Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho
Anyone who can afford it... REALLY afford it. If you're buying a house with zero down and starting payment near the top of your budget, you shouldn't be signing a loan with payments that double a few years down the road. It's common sense...
"I didn't know" or "I expected to be in a better place" and any of the other whiney bullshit excuses I heard in sob stories on the 6 o'clock news when the whole thing was collapsing just about made me sick.
There are plenty of other less extreme scenerios, but the bottom line is... if it weren't for people being irresponsible in the first place, the whole housing crisis wouldn't be at all what it is today.
|
I agree with this to a point. That point is crossed with some of the ridiculously low standards that were set for some loans.
Say you have a methed out relative who wants to borrow money. He says he can pay you back but can't demonstrate how (stated income loans) and hasn't paid back other people you know (poor credit history), yet you loan him the money anyway. When he doesn't pay you back a lot of the responsibility falls on you for making the loan in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldun170
2 people sitting at a desk.
One, the person that wants to money to buy something
The other with the money.
In the big rush to standardize and streamline and automate everything, they have eliminated judgment.
There is no test or cheat sheet or standard. Its judgment and common sense of someone with experience.
|
There are two problems I'm aware of off the top of my head with that system.
First, large organizations get scared of loosing oversight when it ultimately comes down to two people at a desk. The worry is that their representative at the desk is going to make a stupid decision the organization is ultimately responsible for. As it turned out the organization was making stupid decisions anyway, but that still doesn't change the fact that an organization is going to want to depend on its own judgment rather than that of one of their individuals.
Second, without a demonstrable system that removes judgment from individuals an organization opens itself up to discrimination suits. That system gives the organization something to point to showing that the standards are the same for everyone, regardless of race, color, or creed. I'm sure you are aware that lenders get sued all the time for discrimination. Their race, gender, and creed neutral systems function as a defense. Once the system becomes the mind of an individual that defense is lost.