Photographer
Aaron Lewis Photography
Posts: 5217
Catskill, New York, US
E H wrote:
You should have 2 years to cover living expenses,,, and I know people who have done that,,, and the Yfactor hits and ground zero...
Sometimes you don't have control when life bodyslams you to the ground,,, BUT the bank will insure all their loans,,,and will charge you service charges to hold your money in a savings account,,, and charge you to take and use your money,,, give you 1-3% interest for holding and using your money after the service charges to lend it out to make more money at a higher rate...
I have never filed,,, but I can see why people get tired of fighting with the crackhead(banks) that have nothing to lose... Honest business has become suck out every last cent(well the penny is gone here in Canada so now the price has gone up to 5 cents).... I agree, banks are mostly crooked. However, being Canadian, you'll appreciate that I use TD Bank, mostly because they're the least crooked I can find.
Bank of America actually charges you to speak with a teller now. If you go to the windows to perform a transaction that could have been done at an ATM, they charge you something like $2.50 for talking to the teller.
I too see why people get frustrated and throw up their hands but more often than not, bankruptcy can be avoided. To many people do it because it's the easy way out.
Photographer
SensualThemes
Posts: 3043
Swoyersville, Pennsylvania, US
R A V E N D R I V E wrote:
you've said this several times but I never mentioned that. I mentioned real outcomes of bankruptcy
I really don't know where you got that from The title of the thread.
The whole positioning that 'with 200 you can rebuild your credit...so '(why bother working w creditors or letting them garnish)
That gave me a clear idea
And other posts by you and others back it up
Working it out and being garnished is the responsible route when POSSIBLE ...extreme circumstances aside. Those who give you credit deserve to be repaid as agreed
Photographer
E H
Posts: 847
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Just like to add, like some said, it is a choice to file in the end,,, ahhh does it not START with a choice to give that money under what terms the crackhead(bank) sees fit. Soo the crackhead makes a bad deal and it is not their fault but he is the one who started and choosen to start the 'business' under their own crackhead rules,,, K, I got it now, what was I thinkin...
There are no rules when dealing with a crackhead because they have nothing to lose... and there is no respect with crackhead only money and profit...
Photographer
Aaron Lewis Photography
Posts: 5217
Catskill, New York, US
Steve Franco Media wrote:
Working it out and being garnished is the responsible route when POSSIBLE ...extreme circumstances aside. Those who give you credit deserve to be repaid as agreed Thank you. Most of the time people file because it easier than taking ownership of their bad decisions. Which brings us back to my original statement of being irresponsible with finances.
Photographer
R A V E N D R I V E
Posts: 15867
New York, New York, US
Steve Franco Media wrote:
The title of the thread.
The whole positioning that 'with 200 you can rebuild your credit...so '(why bother working w creditors or letting them garnish) but you can get secured credit if you have bad credit, this is the current reality. I'm not advocating some fictional lesser consequences.
my original question was only about the social perception of bankruptcy versus the actual state and federal sanctioned institution of protection
Photographer
SensualThemes
Posts: 3043
Swoyersville, Pennsylvania, US
R A V E N D R I V E wrote:
but you can get secured credit if you have bad credit, this is the current reality. I'm not advocating some fictional lesser consequences.
my original question was only about the social perception of bankruptcy versus the actual state and federal sanctioned institution of protection Perhaps I misunderstood...sorry
But regardless of secured credit...the big b is on your credit for 7+ yrs.
Hopefully you got your answer 'because you're forcing others to lose money, other borrowers and taxpayers to pay more, and not fulfilling your obligations like others do'
Photographer
E H
Posts: 847
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Aaron Lewis Photography wrote:
Thank you. Most of the time people file because it easier than taking ownership of their bad decisions. Which brings us back to my original statement of being irresponsible with finances. So what is the banks owership of their bad decisions of being irresponsible with finances with giving/losing your money in the first place.??? If they didn't make smokes people cant smoke...
Photographer
SensualThemes
Posts: 3043
Swoyersville, Pennsylvania, US
E H wrote:
So what is the banks owership of their bad decisions of being irresponsible with finances with giving/losing your money in the first place.??? If they didn't make smokes people cant smoke... the bank's ownership (and the taxpayer or insurer's) is lost money and reputation
their bad decision often results from good due dilligence and picking qualified candidates...except when the gov't incentivized them with ludicrous schemes to get the "underrepresented" classes (read:people who shouldn't get a loan because they hav crappy history honoring debt or not enough income) into homes with mortgages.
so their screw up was often not forseeable, or was pushed (not forced) by govt
Photographer
Aaron Lewis Photography
Posts: 5217
Catskill, New York, US
E H wrote:
So what is the banks owership of their bad decisions of being irresponsible with finances with giving/losing your money in the first place.??? If they didn't make smokes people cant smoke... What? Are banks giving away your money? So you went to the bank to get money and they told you they didn't have any.
Can you elaborate on your statement here? Banks lent money to people who asked for it and signed a sworn statement that they'd repay the money. They were being generous when times were good.
Photographer
E H
Posts: 847
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Aaron Lewis Photography wrote:
What? Are banks giving away your money? So you went to the bank to get money and they told you they didn't have any.
Can you elaborate on your statement here? Banks lent money to people who asked for it and signed a sworn statement that they'd repay the money. They were being generous when times were good. Banks use everyones money,, that's why 1-3% interest(unless you have I think 10,000,000.oo to call a banking conference), that's why you cant go to the bank and take out large amounts without X days of notice,,, they use money to make more money by investments and loans.
If the banks did not lend that person money, there would be no need for bankruptcy.
In the end filer loses everything,marked for 7+yrs someone said,ect.etc,, fine,,, But the bank made and contracted the deal,, and made bad judgement with no recourse,,, with still free use of everyone elses money to do it again.
The bank should be named and marked for 7+yrs(should be more because they are the money pros) for the same bankruptcy because they did not do their research and made a bad risk...
If two men/women go in and rob a bank but only one carries the money out, does the driver of the car go to jail for robbing that bank to even thou all he did was sit in the car and waited at a different bank??? See where I am going,,,
Photographer
Farenell Photography
Posts: 18832
Albany, New York, US
Alec Dealty wrote:
Uhm, no. It is your duty as a borrower to not over leverage yourself and to have a contingency plan in the event the world does not turn out to be as rosy as you might have fantasized when you borrowed money from someone. Most people I know don't go around carrying a crystal ball.
They can't adequately predict when they'll get sick, how severe it will be, nor how long that sickness will last.
Same goes for being jobless. When a person has been working at a job for 10+ years, its reasonable to assume that they'll still be w/ that employer. Especially when they're turning a profit & giving their CEOs hefty bonuses.
Its nice to plan for the future but economically speaking, we Americans in general are not very good at it. We've been conditioned that if we can afford it, upgrade your car/lifestyle/house at the earliest opportunity. Withdraw from your 401k plan for that down payment because its not like the banks are giving out the money they were supposed to in terms of the near-blankcheck terms as per TARP.
Photographer
E H
Posts: 847
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Farenell Photography wrote:
Most people I know don't go around carrying a crystal ball.
They can't adequately predict when they'll get sick, how severe it will be, nor how long that sickness will last.
Same goes for being jobless. When a person has been working at a job for 10+ years, its reasonable to assume that they'll still be w/ that employer. Especially when they're turning a profit & giving their CEOs hefty bonuses.
Its nice to plan for the future but economically speaking, we Americans in general are not very good at it. We've been conditioned that if we can afford it, upgrade your car/lifestyle/house at the earliest opportunity. Withdraw from your 401k plan for that down payment because its not like the banks are giving out the money they were supposed to in terms of the near-blankcheck terms as per TARP. The banks are running the shell game,making the rules, charging to make a bet, the bet, terms of the bet,taking everyones money,,, crackhead business.
Banks are the reason why it is as bad as it is,, they drive prices up, if you have to go for the loan for the house/car or whatever think who is ever is selling doesn't up the price because of that,,,
|
