Walking away from mortgage- please no flames here just advise or experiences

[roliepolieoliefan]

People don't "get this" because for the last 20-25 years, the housing market has been steadily increasing in value. We can see several reasons for this: Dual income families became a social norm, and that meant more money available for housing; demand increased. Credit became very easy to obtain, so people could buy much more than past generations could afford. Some people bought into "creative mortgages" that frankly were a bad idea. Housing became -- instead of simply an expense and a place to live -- an investment that grew and made large amounts of money for many people. Too many people were allowed to buy with zero down. Finally, all these things affected our society's perception of "middle class housing", and people began to expect more -- even to think that they deserved more. We as a society seemed to develop the notion that this is life: Investments always pay off, things always go our way, housing is a sure-fire way to grow your money.

Throw in the idea that today's young adults have been raised to think that nothing bad's allowed to happen to them. They weren't allowed NOT to make the team, they weren't allowed to fail a class, they were told that they were always winners (I was talking about this with some of my younger co-workers, and they KNOW that they've been raised this way, and yet they can't NOT think this way -- they KNOW it's hillarious). And now these are many of the people who are in trouble with housing; they're young, they haven't had time to pay down a large part of their mortgage, they don't have significant savings that can pull them out of this crisis, and anyway they're paying back higher student loans than any generation before them. Their parents, who haven't saved enough for retirement, aren't able to help them. They're not prepared for this financial and emotional blow.

Even though people talked about "the housing bubble", people didn't grasp the concept that what's become the norm for us could change. Well, it changed.The truth is somewhat in between you two:

I don't believe any of us could literally tomorrow find a good, professional job well-suited to our specific needs, a full-time job that we really want, with benefits and room for growth. Not literally tomorrow. Finding that kind of job takes time, then you'd have to wait for the interview, wait again for their decision (of course, you could use the time to arrange day care and make other arrangements that'd now be necessary for your change from stay-at-home to full-time worker), then you'd wait for your first paycheck. Do these jobs exist? Of course! Could you have one tomorrow? No.

On the other hand, most of the people I know -- and I'm talking about adults with good work histories, not the chronically unemployed without good job skills or educations -- aren't staying unemployed. They aren't necessarily finding jobs right away, and they aren't necessarily finding their dream jobs, BUT they are finding jobs -- even if they're working under the table, waiting tables, or running a cash register at Lowe's. The adults that I know who want to work are working, even if they're under-employed (meaning that they're doing a job that's technically beneath their education or ability level).

So the truth is somewhere in between Fantasy Land and Depression City.You already have a job. You could change your hours. That's a far cry from finding and obtaining a brand-new job.

Lumping all young families like you did is ridiculous. I was always taught to never buy what you didn't have the money for. And that is what we teach our young children, even at their young ages, we have already started to teach them the value of money and that nothing comes for free. Everything has its price. I'm not going to make excuses for people who buy outside of their means. You have to know what you can afford, plain and simple. I see people where we live who work where DH and I work, their house is twice as big, they have 2 brand new cars, they wear all the latest fashions. Now how can that be? If we can't afford it, how can they? Maybe they have a secret stash, parents who are wealthy or just live beyond their means, who knows?

But I do know what you mean about this sickening PC world. It has gotten out of control. Drives me nuts that all kids get a trophy for playing, and the coach sweats it out that all the kids get equal playing time or mommy and daddy will complain , or that a teacher can't give the grade he or she wants because Johnny or Susie's parents will go to the principal.

And I never stated I was a SAHM and could get a full-time job tomorrow. I said if I wanted I could get a full-time job. And yes I can. As I was taught about money at a young age, I was always taught to have a career I could fall back on. I attended college with alot of 30 and 40 year old who HAD to go back to school and support their families. I wanted security, and so far I do.

 

[BuzznBelle'smom]

Actually, I'm a SAHM (for 15 years now), and could get a job tomorrow.

My degree is in electrical engineering, with a nuke background. DH works at a nuclear power plant. They keep asking him when I'm going to come in for an interview. We've discussed it, but there are several factors that concern me--being available for my children (ages 3-14), the long hours DH is sometimes required to put in (requiring me to do more stuff at home), and of course my skills are rusty. That said, it's quite possible that, down the road, his company might be willing to create some kind of tech support position that I could fill on a part-time basis. If I choose to go that route.

I recognize that my skills fill a niche, and not everyone is so fortunate. But there's another factor, too--DH didn't like his old job, so he interviewed at this new place. It involved moving our family to a new state. Not everyone is willing to make such a move, which I understand--but then you also have to understand that your CHOICE not to move is affecting your job prospects.

As to the OP, I would consider all options on the table--renting the house out, finding a roommate, getting out from under the house, etc. Walking away form a house is a possible option, but you'll still need a place to live. Also, I know the laws have changed, but my BIL filed bankruptcy and lost a house in foreclosure ~15 years ago. He STILL has credit issues, because it's still on his credit report. He did a Chapter 13, too. I know a lot of people say it clears off in 7 years. That may be technically true, but a lot of places ask, "Have you ever filed bankruptcy?" (credit cards, job applications, etc.) An affirmative answer can still disqualify you.

 

[eliza61]

Actually that wasn't a knock on the OP, who was floating trial balloons. It was a response to the other posters who thought walking away from a mortgage was actually a pretty good idea.

Who said it was a good idea?

Op,
You will get the usual, "I live in a teeny tiney house and every one else is living way beyond their means" stories. Basically take them with a grain of salt. I'm always amazed at how many people always "know some one" who brought all this misery on themselves. Don't even think about saying you need food stamps because then you'll get all the "every one I know is eating steak, while I'm eating scrapple" stories. These boards can be very sanctimonious.

Anyway,
One women at work walked away from her mortgage. It was a devastating experience for her and her family. She lost tons of weight from the stress, damn near broke up her marriage and she is petrified of what this will do to her kids.

No one here knows your full story, I would gather as much information you can, know all the reprecussions of the decision and try to get a support system that KNOWS you to help.

 

[Planogirl]

Actually, I'm a SAHM (for 15 years now), and could get a job tomorrow.

My degree is in electrical engineering, with a nuke background. DH works at a nuclear power plant. They keep asking him when I'm going to come in for an interview. We've discussed it, but there are several factors that concern me--being available for my children (ages 3-14), the long hours DH is sometimes required to put in (requiring me to do more stuff at home), and of course my skills are rusty. That said, it's quite possible that, down the road, his company might be willing to create some kind of tech support position that I could fill on a part-time basis. If I choose to go that route.

I recognize that my skills fill a niche, and not everyone is so fortunate. But there's another factor, too--DH didn't like his old job, so he interviewed at this new place. It involved moving our family to a new state. Not everyone is willing to make such a move, which I understand--but then you also have to understand that your CHOICE not to move is affecting your job prospects.

As to the OP, I would consider all options on the table--renting the house out, finding a roommate, getting out from under the house, etc. Walking away form a house is a possible option, but you'll still need a place to live. Also, I know the laws have changed, but my BIL filed bankruptcy and lost a house in foreclosure ~15 years ago. He STILL has credit issues, because it's still on his credit report. He did a Chapter 13, too. I know a lot of people say it clears off in 7 years. That may be technically true, but a lot of places ask, "Have you ever filed bankruptcy?" (credit cards, job applications, etc.) An affirmative answer can still disqualify you.

That part about being rusty CAN affect you up to a point. You'll find that some places will take the kids right out of school thinking that their knowledge is more up to date. (Been there!) That nuclear background might be even more useful than the degree.

 

[Planogirl]

So maybe you should count your blessings instead of coming off as "holier than thou" and realize that others may have chosen a different career path that hasn't been spared as yours has. Instead you come off as condescending, when all you have been is lucky. Hopefully healthcare reform will even the playing field for all.

Thank you.

I know of people who are well educated and have experience who don't fit the current job market's needs. Not having a crystal ball, they couldn't necessarily see what the future would hold and now they are a part of that massive group of UNDEREMPLOYED which can also be devastating.

It's easy to point fingers and throw stones when you're not in that situation.

 

[jodifla]

Actually, I'm a SAHM (for 15 years now), and could get a job tomorrow.

My degree is in electrical engineering, with a nuke background. DH works at a nuclear power plant. They keep asking him when I'm going to come in for an interview. We've discussed it, but there are several factors that concern me--being available for my children (ages 3-14), the long hours DH is sometimes required to put in (requiring me to do more stuff at home), and of course my skills are rusty. That said, it's quite possible that, down the road, his company might be willing to create some kind of tech support position that I could fill on a part-time basis. If I choose to go that route.

I recognize that my skills fill a niche, and not everyone is so fortunate. But there's another factor, too--DH didn't like his old job, so he interviewed at this new place. It involved moving our family to a new state. Not everyone is willing to make such a move, which I understand--but then you also have to understand that your CHOICE not to move is affecting your job prospects.

As to the OP, I would consider all options on the table--renting the house out, finding a roommate, getting out from under the house, etc. Walking away form a house is a possible option, but you'll still need a place to live. Also, I know the laws have changed, but my BIL filed bankruptcy and lost a house in foreclosure ~15 years ago. He STILL has credit issues, because it's still on his credit report. He did a Chapter 13, too. I know a lot of people say it clears off in 7 years. That may be technically true, but a lot of places ask, "Have you ever filed bankruptcy?" (credit cards, job applications, etc.) An affirmative answer can still disqualify you.

There are plenty of people who would like to move for work, but can't, because they can't sell their home. In fact, this is really the OP's problem.

In Michigan, home values have plummeted in the past two years. The massive amount of foreclosures have dragged down everyone's home prices....basically since nothing is selling, only foreclosing, people can't get mortgages because there are no comps showing your home's true value.

So you are trapped. No job, or local job prospects, no way to get out from under your home except for foreclosure or bankruptcy. And again, in our neighborhood, these are ranch homes, nice middle class homes, but not McMansions.

Savings only last for so long, no matter how much you've saved. We have a lot in savings, but not enough to withstand years in unemployment. And that's what many people are facing in Michigan.

I realize it's a defensive mechanism to say, "Well, those people are stupid. And greedy. That's why they are in so much trouble." But the truth is, unemployment will torpedo ANY family quickly ...and you, or your neighborhood, could be next.

 

[JoiseyMom]

There are plenty of people who would like to move for work, but can't, because they can't sell their home. In fact, this is really the OP's problem.

In Michigan, home values have plummeted in the past two years. The massive amount of foreclosures have dragged down everyone's home prices....basically since nothing is selling, only foreclosing, people can't get mortgages because there are no comps showing your home's true value.

So you are trapped. No job, or local job prospects, no way to get out from under your home except for foreclosure or bankruptcy. And again, in our neighborhood, these are ranch homes, nice middle class homes, but not McMansions.

Savings only last for so long, no matter how much you've saved. We have a lot in savings, but not enough to withstand years in unemployment. And that's what many people are facing in Michigan.

I realize it's a defensive mechanism to say, "Well, those people are stupid. And greedy. That's why they are in so much trouble." But the truth is, unemployment will torpedo ANY family quickly ...and you, or your neighborhood, could be next.

You are so right. We have dealt with DH being laid off in 2000, got another job right away only for me to be laid off in 2001, which wasn't too bad since I was pregnant and we decided I would just be a SAHM. Then DH got laid off again. He was under employed for over a year, and we were lucky we had lots of savings..we kept our house, he got a job paying way under what he was making..but hey no more Cobra..paid that for over 18 months then got our own insurance..talk about a budget buster.

We have had more bouts of lay offs and the savings needless to say has been depeted, property sold etc.. and at this point if it would happen yet again we would be royally you know what. But we did everything right. We could live on one salary, we bought our house before the market started climbing and thankfully even after the hugh rise in it's price and now the fall we are not upside down and still have equity. DH is working, but at 25% of his previous job. If this job would fall through .

OP, do what is best for you and your DD. Do NOT touch your 401k for your house. Unless you want to stay and live there, I think you will be flushing good money you and your DD will need. Get professional finanical and legal advice..and if they say walk away..the do so. You have to do what is best for you and yours...you didn't ask for this mess. Good Luck! These laws were made for people like you, who don't want to do these things and don't take advantage, but need an out. Take the legal out if that is what is best for you. Depleting your 401k and still losing your house down the road doesn't help anyone, espeically not you.

Good LUck!!

 

[Hannathy]

OP, do what is best for you and your DD. Do NOT touch your 401k for your house. Unless you want to stay and live there, I think you will be flushing good money you and your DD will need. Get professional finanical and legal advice..and if they say walk away..the do so. You have to do what is best for you and yours...you didn't ask for this mess. Good Luck! These laws were made for people like you, who don't want to do these things and don't take advantage, but need an out. Take the legal out if that is what is best for you. Depleting your 401k and still losing your house down the road doesn't help anyone, espeically not you.

Good LUck!!

So let me get this straight she should not use her savings to pay for her own way instead she should let the rest of us use our money to pay for people like this while she gets to keep all her money? Wow no wonder this country is in the state it is in. This is just wrong, I'm sorry but you should not get to stick other people with your problems while you keep your savings. What did she save for then?

Wish I had thought this way when my DH lost his job, instead we used our savings to pay for our obligations. No actually I'm glad I didn't think of it because there is no way my conscious would let me do such a thing. I have to live with my actions.

 

[andrews_dad]

I love that the OP asks for no flames. Has she seen this board? More snap judgements around this board than on a Maury Povich show! HAHAHA

 

[flamom]

OP if you haven't already check out loansafe.org they have forums on there where you will see people in the same situation and what they are doing also lender contact info. you'll actually get useful information instead of flames. I know this is stressful for you,good luck in whatever choice you make.

 

[disneygal2007]

Maybe the rest of us live within our means. DH could lose his job or divorce me( not likely, 20 years and happy ) and I could go to work full-time and afford to still make the mortgage payments.

Yea we could have afforded a way larger home but chose not to for the above reasons. When are people going to be held accountable?

As PP's have already stated sorry no hugs from me, I'm sick of people not taking responsiblity for what they created.

Well excuse me perfect life. But you don't know how things were for them before their issues. They could have been fine money wise. I am not saying walking away is for the best. People get down on their luck. More so now of says. You can't judge others you just can't until you walk in their shoes. And the way it sounds you won't. Good luck with that.

 

[JoiseyMom]

So let me get this straight she should not use her savings to pay for her own way instead she should let the rest of us use our money to pay for people like this while she gets to keep all her money? Wow no wonder this country is in the state it is in. This is just wrong, I'm sorry but you should not get to stick other people with your problems while you keep your savings. What did she save for then?

Wish I had thought this way when my DH lost his job, instead we used our savings to pay for our obligations. No actually I'm glad I didn't think of it because there is no way my conscious would let me do such a thing. I have to live with my actions.

If using up her 401k would still mean in a few months time she will still lose her house, but it saved her those months..then NO, she shouldn't do it. It is throwing good money after bad. If she can no longer afford her house because she lost her job, then NO. What she wants to do is NOT ILLEGAL or Immoral! It is there for a reason. She didn't willy nilly buy a house to expensive for her. She spent a fortune in a divorce then lost her job. If her option is being house poor, and still losing it..then she should keep her 401k for when she really needs it. ANd keeping a house for a few months and then losing it would be STUPID!!

Yes..we are bailing out those damn banks and yes that pisses me off. Yes we are bailing out people that should have never bought houses (this was the banks fault). These laws are for people who through no fault of their own are in financial trouble. She has her DD to think of and her future. SO yes, I 1000% think she should keep her 401k and dump the house if that is the best move for her financially. Why should she lose her savings and her house?? Cause you said so??

This country is in the state it is in because the greedy banks and investors bet against us with morgages and just screwed us over while they tried to make billions. If they did the ethical thing an said NO to people that you can't buy that house and if they didn't bet against the mortgages then we would not be in the mess we are in.

People get divorced...they lose jobs..they shouldn't have to take food out of their kids mouths to make a bank happy. The OP is not doing a darn thing wrong if she walks away.

 

[disneygal2007]

I work in a surgery center in a large city hospital. Full-time jobs are posted weekly. So yes, if I wanted full-time I could bid and get one. No I wouldn't start tomorrow , I would have to give 2 weeks notice at my current position , but yes, I could go full-time pretty quickly if I wanted to.

And at my current position I could increase my hours as much as I want. We frequently call people in from other departments to help us out because we don't have enough staff . I am contracted to work 2 days a week but most weeks work 4 and my supervisor begs for alot of us to work 5 days.

We're busy, and can get the hours to work if we want to.,

As I said in my other posts, our area was somewhat hit by the economy but not as bad as places like Michigan and California. Our housing market took a small dip but I live in a new home subdivision and there are new homes being built in here everyday as well as in many sub-divisions around me. My son and daughter have got new kids in their classes, so there must be other jobs around here other than where I work.

So what you are saying is move to where you live. apply for a position we may not be qualified for and the whole world will be a much better place.

Wow wake up from your dream. We are in a world where if you work in a job construction you are pretty much out of luck. I'm not trying to flame or pick a fight, but when I read your post I get pretty angry. I live in the real world. Walk down the street here in Seattle and there are allot of people sleeping on the streets who 10 years ago might have been where you are today. Makes me sad.

 

[Hannathy]

Yes..we are bailing out those damn banks and yes that pisses me off. Yes we are bailing out people that should have never bought houses (this was the banks fault). These laws are for people who through no fault of their own are in financial trouble. She has her DD to think of and her future. SO yes, I 1000% think she should keep her 401k and dump the house if that is the best move for her financially. Why should she lose her savings and her house?? Cause you said so??

This country is in the state it is in because the greedy banks and investors bet against us with morgages and just screwed us over while they tried to make billions. If they did the ethical thing an said NO to people that you can't buy that house and if they didn't bet against the mortgages then we would not be in the mess we are in.

People get divorced...they lose jobs..they shouldn't have to take food out of their kids mouths to make a bank happy. The OP is not doing a darn thing wrong if she walks away.

First it isn't the banks fault! They didn't hold a gun to peoples heads and make them sign for houses they knew they couldn't afford.

Of course banks want to make money same as Disney they are in business to make money.

If People did the ethical thing and not sign something they knew they could afford or being greedy themselves and trying to turn a quick buck this wouldn't have been happening. The banks aren't nanny's it is up to adults to nanny themselves. If people did the ethical thing and paid their obligations this wouldn't be happening.

You say she shouldn't use her savings to make the bank happy cause she is having bad times, so then I guess when times were good she willingly gave the banks a little extra interest? shouldn't it be both ways?

If you don't think she is doing something wrong in keeping her money and walking away from her bills and sticking it to the bank and us then we will never agree on the definition of doing something wrong.

As far as taking food out of her kids mouth if she truly has no money her child will eat (food stamps, free school food) no one needs to starve in this country.

 

[Colleen27]

There are plenty of people who would like to move for work, but can't, because they can't sell their home. In fact, this is really the OP's problem.

In Michigan, home values have plummeted in the past two years. The massive amount of foreclosures have dragged down everyone's home prices....basically since nothing is selling, only foreclosing, people can't get mortgages because there are no comps showing your home's true value.

So you are trapped. No job, or local job prospects, no way to get out from under your home except for foreclosure or bankruptcy. And again, in our neighborhood, these are ranch homes, nice middle class homes, but not McMansions.

Savings only last for so long, no matter how much you've saved. We have a lot in savings, but not enough to withstand years in unemployment. And that's what many people are facing in Michigan.

I realize it's a defensive mechanism to say, "Well, those people are stupid. And greedy. That's why they are in so much trouble." But the truth is, unemployment will torpedo ANY family quickly ...and you, or your neighborhood, could be next.

Exactly. I've shared our story before - we bought a typical 3 bedroom starter home at a stellar price for the time, 99K (11K under appraisal) in 2004, 10% down on a 30 year fixed loan. That house today is worth about 20K, if that. That's not even short-sale territory; the banks aren't agreeing to short sales because of the HUGE gap between the amount owed and the current value, and there's no good way to relocate when you've got that kind of obligation to your home. Walking away is just about the only choice left to many, many people around here, because staying means having to weather long-term (possibly years-long) unemployment and there's no "above board" way to get out.

We're lucky; we have resources beyond our wages that have allowed us to save much more than most blue-collar families, and hopefully it will be enough to allow us to ride this out without having to choose between staying here near family and leaving to find work. But I just don't have it in me to look down on people who aren't weathering this economy as well because I know our fortunate position is as much luck as good planning.

 

[JoiseyMom]

First it isn't the banks fault! They didn't hold a gun to peoples heads and make them sign for houses they knew they couldn't afford.

Of course banks want to make money same as Disney they are in business to make money.

If People did the ethical thing and not sign something they knew they could afford or being greedy themselves and trying to turn a quick buck this wouldn't have been happening. The banks aren't nanny's it is up to adults to nanny themselves. If people did the ethical thing and paid their obligations this wouldn't be happening.

You say she shouldn't use her savings to make the bank happy cause she is having bad times, so then I guess when times were good she willingly gave the banks a little extra interest? shouldn't it be both ways?

If you don't think she is doing something wrong in keeping her money and walking away from her bills and sticking it to the bank and us then we will never agree on the definition of doing something wrong.

As far as taking food out of her kids mouth if she truly has no money her child will eat (food stamps, free school food) no one needs to starve in this country.

If it was wrong then it would be ILLEGAL!! It isn't wrong, it isn't illegal. Yes, the banks were WRONG! You don't morally offer to loan someone LOTS of money, knowing they can't pay it back. It is wrong, which is why we used to have stricter rules for money borrowing.

If you feel she should empty out her savings to the bank and then be penniless and then still lose her house and then be on the streets..ok..you are entitled to your opinion. I disagree.

What planet are you living on?? Plenty of American children go hungry every day in this country. Have you ever been on food stamps?? Do you really think food stamps give people enough money for a month of good healthy food?? If you think that then you are living in a fantasy land. The food stamp program does NOT give a family enough food to eat healthy for a month and not go hungry.

And what is the OP supposed to do once she goes through her savings, lost her house, is out on the street and has no place to live or feed her DD..??? It is ok for us to pay for her then?? If she can get out of her house and go somehwere else and have a job and support system it is better for everyone.

They bank will eventually sell her house and still make money in the end run...no harm no foul. Look at JP MOrgan Chase today and Goldman Sachs...they borrowed money from the gov't and are not paying out BILLIONS, yes BILLIONS in bonuses. THe OP isnt doing anything wrong or hurting us by walking away from her home.

 

[barbarabini]

Ahhh, the moral hazard argument rears its head in the "walk away from your mortgage debate".

Like any other purchase, your house is an asset. Just like banks own commercial property, teams own contracts on sports figures, or corporations own planes, heavy equipment ect, there must be a cost-benefit analysis to the assumption of and continued service of the debt, in light of the appreciability or depreciation of the asset.

Here, we have unsophisticated asset purchasers (residential home buyers), being forced to make a business decision on whether to continue to make payments on a decpreciating asset or take the risk of loss, making their own calculation of which is worse.

Let me be clear - THE ONLY REASON THAT the "moral hazard" argument has even been brought into this discussion is because once "unsophisticated asset purchasers" fail to act like such, and begin to act more as business asset holders, the Banks risk models fail to work. That also leads to international lenders - read China- second guessing the bets that they made on the "all-american residential home purchaser".

You see, the more you act as an investor (because in all honesty, that is what it is - especially more so now, that there are almost no pension plans except majority self-funded plans and houses are often the retirement nest egg), the more likely you will make rational economic decisions, which will include walking away from a rapidly depreciating asset. - rather than the irrational, "its my home ...moral hazard blather."

 

[punkin]

Ahhh, the moral hazard argument rears its head in the "walk away from your mortgage debate".

Like any other purchase, your house is an asset. Just like banks own commercial property, teams own contracts on sports figures, or corporations own planes, heavy equipment ect, there must be a cost-benefit analysis to the assumption of and continued service of the debt, in light of the appreciability or depreciation of the asset.

Here, we have unsophisticated asset purchasers (residential home buyers), being forced to make a business decision on whether to continue to make payments on a decpreciating asset or take the risk of loss, making their own calculation of which is worse.

Let me be clear - THE ONLY REASON THAT the "moral hazard" argument has even been brought into this discussion is because once "unsophisticated asset purchasers" fail to act like such, and begin to act more as business asset holders, the Banks risk models fail to work. That also leads to international lenders - read China- second guessing the bets that they made on the "all-american residential home purchaser".

You see, the more you act as an investor (because in all honesty, that is what it is - especially more so now, that there are almost no pension plans except majority self-funded plans and houses are often the retirement nest egg), the more likely you will make rational economic decisions, which will include walking away from a rapidly depreciating asset. - rather than the irrational, "its my home ...moral hazard blather."

Actually bank risk models are based on prior purchaser behavior. When the behavior changes so will the models.

Overall I have to agree with you on almost everything you said, particularly that the moral hazard argument is complete blather!

 

[NHdisneylover]

If it was wrong then it would be ILLEGAL!! It isn't wrong, it isn't illegal.

Do you honestly believe that everything that is wrong is illeagal???

Adultry is wrong in my book, but it's not illegal.

Constantly telling a child of one gender that you wish s/he were the other--totally wrong but not illegal.

Swearing at kids (or anyone) is wrong but legal.

Many people would argue that abortion is wrong but it's legal.

Many people would argue that the death penalty is wrong but it's legal.

Corporal punishment is another legal thing that many people consider wrong.

I could go on and on. I just don't think it is a good idea to use what is or is not legal as your moral guide. Goodness, by that assesment, over our country's history, things like slavery, women having severly limitedc rights, jim crow laws, etc. were all "moral."

I think it is fine if you want to argue that walking away from a mortgage or declaring bankrupcy is a good decision to make, but I personally think the line of reasoning expressed in the statement I quoted is faulty and I just couldn't let it slide. Sorry.

 

[MrsPete]

Lumping all young families like you did is ridiculous. I was always taught to never buy what you didn't have the money for. And that is what we teach our young children, even at their young ages, we have already started to teach them the value of money and that nothing comes for free. Everything has its price. I'm not going to make excuses for people who buy outside of their means. You have to know what you can afford, plain and simple. I see people where we live who work where DH and I work, their house is twice as big, they have 2 brand new cars, they wear all the latest fashions. Now how can that be? If we can't afford it, how can they? Maybe they have a secret stash, parents who are wealthy or just live beyond their means, who knows?

But I do know what you mean about this sickening PC world. It has gotten out of control. Drives me nuts that all kids get a trophy for playing, and the coach sweats it out that all the kids get equal playing time or mommy and daddy will complain , or that a teacher can't give the grade he or she wants because Johnny or Susie's parents will go to the principal.

And I never stated I was a SAHM and could get a full-time job tomorrow. I said if I wanted I could get a full-time job. And yes I can. As I was taught about money at a young age, I was always taught to have a career I could fall back on. I attended college with alot of 30 and 40 year old who HAD to go back to school and support their families. I wanted security, and so far I do.

Read again. My first paragraph is about changes in society that led up to the housing crisis. That paragraph didn't mention ages.

Paragraph 2 is about how young people have been raised differently today, and that has led some of them to be in even worse trouble with housing than previous generations. We're all products of the generations in which we're raised, and you admit that today's just-out-of-college generation does have more of the "PC, everyone wins" mindset. All my younger co-workers admit that they have this mindset -- but I never said that means they're all crappy with money.

Yes, after I read on, I realized that you didn't mean you could go from non-employment to employment in one day; however, you did imply earlier that would be possible. I addressed that in the next post.