Slaves to Credit -- Giving Up Your Life One Loan at a Time.

Do you people actually read the thread before replying?
Blowing your horn about how its our own damn fault, how we were selfish people who had to have the latest big screen, how we should be more responsible.
Well if you had bothered to actually read the thread you would see that the majority of us did not use credit for the latest gadget, we used it for food, electricity, survival. Like I posted on pg 3, my ex husband kicked me and our 1 yr old out of the house, I had no money and no support from anyone, I used my credit to FEED MY CHILD. If you honestly can say I was not responsible and I should pay for my gluttony, then I really dont give a rats tushy what you think at that point.
8 years later, my 2nd husband and I purchased a $130,000 home 4 years ago at an interest rate of 5%, we have 1 2001 minivan that is financed and a 1998 Tahoe paid for. We shop the clearance aisles, clip coupons and hit the goodwill once a week. In other words we do not live extravagant flashy lives nor do we want to, I have never cared about all that crap. I do however care immensely that my child is fed, sheltered and healthy, that is a #1 priority for me and if that means my credit score lowers my value as a human being, so be it.


Until you have walked in my shoes you cannot judge me.

The thing is that the majority of people in the US are living their lives on loan. SUVs with crazy rims, houses, student loans, clothes, jewelry, cell phones, on and on and on. And this is NORMAL. It's normal, but it's also wrong. It's materialism fused with consumerism, and it's dysfunctional. And nearly everybody is stressed out over the specter of having to come up with the necessary funds at the end of the month. It really is nuts when you are hanging out with people and they are talking about the stuff that they just bought. Talking about it like their the owners. "Oh, we just closed on our new house today." Right away you know they are in debt for the next 45 years or so. 45 years! But they have the mind set that they are homeowners. But what happens when they are 30-60 days past due, they come to the harsh realization that they do no own their home. That at any time it can be taken away from them. And slowly they go crazy from the realization that nearly everything around them has a balance due on it. The sad part about it is that those same people will look down on somebody who lives within their means -- someone who goes around looking like they do not own much. It's a very peculiar madness for someone who doesn't own anything to look down upon someone who only owns a few things. I don't understand it but I"ve witnessed it nearly everyday as an adult. Folks talking bad about someone who refuses to buy a cell phone because they do not want to sign a contract, or refuses a pay as you go phone because the cost to operate it is several times more expensive than getting a phone with a contract. Americans have problems -- "I want. I want. I want." Never mind paying for what one can afford.

Can't afford to buy a $12,000 car? Then don't buy it. Don't be swindled into the "Can you afford to pay $250 a month?" deal. If one can pay $250 a month then one can save $250 a month and buy a car in three years time. Or buy a used one. And buying a car is the worst deal because it depreciates 10% the moment it leaves the dealer's lot. So over time, the amount that one is paying for the car becomes greater than the car's value. That's the scam of scams, auto loans. But people want to sign up for that dream.

Remember the days of The Waltons and Little House on the Prairie? Kinda funny, I know, but there was a time when generations of families grew up in one house. They lived within their means, looked out for one another, and handed down the knowledge gained through living life under any circumstances. Fast forward to today. Communication between family members is erratic at best. Lots of secrets and behavior under the pretense that "It's all good." No one passing any information on because, who needs it? They are just going to run right out and get a car loan anyway. And who wants to live in their parents home at 40? For crying out loud. Now kids just want to get out of their parent's home as soon as they can so that they can go and live an MTV lifestyle. Just more suckers signing up for the dream.

The awful truth is that for all the debt that Americans carry there isn't enough money in circulation to completely pay it off. Just more debt creating more debt through refinancing schemes and home equity loans. Awful stuff. But they bought the dream. That American dream that's pushed and sold to the world at large. Yup, they bought the dream alright and the lenders are laughing all day at the bank. A sucker born every minute, and a hustler born every six months to take advantage of them all. Yeah, "It's all good."

Care to post a source for that? As someone who drives some 250+ miles a day around Dallas, and who keeps up with his gas mileage almost every day, I can tell you from experience that the extra drag of running your AC compressor does definitely use more gas than running with the windows down. That's why your engine automatically increases the idle speed when your compressor comes on, to make up for the increased drag.



I never addressed your mother, nor did I call her anything. You just can't help but falsely accuse folks huh? This will be the last bit of time I waste on you.

Any of you ever heard of Dave Ramsey? I agree with about 80% of what he teaches, and did before I ever heard of him. When I listen to him on the radio, I wonder why he hasn’t been destroyed yet.

www.daveramsey.com...

life is a game; a joke? remove the stimulus and we exist for what?? we exist for the purpose of amusement for some higher power??
what future??

just my random thoughts

Hey all,

I just wanted to take a sec and thank all of you for your contributions to this thread.

All replies, with the exception of the trolls, are very very much appreciated.


I am having a huge lag issue with my wi-fi and I'm sorry if I can't respond to all of your posts right now. I promise, I will try to respond to those addressed to me when my lag issue is over.


Thanks again,
Jasn

Revealing All


Everybody can claim mitigating circumstances, and in some cases these circumstances are truly mitigating. The thing is, we cannot tell until we know more about you. So we ask odd questions -- exactly the kind of questions lenders ask when you go to them for credit. How come you had nobody to turn to when your husband kicked you out? No family, no friends? How did that come about? If you'd recently moved to a new area, why couldn't you move back home? Wasn't there some kind of child support you could claim? Some institutional avenue that you could have followed to obtain funds?

Dear lady, please understand: I am not interested in the answers to these questions and I am not asking you to provide them. I merely point out that, if you post personal experiences of this kind on a public board, you automatically raise such questions in people's minds. Notice that they are exactly the kind of questions lenders will ask you, and are asked for roughly the same reasons. A lender invests money in you; your fellow ATSers invest belief and trust. We want to know if our investment is worthwhile. So these are, in my view, legitimate questions.

And replying them just involves posting more personal information. Now you've told us about your cars (two of them! -- only in America could a family with two cars consider itself modestly off) and your supermarket habits. How much more about your personal life will we know before you have justified yourself to your own satisfaction? Is it worth it?

The same goes -- in spades -- for Simius Dei. His credibility unravelled as he told his story and more facts about his life became known. There are now more people in the world who think him foolish, or irresponsible, or even culpably negligent, than there were before. Was that worth it, just to expose a 'conspiracy of credit' even if one exists?

Poor fellow. What price his credit now? Would it improve if a transcript of this thread were placed before a rating agency? Or would it deteriorate further?

Think about that before you reveal any more about yourself to the world.


Oh, but we will, we will. And we have every right.

Well... I had you a nice long response and was on the last sentence when that DAM..D capitol one ad at the bottom of the page jumped up and filled the entire page and WIPED MY POST OUT. It must have known what this thread is about. It's late I'll try again tomorrow night.

reply to post by MBF

---

Indeed. Hahaha.

It happens, my friend. That's why a good number of us have taken to writing long posts out in wordpad (or similar prog) and then copy/pasting them.


Jasn

The question is:
Is it a luxury to own a home?

My belief is that every family in wealthy countries (US, Europe etc) should have a realistic shot at owning a home. That, to me, is the most basic of rights. We work our lives away at jobs we don't care about; the least we deserve is a home. It doesn't have to be a mansion, and may very well be just an apartment, but a home nonetheless. BMWs, Mercedes, Hummers - that's all extravagance. Widescreen TVs, new-fitted kitchens, and the latest cell-phones - again, these are luxury items. But a home? Nah.

My point is that it's not all black and white. You can be the most discerning, organised spender/saver in the world, you can turn your nose up at material goods, mass consumerism and credit cards all you like, but for 95% of us, unless you have very wealthy family, or a lot of inheritance money, or want to live in your parents basement all your life, owning a home CAN ONLY HAPPEN THROUGH BORROWING!

Thus it becomes clear why the government aren't too worried about combatting rising house prices. They're probably lobbied by the banks not to do so, so that there will always be at least one thing people have no choice but to be in debt over.

reply to post by SimiusDei

---

I read it.

FYI- someone with bad credit.. who has agreed to repay a LOAN, yet failed to keep their end of the contract.....

would be " less than Honest"

with NO credit.. it's IMPOSSIBLE to be able to tell if the person will repay the loan.. and without knowing their financial status.. you have no Idea if they CAN repay the loan.

I assist people getting loans for a living...... so I know EXACTLY what Im talking abvout.

since 16 years old?

seems you dont understand credit.
In the US.. it's ILLEGAL to enter into a contract if you are under 18.
Illegal for BOTH parties.
No bank, or finance company will loan a 16 year old a dime because they cannot recoup the funds if they default.

so talk all you want..I KNOW you couldnt have had a legitimate loan at 16, nor anything that would affect your credit in a positive way.


Sounds like you just poorly managed your income.

before starting a family or getting any dependents.. please learn a bit about life and personal finance.

If you are living paycheck to paycheck, or you borrowed money to purchase an Item that you cant fully pay for on yer own, you are living beyond your means.

Credit isnt a way to buy stuff you vant normally afford to pay cash for..
it's a way to buy something and use the banks money so you can use YOUR funds to re invest at a higher rate.

dont blame the system or the banks if you dont understand how it works.

stay in school .. a mind is a terrible thing to waste.










[edit on 23-10-2007 by Ninja-san]

reply to post by Ninja-san

---

If you read it ninja-san, why didn't you get that I said I had a checking account at 16 (yes, they do that) and was receiving credit card offers 6 months before my 18th birthday and had been "building my credit since I turned 18".


It's a darn shame that this thread gets sidetracked because people either have problems actually reading OR comprehending.


Jasn

Impossible for you to have actually recieved a CC at 16.. did you miss the part about how I do this for a living?

a checking accnt isnt credit.

neither is one with Mom's name on it.

Im not calling you a liar, but Im fully aware of the laws and regulations that govern banks and financial institutions within US borders.


banks dont give loans to minors.. they cant sue you if you default.

It's illegal, and it just wont happen... no matter how badly you wish to believe you could have actually GOTTEN that Visa application approved


the biggest killer of credit is debt to income ration..
peole that borrow above their ability to repay.

bottom line.. if you borrow money, and dont pay it back.. it's on YOU.

Using credit to buy things you canbt afford will get ya every time.
unless you had a contract at your job.. you could be subject to anything from a layoff, to just being let go.

these are things you have to take into considerastion when applying for a loan.

If you arent SURE you can repay the loan in FULL.. dont borrow the funds.

again..
Loans arent for buying things you cant afford.
it's alternative purchasing power so you can use you OWN money to re invest, and make more money.

If you dont have the funds to buy something flat out..
getting a loan to buy it is living beyond your income and means.

again.. seems you dont really understand personal finance and credit

which is actually NOT your fault.. our educational system doesnt teach kids this stuff early enough IMHO.






maybe it's YOU that should read the posts more carefully.

Use Firefox to browse ATS.
www.mozilla.com...
unless you already do, in which case, ignore what i just said.

Dont Ignore This

I hope I'm not one of those you've chosen to ignore, Simius Dei, because I have something very important to tell you.


What I have to tell you is something I heard from a banker, a credit expert in fact, who worked for an international development bank. He was addressing a workshop on -- yes! -- credit mobilization for bankers and finance ministry bureaucrats. I am neither, but I was there.

This is what he said, in the broad accents of his native Bavaria:

'A loan is a funny thing. Before you have it in your hands, it is credit. After that, it is debt.'

A $10,000 loan will not reduce your money troubles. It will compound them.

Even if, despite your poor credit rating, you somehow managed to obtain one at a lower interest rate than your current liabilities, it would be so hedged about with conditions and constraints it would, in effect, further cripple you.

This is only to be expected. Even if we leave your actual rating aside, look at you: you're young, you have a dependent family, no steady income and you have actually stated in this thread that you have a history of lending your own money to borrowers whose ability to repay is questionable.

The degree of 'moral hazard' you represent (to use a banker's term) is extremely high. And this has nothing to do with your credit rating per se. Can you reasonably expect anyone to lend to you without tying you down hand and foot to make sure you repay? It's their money, after all.

I am 26 and thankfully have not truly been thrown to the wolves financially.

I do have a 30,000 bank loan from schooling unrelated to fields that have any demand. This was at a time right out of high school where I definitely did not have the maturity to think into the future regarding the implications.

This is a ruthless world, so maybe not everyone needs large families, new homes and brand new cars unless they sure as hell are financially secure enough to prepare for a downfall.

reply to post by Cythraul

---

Well I agree with you. Folks should have a shot at owning a home. And I think in many ways it's realistic to save for a home. The problem is when folks decide to start a family. It seems like there isn't any planning involved. Often it appears that folks decide to get married and then right away get a home. Well, my lessons in life have taught me that if one cannot afford it, then one shouldn't buy it.

What generally happens is that folks buy a home that they cannot afford, and once receiving the home they then develop a need to fill the home up with stuff. Kitchen stuff, living room stuff, den stuff, bedroom stuff, garage stuff, lawn stuff, backyard stuff, stuff, stuff, and more stuff. And then they become likely casualties of getting crushed by excessive debt load. We've all heard the story too many times.

The system of selling homes is not based on what people can afford, it's based on what folks dream about owning. Put another way, if more folks bought what they could afford, instead of taking out loans on their dreams, then the prices for homes would be much, much lower. But because folks are scrambling to buy homes, condos, and apartments the prices are through the roof, and then some. They create a huge demand for homes and for loans, and guess who gets paid in full? The sellers of homes, the real estate brokers, the landowners that condominiums are situated upon (they never sell the land only what sits on it), and the banks. Meanwhile, back on the ranch, the Doolittles have a huge 45 year note that they have to pay off. A 45 year note against an uncertain future. And buy today's life expectancy figures it amounts to more than half a lifetime.

The way I see it is that young couples should rent, and have small families if they desire to have kids. It's just an opinion. And they should start saving for a home the minute they decide they want to own one. If they are making $45,000 a year each, then they should save $15,000 per year each and in six years time they could afford to pay for a home outright. Of course, if they would then have close to $200,000 burning a hole in their pocket, I would tell them to make long term investments with half of their money and use the other half towards the purchase of a home. Make a plan to pay off the home in 7-10 years. And if they are upwardly mobile, then paying off the house should become easier. If every couple did that according to their economic standing, housing prices would be a whole lot more reasonable. And more buyers would be free and clear homeowners in a much shorter period of time than 45 years.

Basically, if folks are in line to buy a home then they have a certain amount of confidence that they are going to be able to pay the thing off. If that's the case, what's the rush? Save, save, and save. And teach your kids to do the same thing.








[edit on 23-10-2007 by Areal51]

Area51,

Actually, the price of homes isn't determined by who is and isn't buying them. During the War Against Terror, our home increased in value by about 200 thousand dollars. It was a 100 thousand dollar home. The only reason it increased was not due to demand but rather that the real estate market was being intentionally tinkered with at the top. Before the war, houses in florida sold like hotcakes. Now, there are two houses next door to us that have been for sale for over a year, closer to 2 years. And there are others that haven't sold as well. They are nice florida properties, abutting a golf course with inground swimming pools, and all the amenities, including landscaping. There's an university just a few blocks away. It's prime real estate. No one is buying because the artifical increase in price has essentially locked out most buyers.

cry me a river.

debt does not "sneak up on you"...ok, it can, with unexpected hardships.

the problem is not credit cards. its our affluent lifestyle. people for generations now have not taken care of themselves to a point where they can bear a sudden hardship.

you have to prepare for this and forego luxuries and conveniences that only make you fat and lazy. oh, i speak blasphemy.

you cant convince me that the amount of credit card problems are totally avoidable. people are just spendthrift fools.

[edit on 23-10-2007 by Tynee]

reply to post by undo

---

Actually demand does have an affect on the price of home. More precisely, the demand for home loans and the availability of loans that are available for sale. Which underscores another point. Many homeowners do not look at home loans as items for sale. Mostly that's due to the game that lenders play, telling folks, "Get the money you need!" Folks think they are buying a home when really they are purchasing a loan, and the home is actually held by the bank or banks, i.e., the title of ownership of the home is held by the bank or banks until the loan is repaid. But the banks are nice because they let folks live in the home while they pay it off.

There has been a crash recently in the home loan sector that has much to do with the fiasco surrounding subprime mortgages. Loans that are structured with one or more banks that allows borrowers to repay at a low interest rate during the first few years of the loan and then the interest rate increases dramatically afterward. As many as 2.2 million borrowers face foreclosure due to subprime loans. Home loans are actually funded in large part by investment into funds that rely on the strength of borrows in the housing market.. So when investors restructure their portfolios to exclude investment in the housing market the availability of homes increases despite demand because there are fewer mortgages to sell. But things get really severe when banks suspend operations of their funds which make it impossible for investors to buy in or sell out of the funds. Because of the way that this system is structured the quality of credit ratings has a direct effect on how the housing market will continue to do. If the majority of borrowers are paying their mortgages on time, then more loans will be available for new borrowers to buy. If a large percentage of borrowers are defaulting on their mortgages, then fewer loans will be available.

Speaking of Florida, the American Dream, foreclosures, and manipulation.

Anyway, it should be more clear where I'm coming from when I say it's better to buy what one can afford, and save for as long as it takes to buy a home. What's the point of getting something that one cannot afford only to end up losing it? Loans where originally intended for other businesses. For individual persons who are only worth their acceptable credit rating, well, do the math. Does it make sense for someone who is not worth any sort of tangible and intrinsic value to borrow a quarter of a million dollars or more? At least business that borrow are valued at least as much as they are going to borrow. For young couples, single parents, this often is not the case, as you have said. And so they take out a loan on a contract that extends 45 years while the home they live in is held by the bank as collateral against the loan. Definitely not a position of advantage. At least a business could choose to borrow less against its full value and have a chance of not only paying off the loan, but also in the event of extreme trouble, liquidate some of its assets in order to pay off the loan. The cards are definitely stacked against borrowers of home loans, and I believe that it's best that folks refuse to play that game altogether. That's just me.









[edit on 23-10-2007 by Areal51]