|
Find FL real estate agents and Daytona Beach real estate on ActiveRain.
Disclaimer: ActiveRain Corp. does not necessarily endorse the real estate agents, loan officers and brokers listed on this site. These real estate profiles, blogs and blog entries are provided here as a courtesy to our visitors to help them make an informed decision when buying or selling a house. ActiveRain Corp. takes no responsibility for the content in these profiles, that are written by the members of this community.
© 2013 ActiveRain Corp. All Rights Reserved
49 Comments on Painfully Adjusting to the World
Mike - it is partially because I did not use any definition of morals, and use it very generally. I think you are talking about your core values.
I looked up the definition in the dictionary and here's what they offer: Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character.
If you accept it, then us changing our view of walking away, is a definite change from 2-3 years ago. At least for me.
Thank you for your always very thoughtful and sincere comments
Kris - I do not blame you. And I think this is far from over.
Lenn - I think financial and moral are together. your comment made me think and I wrote a blog, inspired by your comment Show Me The Soul...
Thank you
Gynell - "varying stances on our current challenging times" if they involve "judgment of goodness or badness" (and everything does), are moral issue as well as financial.
Doing something (like deciding to walk away) is a financial, but judging it (valuing it) is moral. We do not do one without the other.
I think that you would agree with me on that. Financial is an action. Morals are the compass and sense of direction. Troubled times are when it is not in accord, like now
Bryant - that idea came in the process of reading terrific comments to your blog. When I just read your post, I could not answer.
It was coming to me as I was reading
Thank you
Joe - I think you are right on the money here. Circumstances may be not our choice, our morals are always our choice.
Anna - But it still is. It still involves judgment. I am not saying it should keep people in the hole, absolutely not.
Carla - I know how much are we regulated on a State level, and I am sure the Banks are regulated not any less. And often time the Lenders are not banks, but groups of investors that happened to buy securities backed by mortgages.
They are losing, and we can't demand that they feel happy about it. And as far as I understand, these investors do not get bailout money.
So when you are coming to a guy, who is standing to lose $100K, and if he thhinks that he is being screwed, wouldn't you agree?
Lane - it is simply a matter of definition. Core values and morals maybe not the same thing, but I am not a scholar
Julie - I find it an incredibly thoughtful comment. There is no moral or financial absolute. What we do is both the situation and what we are.
This is not a black-and-white world, and our morals are not the set of canonized commandments. And nobody is going to make choices for us, and we will have to live with the choices we make.
Thanks, terrific comment
Charles - If not Bush, then who? And yeah, he was our shame. Two terms and not a single intern, simply pathetic.
And now the country is paying the price... just a different cashier, whose math is plain scary (LOL)
What an incredibly compassionate and well thought out post. Whether we saw it coming or not should in no way affect the compassion due to those in need today.
I definately think there has been a shift with homeownership but changing morals, really?
Hi Jon! Well, you struck a chord with many here and I have to say that it's been interesting sitting back and reading the comments. Like Fernando, I never would have expected this to be a topic of conversation--EVER--before! Not sure that it's a moral issue but, it still does not seem 'right' to me. I just can't put my finger on what it is but, walking away from a contractural agreement and not fulfilling it just seems 'wrong' to me.
I've never been in those shoes so, I can't say what, exactly, I would do in a situation as Bryant described in his post. That's probably why I can't wrap my head around this yet!
Congrats on that little gold star! WELL deserved!
The issue of morality will always get a big response. Because what you see as moral might be seen as immoral to another. Any way that you look at it, you make a great point that we must be willing to change our viess with the times.
I've enjoyed these discussions, since I've had to make similar decisions. Another great blog!
William James Walton, Sr. - You are right, but it engages us not only on a personal level, but also on society level. Will it destroy the credit as we knew it? How we will be looking at our obligations after we saw that you can change the terms of the agreements when they became unfavorable?
There are a lot of issue, and in any crisis we create new realities, and we need to build our community attitude towards the changed reality.
I liked your term "situational ethics". I think we see it a lot today, when so many people are going with the flow, because there is a flow. Even if they can keep paying. But if you changed the rules, and it is not the contract that governs, how can you tell them that they can't do that? The contract specifies what they can and can't do, but if you allow some to break the contract, you invited everyone to break the contract.
You can't change the rules and then make new rules for some of the people, and expect it to work.
yo either allow people to fail and go through the provided venues, that are specified in the contracts. But if you decide to allow the contracts to be negated, then we have what we have.
William James Walton, Sr. - This is not our choice, the shift is the result of instability. I think this change is, if I can use this word- systemic. It is not just a cycle, where down if followed by the up. I think there are deeper changes (shifts) that are happening today.
It is not the collapse of the market that is stunning, it is the effect of a collapse of the market i one place, and how powerful the ripple effect is. Before we used to talk about crisis and say that they are global, because famine in one part of the world was somehow felt in other parts of the world.
So, we would not buy onions from that part of the world and buy it from another part of the world, but for more money. That was our understanding of the global part of it. Now we created the Tsunami of biblical proportions, and when we just sneeze and cough, other countries are running a full blown fever with deadly results.
This world became smaller again. And more fragile
Jeani - Surprisingly, not that many people say that. i had very difficult time trying to figure it out. I knew that you can't keep up with the prices going up and up, and up, but at the same time, I did not see anything that would be a powerful (to be heard) voice of reason.
NAR kept bragging how the market was great and was going to get even better with a huge influx of baby boomers starting from 2008, and so on and so forth
By the way, you doing what you were doing was a moral decision, not economical...I would even say it was counter-economical
Christianne - Bryant's is a great post and it made me think, and like Bryant did not simply foloowed Richard Zaretsky's post, the same way I am looking at it at a little different angle.