Stop payment! A homeowners’ revolt against the banks
By Barry Ritholtz - December 28th, 2011, 9:58AM
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
Comments
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.
5 Responses to “Stop payment! A homeowners’ revolt against the banks”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
December 28th, 2011 at 9:59 am
[...] ostensibly about the ongoing battle between Homeowners and Bankers (PDF is online at Scribd, Think Tank, but not for [...]
December 28th, 2011 at 10:24 am
THEY ARE NOT HOMEOWNERS THEY ARE DEBT HOLDERS. IF THEY OWNED THEIR HOMES THEY WOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY ANYONE ANYTHING.
December 28th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Bankers, NYPD thugs – hell of a world we leave for the young.
Easiest fix?
Live in a homestead state…with those near 200 yr laws (which could never be passed today) – and opt out of getting bankers involved at all (pay cash – only way to be sure).
Then stay away from *any* area occupied by militarized police. You can’t win, and sooner or later – you’ll lose.
Young people should let old people perish in their own financialized vomit. Life is finite – don’t waste yours here.
December 28th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
“IF THEY OWNED THEIR HOMES THEY WOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY ANYONE ANYTHING.”
They would still have to rent their homes through taxes.
December 29th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
“THEY ARE NOT HOMEOWNERS THEY ARE DEBT HOLDERS. IF THEY OWNED THEIR HOMES THEY WOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY ANYONE ANYTHING.”
For this occasion, we shall overlook the rude behavior that is the intemperate use of all caps. (Sigh!)
As for the comment itself, pray tell how the distinction between homeowners and debt holders changes the the gist of the article, hmmm?
Believe it or not, but in a country where 1) the rule of law is supposed to be the norm and 2) striving for fairness in making and applying said law is seen as desirable, debt holders do have rights too. The humanity and dignity isn’t erased by the fact they owe money.
I know, I know! The last concept is kinda radical in a banker/rentier/grifter-dominated culture, but it has some intrinsic and historical validity.