good decisions.

my wife called this crisis close to 20 years ago. she knew that there are tons of unethical people doing whatever they could to get people into houses that they just couldn't afford. she has been under writing mortgages for almost 25 years. the people that were the root cause of this will pack up shop, walk away, and open up somewhere else. when you haven't walked in these peoples shoes, your comments come off as snobbish( or shall i use the term, elitist?) right now, there are alot of good people really struggling to make ends meet. living paycheck to paycheck. one wrong decision could pretty much ruin them financially. growing up in an environment of poverty, already starts them off with a strike against them. they can only mimic the choices and decisions they have seen. that's part of the reason it remains a cycle. the other is it takes alot of hard work to break that cycle. some want to, but don't know how. others are just too damn tired to break it. others don't mind going along for the ride. i think that most are good, decent, hard working people. that want a better life, both for their kids, and themselves. but most are also very proud, that would rather do without a hand out. its very hard to separate the needy, into people that want to do the right thing. and people that are generally worthless

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by firstdown

So the parents that have shown that they make the bad choices and have the social programs allready need more help? What has the billions of dollars that we have allready spent done to correct the problem? Nothing. Sure you can go out and find examples of how people have used the social programs and bettered their life and then contributed back to the community but there are far more that just keep using the system for every penny they can get.

We're not talking about other social welfare programs - just the after-school care.

Originally Posted by firstdown

The one good thing about after school programs is that it does go directly to the children and not to the parent. I just feel its a jod that is better delt with on a local level than depended on the fed gov. and having to play by their rules to receive the funding. Also if the money is not just a hand out from the fed gov the local community will do a better job on using the money wisely.

That's what I said. As Schneed said, it's a long post, and you probably haven't read every single post.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I can't say I understand what you're saying about a mortgage crisis 20 years ago? Rates were great in the 80s. I'd like to comment further but I can't say I understand what you're talking about.

30 year fixed rates in the 80s were awful, Schneed. My parents first mortgage in the DC area in 1981 was at 19%.
Interest Rate Trends ~ Historical Graphs for Mortgage Rates

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

30 year fixed rates in the 80s were awful, Schneed. My parents first mortgage in the DC area in 1981 was at 19%.
Interest Rate Trends ~ Historical Graphs for Mortgage Rates

Yeah that was the tail end of the mortgage crisis that spilled over from the 70s into the 80s. But under the Reagan administration rates moderated and, 20 years ago (1988) were back to very manageable levels, around 9-10%. Still higher than what we're used to today, but manageable.

Maybe he meant 25-30 years ago, because 20 years ago things were relatively good on that front.

[724Skinsfan]

Okay, I think it's settled. All in favor of helping kids say "AYE"!

[MTK]

Booo kids!

[firstdown]

Nay!

[onlydarksets]

Kids suck - anyone want mine?

I agree - we've beat this one to death.