just some dumb guy writes:
touche'
just some dumb guy | 03.30.08 - 9:45 am | #

bacon dreamz writes:
good morning Tanta! Sorry, this is off topic, but i didn't know you were also working as a medical transcriptionist...

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/ 0...anscriptio.html
bacon dreamz | 03.30.08 - 9:49 am | #

JimmytheK writes:
Wow, or Yikes... quite a post. Tanta, they need to modify the 50's hit for you, to... "You write too much, you worry me to death, you write too much you even worry my pet..."
JimmytheK | 03.30.08 - 9:52 am | #

lawyerliz writes:
These people are looking for and getting revenge. It's not new, as you pointed out.

There was an angry seller (in the 80s) I knew of who ripped all the copper wiring out at the last minute. Buyer didn't notice, damage not visible, until he was gone.

A foreclosee in the mid 80s who had ripped out the entire inside of the house, not just punched in some drywall. I saw pictures. It was amazing.

A guy in the 90s who also ripped out the entire inside of the house. Not mad at the lender, mad at the world; he died of AIDS. Also, he was a decorator, so there is some thought he intended to fix it up again.
in the early 2000s, to get down to the silly, a client asked me if she could replace her fancy Mexican hand-painted drawer knobs in her bathroom, and another who wanted to take down hunter fans & put up cheap ones. I said you're on your own. She did take the knobs and nobody said anything. The original fans were left at my urging.

I imagine ripping things up is very satisfying to a certain type of person.

Also, the banks are letting more houses rot, than are being destroyed by angry borrowers. I personally know of several, and I'm sure Cobra Driver could tell us of many.
lawyerliz | 03.30.08 - 9:54 am | #

Mark to Market writes:
The problem is that these whiners (both reckless borrowers and foolish lenders) are DEMANDING that society as a whole bail them out. In fact, that process is underway...I am getting hit as a taxpayer and in my dollar savings. So I have an emotional, unsympathetic reaction-- NO BAILOUT for the jerks on Wall Street and their deadbeat borrower partners in crime.
Mark to Market | 03.30.08 - 9:54 am | #

Jas Jain writes:
--
"However, I for one did argue, quite early in this mess, that 1) housing policy is political in this country and 2) financial crises are even more so and that therefore 3) whether or not it "should" be that way is immaterial; it is so. The housing bust and the debt bubble pop have been and are going to remain political footballs for the foreseeable future."

Dear Tanta,

“This mess” was turned into a criminal (I mean unethical to the limit) activity fully supported, or encouraged, by the Fed and the USG for the benefit of business groups (Hopebuilders, Bankrupters, Fraudsters, etc) and at the full expense of the American People, in general.

That must inform you as to what kind of econo-political system we do have (not the fantasy version you were taught as a child). It is as corrupt as any in the world today. In a bad system bad practices are the norm.

Jas
Jas Jain | 03.30.08 - 9:54 am | #

Viewing with alarm writes:
People hate it when they find out they have been had. The ponzi economy sucked a lot of lower income people in and made them think they too could join the world of the rich and famous. There is a bitterness building that will have dark implications in the future. Tanta scores again!
Viewing with alarm | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 9:56 am | #

Tanta writes:
Sorry, this is off topic, but i didn't know you were also working as a medical transcriptionist...

Wow. I don't actually have any holes in my keys yet. Maybe I don't try hard enough.

Actually I have this terrible habit of curling my right hand into a fist and literally banging on the "enter" key (the one on the far right, on the number pad). It comes from those years of using a ten-key desktop calculator and, well, having an increasing sense of doom and/or rage growing in you as you see the running total rising or falling. By the time you get to "grand total" and that "enter" key, it's Hostility time.

So my "enter" key is in bad shape, but I haven't melted it yet. Good heavens.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 9:58 am | #

sunsetbeachguy writes:
I feel an Unskilled and Unaware post coming on.

I still think those couple of posts are some of the best on CR.

I have the paper on the desktops of my computers to open it up and remind myself.
sunsetbeachguy | 03.30.08 - 9:58 am | #

Tanta writes:
Wow!

With "Mark to Market" and "Jas Jain" coming in at less than 20 minutes on a post that tries to get the mean-spirited and the terminally humorless to stop for a minute and think about it, I believe we have just set some kind of internet record.

Does anyone know how you get in touch with the Guiness Book of Blog Records?
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 10:02 am | #

sunsetbeachguy writes:
I'll reiterate.

Tanta, just go ahead and recycle the unskilled and unaware pieces.
sunsetbeachguy | 03.30.08 - 10:08 am | #

Sunday Morning writes:
I suppose I could write you a loan that involved my promising to hand over an asset that I already owned to myself--that'll teach me!--in the event that you fail to pay me back as agreed.

When I fail to meet my annual savings goal, I have to fine myself! Works every time.


You might consider it a kind of performance art of the gallows-humor subgenre.

Classic.
Sunday Morning | 03.30.08 - 10:08 am | #

bacon dreamz writes:
weilding the English language like that

"i" before "e" except after "w".
bacon dreamz | 03.30.08 - 10:10 am | #

Jas Jain writes:
--
The Motive Behind the Mess

Without “this mess” creating big economic boom in 2003, led by “emergency Fed Funds Rate policy," Greenspan would not have been reappointed in June 2004, Bush would not have been re-elected in late 2004, and Bernanke would not be the Fed Chairman today.

So, you can see where the impetus for “this mess” came from. It is very important to understand the root causes. I call this era in American history as the Rule of the Evildoers

Jas
Jas Jain | 03.30.08 - 10:10 am | #

Dickeylee writes:
Anybody sold any "scrap" metal lately? Aluminum cans are bringing $.50/lb, but thats chicken scratch compared to aluminum wire and copper of any type! Copper plumbing pipe fetches close to $1.80/lb, and pipe is dense and heavy. Maybe those people "trashing" the 'ol homestead are just taking their equity with them.
Dickeylee | 03.30.08 - 10:11 am | #

Tanta writes:
I feel an Unskilled and Unaware post coming on.

Now, now. It will do no good to repost that one. If they didn't get it then, they'll fail to get it again. And that way lies the only laugh I'm likely to get today.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 10:11 am | #

Jas Jain writes:
--
Showing your true colors, Tanta?

Jas
Jas Jain | 03.30.08 - 10:12 am | #

Sunday Morning writes:
lawyerliz: the banks are letting more houses rot, than are being destroyed by angry borrowers.

In subzero cold, the banks forget that someone needs to keep the place warm, lest the pipes freeze. Etc.

Folks have been known to leave the water, um, running, too. An ice palace in no time!
Sunday Morning | 03.30.08 - 10:13 am | #

blueridge writes:
Hear on a podcast the other day that up to 40% of the growth in home ownership since 2000 was from immigration. Imagine that you've managed to get over here, bought your piece of the American dream and then had it "snatched away from you". Especially after everybody and his brother (and TV and radio) has been telling you how smart you were to sign on that dotted line....

Reckon I'd feel like I'd been shafted, be pretty bitter and want to do some damage, too.
blueridge | 03.30.08 - 10:14 am | #

S N writes:
Well, it is leagally crime to destroy and/or damage the property intentionally during BK.

Though the banks dont persue this people now, there comes time when banks will go after this peple for the damage. This damage cant be wiped out by BK.

In otherwords, very soon I do expect some startup company to come forward and video tape the entire house/condo before the owner vacates.

Then they will ask the banks to share the profit with them from the money they will be persuing from the vandelizers legally.

For banks, any money from this way is profit and they would let third party to do this.

It is only the matter of how many incidents it happens to reach critical mass.

It is dangerous for the people who have non-recourse loan and vandelize than the people who have recourse loan.

Simple, the non-recourse people has more money which they haven't spent on paying their loans.

Also the people who has recourse-loans will have a lien held on their future income.

Guys, for heven sake dont be stupid to damage the properties when u leave. It is easy to escape during boom than during bust.
S N | 03.30.08 - 10:19 am | #

bacon dreamz writes:
although i do fear that that was an intentional spelling given the sentence it happens to be in, Tanta's nerdiness, and the title of the post.
bacon dreamz | 03.30.08 - 10:21 am | #

Nemo writes:
http://www.quotationspage.com/qu...uote/ 27376.html
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 10:24 am | #

Anonymous writes:
In the bust I saw in the 80's entire subdivisions were trashed and then sold for 17 cents on the dollar there is nothing new here and this is what I would have expected. Human nature never changes.
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 10:24 am | #

Hysterian writes:
Well written, Tanta!

In any society, there are always those who aren't as smart and/or lucky as others. A sane society doesn't try to cheat its most vulnerable members.
Hysterian | 03.30.08 - 10:24 am | #

Rob Dawg writes:
Money may be the grease of the wheels of commerce but humor is lubricant that keeps civilization from seizing.
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 10:25 am | #

JB writes:
The humor I see is irony. The investment and commercial banks made out like bandits from the dot.com boom. They got overconfident in their own schemes and now they reap the rewards. It's the same joke as the man who logically proves that God doesn't exist because of the creation of the Babelfish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babel_fish).
JB | 03.30.08 - 10:26 am | #

Marcus Aurelius writes:
Destruction of another's property is a crime (begging the question of ownership). Fraud by enticement and theft by deception are crimes.

Never assume that incompetence and/or ineptitude and/or stupidity is to blame when a loss of money or value is involved.

There is no honor among snakes.

The only victims here are the innocent bystanders.

That said...a mortgage broker, an investment banker and a settlement attorney walk into a bar...
Marcus Aurelius | 03.30.08 - 10:26 am | #

Anonymous writes:
"A sane society doesn't try to cheat its most vulnerable members."

So what does that tell you?
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 10:27 am | #

Tanta writes:
although i do fear that that was an intentional spelling given the sentence it happens to be in, Tanta's nerdiness, and the title of the post.

No, it wasn't. And the sad part is that I actually did remember to run the spell-checker. I think I just didn't click my mouse hard enough on the correct choice. For someone whose reputation for banging hard on keyboards is well-established, that might be kinda funny. But if so, the joke's on me.

(Relying on a spell-checker, which I usually refuse to do, is how I got an "I" when I needed an "a" in another part of the post. "I" is, of course, spelled correctly.)
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 10:27 am | #

Sunday Morning writes:
A sane society doesn't try to cheat its most vulnerable members.

Oh, Hysterian, that is so pre-Bush era! I have fond memories of that time, too.
Sunday Morning | 03.30.08 - 10:29 am | #

Rob Dawg writes:
Also, the banks are letting more houses rot, than are being destroyed by angry borrowers. I personally know of several, and I'm sure Cobra Driver could tell us of many.
lawyerlizSee how Countrywide treated their million dollar asset until shamed into responsibility: http://exurbannation.blogspot.co...oi- edition.html
and: http://exurbannation.blogspot.co...de- edition.html

Treat the bank's property the way they would treat it themselves is my motto.
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 10:31 am | #

bacon dreamz writes:
i also refuse to use spell-checker. "dreamz" with an "s"? i don't think so, microsoft.
bacon dreamz | 03.30.08 - 10:33 am | #

Tanta writes:
Nemo, I don't know if Bill Strunk ever did catch on to the . . . irony . . . of making "rules" for "good writing" that require all good writing to be of the same kind.

I don't actually care, either. The tyranny of the Strunk-worshippers is way past its sell-by date, and ridicule is the kindest thing we can heap on it.

Once upon a time, in a land far away, there were multiple styles and genres and conventions of discourse. A famous one was called "baroque." (No, really. Look it up.) It went out of fashion as an earnest discursive style, not coincidentally when the precursors of the Strunk-tyrants decided that everyone had to go for lean and mean and stripped-down in order to flatter their own desires to legislate aesthetics as well as morality.

After a while, of course, the baroque resurfaced as a tool wielded--hopefully with the i and the e in the right place--by the subversive-minded who have pretty much had it with pedestrian thinkers and aesthetic amateurs bonking us over the knuckles with a copy of The Elements of Style.

A moral could, in fact, be extracted from the story. Like, don't mess with someone who has read Sir Thomas Browne.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 10:36 am | #

Tanta writes:
Now, S N up there at 10:19 is pretty funny. Borat does economics? Or just some garden-variety nitwit who fails to understand "risk" and "property rights"? It's so deliciously undecidable. Paging Dr. Heisenberg!
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 10:39 am | #

Hysterian writes:
""Jas Jain writes:

Without “this mess” creating big economic boom in 2003, led by “emergency Fed Funds Rate policy," Greenspan would not have been reappointed in June 2004, Bush would not have been re-elected in late 2004, and Bernanke would not be the Fed Chairman today.""

Jas, the 2004 election was 'crookeder' than my dog's hind leg. Just like the 2000 'selection.' The folks in the US aren't as dumb as they seem.
Hysterian | 03.30.08 - 10:39 am | #

Nemo writes:
They begin to grasp that they had only ever been given a short-term lease on the "American Dream," not a piece of the "ownership society" pie.

Um, no. What they were given was an opportunity that they abused by buying something they could not afford, because they hoped it would make them wealthy.

I have no sympathy for these people, and neither should anybody else. This is not about making jokes or making fun of anybody. This is about the political question of whether it is reasonable, sane, or fair to spend so much as a penny of taxpayer money bailing these speculators out. (Yes, buying a house you could never afford makes you a "speculator".)

So sure, let's reward everybody who got greedy at the expense of those who saved responsibly. Oh wait, that sounds insane, so to make it politically feasible you first have to paint the greedy as "victims", and write long screeds decrying how they are being "made fun of" by all the mean self-absorbed taxpayers.

Yes, somehow, we have to get from "greedy person now engaging in petty vandalism" to "victim". This is impossible to do succinctly, so we wind up with twelve paragraphs...
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 10:41 am | #

Sunday Morning writes:
Far OT, but is the haircut that UBS is giving some of their brokerage accounts unprecedented?
Sunday Morning | 03.30.08 - 10:42 am | #

Newbie writes:
Tanta, I LOVE YOU. You "get it" and your brain power shows a clean heart. Please..., Can you be my President? I hope someday more people like you are entrusted to lead the rest of us into a world of collective awareness and a healthy pursuit of equilibrium.

Maybe, I am too much an idealist. But the reality is that we need to change our ways for the better of all.
Newbie | 03.30.08 - 10:42 am | #

Rob Dawg writes:
I pity they, poor of spirit and imagination who cannot think of but one way to spel a word.

Spoken by someone who just spent $15 yesterday at a yard sale for a pristine 1949 2nd ed of Webster's Unabridged. 3210 pages of wordy goodness.
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 10:44 am | #

Tanta writes:
Shorter Nemo: You need to take out all of the parts of the post that aren't validating my point of view. It would make more sense to me that way.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 10:48 am | #

12th Percentile writes:
Is "Trash Out Refinancing" another Tanta original? I don't recall seeing it before. I think i've learned more new words and phrases on this blog than I did studying for the SAT's (still remember "miasma", the rest are long gone)
12th Percentile | 03.30.08 - 10:49 am | #

Topher writes:
Hysterian writes:
Well written, Tanta!

In any society, there are always those who aren't as smart and/or lucky as others. A sane society doesn't try to cheat its most vulnerable members.
Hysterian | 03.30.08 - 10:24 am | #
The problem is there is no 100% sane society.
Topher | 03.30.08 - 10:54 am | #

ronin writes:
Is it just me, or is there some confusion as to when a 'trash out' has occurred?

Is this leaving behind a lot of junk or unwanted stuff, especially when you have a house full of said stuff and have to move, um, quickly?

Was this done by the homeowners or by someone to whom they had rented the house before it was foreclosed?
They use the term 'tenant', after all.

Does this also encompass vandalism by burglers and such who ransack an abandoned house or use it to party, etc?

You still have a trashed house at the end, but causes and effects are still important when trying to evaluate the problem, especially when some are using this to moralize.
ronin | 03.30.08 - 10:58 am | #

burnside writes:
One thing I loved about 70s vintage NPR All Things Considered was the programmers' willingness to devote fifteen or twenty minutes to a topic if it took that long to flesh out the tale or to talk with people who could help debunk some commonly held view in serious need of attention.

Proust trumps Strunk? Yup.
burnside | 03.30.08 - 11:00 am | #

Tanta writes:
Is "Trash Out Refinancing" another Tanta original?

I don't think I made that up. But at a certain point it becomes hard to tell. Is there a kind of crypto-cryptamnesia? Forgetting that you actually made something up by rememebering falsely that you read it somewhere else? If there isn't, can I patent it?

I think the phrase "trash out" gets used a lot. I am willing to take credit for trying to work out the implications of the pun "trash out refinance." Using literally "brute force" to "re-write" the terms of the loan. But I'll defer to anyone who beat me to that.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 11:01 am | #

Yearning to Learn writes:
"trash-out refinances"

darn, 12th percentile beat me to it.

this to me was the money phrase if you will...

made the 12 paragraphs worth it! (wink-n-smile).
Yearning to Learn | 03.30.08 - 11:02 am | #

Fair Economist writes:
Nemo, do you really not get that somebody can be victimizer and victim at that same time? That's it's downright common for victimizers to be or to have been victims?
Fair Economist | 03.30.08 - 11:04 am | #

Nova writes:
Wow. You be a smart girlz.

Methinks this was a big picture post.

So, you have a society which contains significant percentages of people who believe that:

The Rapture is coming. They are entitled. The sq. footage of your house is an indicator of your status and success. I've got a 4,000 sq. foot "winkie!" How about you? Ah, such a little guy. Well, some women love landscapping.

You have an undercurrent of resentment. Especially by white people who because of demographics are feeling endangered. Then, add the "Mad Max" wannabees who sit at home playing with their Glocks.

To keep this short we are on the way to having a large population who feels "It was stabbed in the back." This is not going to lead to flowers in the hair and really good bands.
Nova | 03.30.08 - 11:06 am | #

lawn grass writes:
I feel trashed out by all this mortgage meltdown, financial crisis, subprime, no down payment ARM reset, monoline, hedge fund, MBS, no doc loan, fraudoorall
lawn grass | 03.30.08 - 11:07 am | #

Nemo writes:
Shorter Nemo: You need to take out all of the parts of the post that aren't validating my point of view. It would make more sense to me that way.

Well, at least that was concise.

Now let me see...

Paragraphs 1-4: Long description of what you are not going to discuss.

Paragraphs 5-6: Introduction

Paragraphs 7-11: People took out loans to buy houses "at cost" with no down payment. Now they are mad because everybody who said they were being stupid are turning out to be right.

Paragraphs 12-13: Anyone who says he "have no sympathy" is overestimating the importance of his own feelings.

Paragraphs 14-15: Actually, he is really trying to make fun of the poor victim borrowers, in an attempt to prevent right-wing "free market" economists (the real villains) from looking stupid for advocating all this "Ponzi finance" in the first place.

Paragraphs 16-19: Being the butt of jokes makes the poor victims want to trash the bank's house.

OK, I think I get your point.

And mine is that you are seriously misunderstanding -- or just misrepresenting -- what people like me are thinking when we say "I have no sympathy".

P.S. I hope the vandals see jail time. Now THAT would be funny.
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:09 am | #

Anonymous writes:
"sane"

There's that word again.
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 11:09 am | #

Tanta writes:
Is it just me, or is there some confusion as to when a 'trash out' has occurred?

I'm not in the mood to call it "confusion" today. I'm in the mood to call it willful failure to recognize that we are interpreting this humorless thing called "reality," not simply recording it like a good camera.

Of course these things are often "undecidable." As Fair Economist notes, terms like "victim" and "victimizer" are a bit slippery, too. That real world does have a stubborn way of making hash out of our more simple-minded pronunciamentos about it. (No. Really. Sometimes nice guys finish first. The world can always surprise you if you're an idiot.)

The big problem with The Elements of Style, besides the monumental hubris of thinking there is only one "style," is the equally monumental delusion that everyone is trying to write about something that can be stated in six words or less.

A former professor of mine kept a poster on his wall that said, "Any philosophy that can fit in a nutshell belongs there." Words of wisdom.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 11:10 am | #

Troy writes:
What I also "get" is that here you have a classic example of where the rush to start making a list of people you don't have any "sympathy" for gets you: nowhere, fast

A long list of lack-of-sympathy gets you to Glibertarian Land, of which McCardle is the reigning media queen.

As a left libertarian, right libertarians strike me quite like the bolsheviks struck the mensheviks; irreconcilable factions of radical movements as a rule simply detest each other, often more than members of more polar opposite movements.
Troy | 03.30.08 - 11:11 am | #

Troy writes:
I think the phrase "trash out" gets used a lot. I am willing to take credit for trying to work out the implications of the pun "trash out refinance." Using literally "brute force" to "re-write" the terms of the loan. But I'll defer to anyone who beat me to that.

google comes up < a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22trash-out+refinancing%22&btnG=Search">empty.
Troy | 03.30.08 - 11:15 am | #

Troy writes:
empty
Troy | 03.30.08 - 11:15 am | #

Anonymous writes:
no, the joke's on me, who tried to buy a house in 05 and thought the things were just cwazee and decided to wait it out... looks like the bailout's not for me.
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 11:16 am | #

Anonymous writes:
"the rush to start making a list of people you don't have any "sympathy" for gets you: nowhere, fast"

Tell that to the guy with the AK-47
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 11:16 am | #

Pudentilla writes:
"I have no sympathy for these people, and neither should anybody else."

Really? Not even karmic prophylactic sympathy? Not even like, it's in my own self interest to cut a little slack to someone who misjudged his own margin of error in case I ever misjudge my own? Your reach never exceeded your grasp on anything? What a dour world you must inhabit.

I think we all should have sympathy for "these people." Even the speculators and the flip this property types. Even the young recently unemployed mba's. Didn't anyone ever describe to you what a breadline looks like? Or the spectacle of apple sellers hawking for their literal survival?

A little more sympathy, a little less self righteous holier-than-thou, and we might struggle through this mess and imagine how to avoid a similar one anytime soon.
Pudentilla | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:16 am | #

Nemo writes:
Fair Economist --

Nemo, do you really not get that somebody can be victimizer and victim at that same time? That's it's downright common for victimizers to be or to have been victims?

Sure. But I do not believe foreclosed homeowners are "victims". I believe people are responsible for their own actions. (But then, I believe Bear Stearns should have been allowed to fail. Privatize the profits, privatize the losses...)

I object to any attempt to justify the actions of vandals on the grounds that they are just mad because the mean, heartless "conservatives" are "making fun of them".

Tanta could have started and ended with "Megan McArdle is an idiot". That would have been both shorter and completely uncontroversial. But Tanta went on to explain how she "understands" why someone would want to trash their house because of comments like Megan McArdle's. On that, I call BS.
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:17 am | #

Yearning to Learn writes:
to topic:

I, like many people, fall prey to whether or not the "victim" is a "victim".

it clouds my understanding of what is, and what should be done.

and thus I've tried to separate arguments when I think of this topic, as I've found there are several DIFFERENT aspects to the idea.

1) is the victim a "victim"?
2) what should our response to this be?

as time has gone on I've realized that most of the time there really is no way to discern if the victim is a victim... it's pointless. often it seems to me that the victim is a victim, but also partially culpable nonetheless.

thus, I've found that I can have empathy with those involved (borrowers, tenants, lenders, investors, etc) without absolving them of their culpability in the situation.

but this line of reasoning may be separated from whether or not I have a fiduciary duty to help in their cause- EVEN THOUGH I understand fully that their cause directly affects me.

I believe it is possible to have empathy for those involved but still feel that I have no fiducicary duty to them.

so for the borrowers:
-give them legal address in court
-if they are destitute, give them the most basic of food and shelter (which is why Jesus created welfare and food banks and all that, and why I support those enterprises with my tax dollars and my votes.)

For the lenders/investors, etc
-give them legal address in court
-if they go BK based on all this, allow them the protections that Allah gave corporations in his wisdom.

as for the rest:
I don't agree with all the financial shenanigans being done to "save me" from "systemic risk" (that they ironically caused), so I'll pass on all that.
Yearning to Learn | 03.30.08 - 11:18 am | #

Tanta writes:
P.S. I hope the vandals see jail time. Now THAT would be funny.

Perfect example of how a mere sense of hostility masquerades as a sense of humor.

As someone who never appreciated slapstick in the slightest, I can see where you're coming from. There is certainly a tradition in this culture of finding the infliction of pain on others a big yuk. If you can drag out some hoary watered-down concept of "poetic justice" for something that is neither the one or the other, you can claim to be at least a middle-brow, not just the kind of low-brow who finds the Three Stooges a real scream and wants front-row tickets to the comeuppance of these people who are vandalizing their own property.

Scratch a libertarian and you get someone who really does want the government to interfere in property rights: at the point where your exercise of those rights might cost your corporate betters a repair invoice.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 11:18 am | #

Anonymous writes:
among the best pieces i have read in my life.
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 11:19 am | #

Nemo writes:
Perfect example of how a mere sense of hostility masquerades as a sense of humor.

Oh come on, that last line was a deliberate attempt to yank your chain. Sigh. Too easy.

Would you care to respond to any of my actual, you know, points?
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:21 am | #

Nova writes:
It is going one big scratch and claw show. Go ahead and be "holier than my cat." This is going to continue to get snowball* and many of those who thought they would be untouched will find themselves in the big litter box of life.




* cliche alert
Nova | 03.30.08 - 11:23 am | #

Tom Stone writes:
One of the things I like about Tanta's posts is that she never forgets that we are dealing with Human beings in all their absurdity and glory.This mess affects all of us,and there will be profound social changes due to this misallocation of resources and the anger of the people who have been had.Does anyone here think that there hasn't been literal "blood in he streets" already ?if only caused by someone in despair who got behind the wheel of a car after taking a few drinks? Or the retirees who thought their brokers put them in safe investments only to find out that they had better start taste testing cat food? more poor people crowded together mean more drug resistant TB...I have certainly made my share of disastrous financial decisions (My Marriage,now over)and I don't have any desire to blame the folks who bought into the big lie.I do think it is vital to understand the situation in order to mitigate the damage to our society,and to ensure that similar situations do not arise quickly.It will be interesting,and I intend to enjoy the more absurd and ironic aspects of the show,but it is about real people with real lives,and a LOT of very real pain for everyone.
Tom Stone | 03.30.08 - 11:25 am | #

baron samedi writes:
S N writes:

In otherwords, very soon I do expect some startup company to come forward and video tape the entire house/condo before the owner vacates.

Better yet, another line of insurance to be tacked onto the closing costs.
baron samedi | 03.30.08 - 11:25 am | #

praetorian writes:
"Any philosophy that can fit in a nutshell belongs there." Words of wisdom.

Perhaps, although a few paragraphs and epigrams often contain far more truth than vast philosophical tracts.

The halting problem (about the profoundest thing my little brain can understand) can fit on an index card, for example.

If anything, most academics (and some bloggers *wink*) seem guilty of the opposite sin to me.

Cheers,
prat
praetorian | 03.30.08 - 11:26 am | #

bacon dreamz writes:
Scratch a libertarian and you get someone who really does want the government to interfere in property rights

that, plus you get libertarian cooties. ew!
bacon dreamz | 03.30.08 - 11:26 am | #

Yearning to Learn writes:
Open question to Nemo:

do you have empathy (as opposed to sympathy) for these people (victim or not)?

and open question to Tanta:
is your ire as piqued against those of us who have empathy but not necessarily sympathy for these "victims"?

because I can CERTAINLY empathize with a lot of those deeply involved.

I can understand why the borrowers overextended themselves, why the loan officers approved the deals, why the securitizers passed the garbage through, why the ratings agencies did what they did, why the Fed looked the other way, and so on.

I DON'T necessarily sympathize with any of them. (depends on the exact situation, which is rarely if ever known to me).
Yearning to Learn | 03.30.08 - 11:26 am | #

Nova writes:
Don't forget the kittens!
Nova | 03.30.08 - 11:27 am | #

praetorian writes:
Scratch a libertarian and you get someone who really does want the government to interfere in property rights: at the point where your exercise of those rights might cost your corporate betters a repair invoice.

Humoress, humor thyself.

Cheers,
prat
praetorian | 03.30.08 - 11:28 am | #

Neuf writes:
Let's see....a real estate related joke....
How many lawyers does it take to shingle a roof?
Depends how thin you slice them!
Neuf | 03.30.08 - 11:29 am | #

Rob Dawg writes:
Scratch a libertarian and you get someone who really does want the government to interfere in property rights: at the point where your exercise of those rights might cost your corporate betters a repair invoice.

Tanta, maybe you should try half-decaf. Libs advocate minimum government participation. Hardly the same thing. In fact you make a common mis-generalization of what zoning actually does. There is a voluntary exchange of land use rights. Accepting restrictions on your activities grants in turn a right to quiet enjoyment. It is only the recent decades when planners and municipalities started using planning as a blunt social agenda tool that the idea of zoning as restriction has taken hold.
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:30 am | #

S N writes:
Tanta, doesn’t the mortgage contract contain a clause stating that "borrower shall keep the Property in good repair and shall not commit waste or permit impairment or deterioration of the Property."
S N | 03.30.08 - 11:32 am | #

burnside writes:
oh so very like way off topic

John Cassidy essays to tell us a great deal about E. Stanley O'Neal in the March 31 New Yorker.

Sorry, they don't offer it on line and, no, it is not brief.
burnside | 03.30.08 - 11:32 am | #

Tanta writes:
Would you care to respond to any of my actual, you know, points?

No.

I dealt with the the only one worth comment. I have no intention of trying to deal with anyone who wants to diagram my sentences or outline my posts.

You are trying to get me to resolve the contraction. I am, as I mentioned in the post, trying to drag it out into the daylight and let it squirm for a while. One of us is never going to be happy here, and I think it should be you.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 11:35 am | #

Nemo writes:
Yearning to Learn --

do you have empathy (as opposed to sympathy) for these people (victim or not)?

Yes, I understand how lots of people would be lured by the promise of getting rich for doing approximately nothing. And I understand how they could be mad when it doesn't work out and they lose a lot of money.

In other words, I have empathy in the same sense as I do for gamblers in Vegas. In a drunken stupor, I might even admit to a certain sympathy...

My beef comes when the politicos paint these people as "victims". Because I know what comes next.
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:36 am | #

baron samedi writes:
Anonymous writes:
no, the joke's on me, who tried to buy a house in 05 and thought the things were just cwazee and decided to wait it out... looks like the bailout's not for me.

Me either, except that I bought an affordable house in an affordable neighborhood, so that I wouldn't ever have to go to sleep at night wondering if I could make the next mortgage payment.

It's tough to go in for the group hug
under the circumstances.
baron samedi | 03.30.08 - 11:36 am | #

Yearning to Learn writes:
and lastly:

although I empathize with many of the parties, my brain rejects the attempt to overly-victimize them, for the sole reason that I fear that this victimization profile will be used in order to convince me that I must pony up more $$$ for their "cause".

and I sometimes get angry, because I fear/believe that this is exactly what is happening.

give us tales of woe about these poor borrowers so that we can create a taxpayer funded bailout of some sort.

give us tales of "hoocudanode" and "systemic risk will ruin you too" so that we agree to bail out those involved. Then try to convince us that the bailout went to the aformentioned sympathy-deserving victims, instead of where it really went: to the reckless corporations

and then when people start noticing that it was a bailout, say "well it wasn't really a bailout... you just don't understand these sorts of things."

(example: Bear Stearns. remind me again why $10/share wasn't a bailout? remind me again why their CEO just cashed out $60Million and how that's not a bailout?)

so I empathize of my own free will... but I reserve my sympathies for now...
Yearning to Learn | 03.30.08 - 11:36 am | #

Tanta writes:
Rob Dawg, at least two people on this thread have stated or implied that it should be illegal for people to destroy their own property.

What they mean, I must conclude, is that secured residential mortgage lending should be risk-free to lenders: you should be able to put someone into one of these "de facto lease" loans without having to risk them catching on and taking out the built-ins.

Well, there is no risk-free lunch, not even for lenders.

I should have said "glibertarian" instead of "libertarian." In any case I was aiming at someone whose grasp on this idea of the sanctity of property rights seems a touch weak.

Then again I am not a libertarian myself, at least not as the word is most typically used, so I'm probably capable of making the mistake of thinking y'all look alike. I mean, we're on the subject of making sweeping generalizations about people . . .
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 11:39 am | #

Nemo writes:
I have no intention of trying to deal with anyone who wants to diagram my sentences or outline my posts.

nah nah nah nah I can't hear you nah nah nah

One of us is never going to be happy here, and I think it should be you.

Actually, I am quite happy just having said my peace. I was curious if you had any rebuttal beyond name-calling. You have answered my question; thanks!
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:40 am | #

praetorian writes:
YTL,

Absolutely wonderful distinction to make: we are all greedy little curs, but that need not keep us from criticizing that fact (with humor, natch!)

Tanta is a radical liberal (I do not mean that as an insult, merely a description) and hates high-and-mightiness, which I can empathize and even sympathize with. The problem with that outlook is that the high-and-mighty are often absolutely correct about what they are being high-and-mighty about, they are just guilty of another sin: pride. The aesthetics of the discussion simply dominate: prideful moth**r f**kers are just intolerable a**holes and we instinctively set our stance firmly against them.

Wait, was there a joke in there? Knock knock...

Cheers,
prat
praetorian | 03.30.08 - 11:40 am | #

Anonymous writes:
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man

Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will live as one

Now get real!
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 11:40 am | #

Virgil writes:
This seems like an enlightening post.

It makes the point that we all should strive to understand the situation better before passing judgment. This is especially true for journalists, who have the power to influence others through the written word.
Virgil | 03.30.08 - 11:41 am | #

baron samedi writes:
Tanta writes:
Scratch a libertarian and you get someone who really does want the government to interfere in property rights: at the point where your exercise of those rights might cost your corporate betters a repair invoice.

You mistake Libertarian for "tax dodging Republican crybaby", but it's a common mistake.
baron samedi | 03.30.08 - 11:43 am | #

Bob Dobbs writes:
I live in a bubble area. I hang out with civil servants. Low-paid civil servants. Teachers. Back in '04, '05, and even '05 I saw a number of them pay prices they could barely afford for the most remote or modest of homes so that they wouldn't be "priced out of the market forever." In their home county. Get it? Their home.

They thought this was their last chance to get some kind of stability, because rents were rising, too, and they might be squeezed out.

Now they're about to take it in the shorts -- not because they were greedy, but because they were desperate and everyone assured them that it was "now or never."

Some may want to reassure themselves that the fault lay in the individuals, not the system. But I see no fault in these people. In those who would judge, I see a lot of suppressed fear.
Bob Dobbs | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:43 am | #

Yearning to Learn writes:
that said,
(I guess I shouldn't have said "lastly" before!!!!)

I have progressed beyond the overt BLAME that I used to have.

before, I'd see a proposed "victim" and my first subconscious reaction was to see how s/he was to blame.
(eg: last week when I asked "why doesn't she speak English")

this way I could reserve all sympathy.

now I am able to see the victim as simply a person. I can empathize without all the blame.
(eg: when I realized "hey, she would've made the same mistake with or without English, and I also signed documents at closing that I didn't fully understand")

this has freed my mind: now I don't bother trying to figure out whether or not the victim is a victim, because I'll never know anyway.

instead I can focus on my empathy for them and what should be done for them.

it's nice to get the hating out of my mind.
(I'm still upset with them all for doing this, but the hate is gone)
Yearning to Learn | 03.30.08 - 11:44 am | #

El Cliffo writes:
A national poll (by a well-respected polling firm) shows a majority of Americans believe that the Feds should let people who borrowed too much twist in the wind:

"Fifty-three percent (53%) of Americans say that the federal government should not help out homeowners who borrowed more than they could afford. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 29% disagreed and believed that federal action is appropriate. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure."

"There is even stronger opposition to federal help for banks that made bad loans. By a 4-to-1 margin (61% to 15%) Americans reject that approach to resolving the current mortgage crisis."

http://rasmussenreports.com/ publ..._for_homeowners
El Cliffo | 03.30.08 - 11:45 am | #

baron samedi writes:
Tanta writes:

Then again I am not a libertarian myself, at least not as the word is most typically used, so I'm probably capable of making the mistake of thinking y'all look alike. I mean, we're on the subject of making sweeping generalizations about people . . .

Apology accepted.
baron samedi | 03.30.08 - 11:47 am | #

praetorian writes:
Ahh, the enduring good sense of the american electorate when asked if they should pay for someone else's mistakes. Just don't ask them if someone else should pay for theirs.

"Libertarian for me, but not for thee"

Cheers,
prat
praetorian | 03.30.08 - 11:47 am | #

Misean writes:
I thought foreclosed tenant WAS a joke.

Silly me.

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 11:48 am | #

lawyerliz writes:
I always loved Strunk & White's:

Avoid Needless Words.
Avoid Needless Words.
Avoid Needless Words.

Didn't White write the Once and Future King? And so was capable of style and verve.

I've always liked Wolf? Wolfe's? baroque style, but you have to be careful; it can easily get out of hand.
lawyerliz | 03.30.08 - 11:48 am | #

Joe Six Pack writes:
Yeah, it's all fun and games to have no sympathy for a dying bull, until you find yourself being chased down a blind alley.
Joe Six Pack | 03.30.08 - 11:49 am | #

jmay writes:
Tanta, when you start writing gargantuan posts on a Sunday morning to get into chicken-fights with sanctimonious posters....

I worry. I do.

As Strunk would say...

This road don't lead nowhere good.
jmay | 03.30.08 - 11:49 am | #

lawyerliz writes:
I didn't know what foreclosed tenant meant and I suspect the writer didn't know what she meant either.
lawyerliz | 03.30.08 - 11:49 am | #

Rob Dawg writes:
Well, there is no risk-free lunch, not even for lenders.Doesn't that violate your nutshell rule? Just kidding.

Yes to the rest, lenders are at risk. To compensate for that risk they charge interest. Lenders have no more right to risk protection than do the borrowers. If as a lender you feel you might be lending to someone who might pour cement into the toilets before defaulting then you charge more or you don't lend. There were no guns involved and the process worked pretty good for a very long time. Just because there is this new crop of streamlined lenders who ignored the rules about knowing your borrowers does not mean those rules went away.
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 11:51 am | #

S N writes:
Show your sympathy to a person who suffers but not when they spread their sufferings to others.
A person who destroys a mortgage property causes damage to the neighborhood through devaluation of other properties around. They should be socially damned.
S N | 03.30.08 - 11:51 am | #

Mel writes:
I worked with people that bought cars on credit--knowing they couldn't afford it. Mitsubishi had no money down, no interest deals a couple of years ago. They worked the system, their cars were repossessed, they were happy to have a new car for a substantial time.

If you tempt them, they will come. Ask Mrs. Spitzer. (sorry, this is a humor diary)
Mel | 03.30.08 - 11:53 am | #

Billy Shears writes:
You mistake Libertarian for "tax dodging Republican crybaby", but it's a common mistake.
baron samedi | 03.30.08 - 11:43 am | #
_________________________
Thanks for that definition! I love it! I know many people who call themselves 'libertarian', but this term fits them better.
Billy Shears | 03.30.08 - 11:55 am | #

Allen C writes:
I suspect for most, this wasn't their first trash experience. Many of these folks probably don't think twice about dropping garbage out the window either. Another sad theme in the overall sad plot.

It's been over a year for me watching the slow moving train wreck and while my portfolio is spared, the now daily bad news and jockeying by the greedy and/or incompetent is indeed depressing.
Allen C | 03.30.08 - 11:57 am | #

Misean writes:
Never been a fan of slap stick? Now I feel sorry for you. Wile E. Coyote NOT funny?

Sad.

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 11:57 am | #

Jake writes:
Tanta, I liked the point you made, but you could have done it in 2 paragraphs instead of 200. This post was way too rambling.
Jake | 03.30.08 - 11:57 am | #

Marcus Aurelius writes:
I don't care what motivated the buyers or the lenders - they made their decisions. They speculated and lost (on both sides). I don't laugh at them, but I don't feel sorry for them either. They need to suck up their losses and move on, without burdening those who acted more prudently.

I'm not looking to make their loss my gain. I'm advocating keeping their loss their loss - not mine.

Never gamble what you can't afford to lose.
Marcus Aurelius | 03.30.08 - 11:59 am | #

Misean writes:
baron samedi,

"You mistake Libertarian for "tax dodging Republican crybaby", but it's a common mistake."

Nice. I'm going to use that. Leave your email, so I can pay for the privilege.

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 12:01 pm | #

baron samedi writes:
Billy,

I only get credit for inserting "Republican", the rest goes to Berke Breathed.
baron samedi | 03.30.08 - 12:01 pm | #

dissident writes:
With "Mark to Market" and "Jas Jain" coming in at less than 20 minutes on a post that tries to get the mean-spirited and the terminally humorless to stop for a minute and think about it, I believe we have just set some kind of internet record.

Here you go, making your Sunday complete.

Actually you are right this time. I don't care what happens to these leeches in principle, it's just the whining and begging that gets old. If they took the hits from their bad investments ans STFU there would be no issue. Heck, even if they walk away and take their hits there is no issue, but they should suffer the full consequences of their actions.

But it's the way it is, way too many people want to externalize liabilities and reap free rides, actually this is the #1 trait these days, they need a little 4byclue Singapore style justice.
dissident | 03.30.08 - 12:04 pm | #

Misean writes:
baron samedi,

I retract my previous offer. It's FREE!

Bwahahahahaaha!

;)

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 12:04 pm | #

lawyerliz writes:
Wiley Coyote was funny the first and second and third times, and then it wasn't anymore.

Altho the analogy to our economy is funny and scary.

I have never got the 3 Stooges tho I think the Whos on First think is probably not slapstick and funny if you like that kind of thing. (Apostrophe deliberately left out.)

I always thought the Stooges was a guy thing. I don't know anyone of the female persuasion who likes them.
lawyerliz | 03.30.08 - 12:05 pm | #

praetorian writes:
I thought last weeks BB was particularly apropos:

http://comics.com/wash/opus/arch...s- 20080323.html

Am I allowed to be a tax dodging republican crybaby and still sympathize with the idea of that comic?

Cheers,
prat
praetorian | 03.30.08 - 12:06 pm | #

S N writes:
The appellate court further noted that the court in Cornelison stated “that the common law
action for waste was partially codified in Civil Code section 2929, which provides that
‘no person whose interest is subject to the lien of a mortgage may do any act which will
substantially impair the mortgagee’s security.’”12

http://www.firstam.com/ekcms/upl...sures/ waste.pdf

Yes, it is illegal to destroy/damage your property while lien is held on it.
S N | 03.30.08 - 12:06 pm | #

praetorian writes:
Yes, it is illegal to destroy/damage your property while lien is held on it.

THAT'S NOT FUNNY!!!

Cheers,
prat
praetorian | 03.30.08 - 12:08 pm | #

Allen C writes:
"Never been a fan of slap stick?"

It hurts more when it's real...
Allen C | 03.30.08 - 12:08 pm | #

Misean writes:
lawyerliz,

Wile E. Coyote is the same joke...over and over...and it's funny every time.

The Three Stoodges is great too...but only with Curly...Nya Nya Nya...I don't like Shemp.

:P

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 12:09 pm | #

Ziggurat writes:
The trash out refi is just another embedded option that wasn't properly modeled.
Ziggurat | 03.30.08 - 12:10 pm | #

Misean writes:
Allen C,

""Never been a fan of slap stick?"

It hurts more when it's real..."

ROFLMAO,

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 12:10 pm | #

Grasshopper writes:
"I have never got the 3 Stooges tho I think the Whos on First think is probably not slapstick and funny if you like that kind of thing."

Who's On First was Abbott and Costello.
Grasshopper | 03.30.08 - 12:11 pm | #

dissident writes:
Now, S N up there at 10:19 is pretty funny. Borat does economics?


Borat misses the part where a heavy armor column is needed to enter some of these neighborhoods. Maybe we can outsource the filming to Chechnya vets.
dissident | 03.30.08 - 12:12 pm | #

Misean writes:
laweyliz,

For you, my dear,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s...h? v=sShMA85pv8M

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 12:14 pm | #

El Cliffo writes:
Larry of The Three Stooges actually developed a callous on the left side of his face from being slapped by Moe so many times.
El Cliffo | 03.30.08 - 12:15 pm | #

baron samedi writes:
Prat,

Beliefs are free of charge...unless you are Christian, then it's 10% of net.

bs
baron samedi | 03.30.08 - 12:15 pm | #

Gawain's Ghost writes:
Well, I had an assignment on a repo in a gated community last year. When I first drove up, I thought nice house. But it was completely gutted on the inside. I mean, everything was taken, carpet, doors, lights, cabinets, appliances, vanities, toilets; the sheetrock was ripped out and the plumbing and wiring stolen. It cost over $35,000 in repairs just to get this house into marketable condition.

But then I reasoned, what did anyone expect to happen in this environment? The lender says, no credit, no documentation, no down payment, hey, no problem! You can get a 100% LTV, roll over the closing costs, and move into this gorgeous house in a gated community for nothing. Then the appliance store says, no credit, no documentation, no down payment, hey, no problem! You don't even have to pay interest for the first year. You can have all the appliances for your new home for nothing. Then the furniture store says, no credit, no documentation, no down payment, hey, no problem. You don't even have to pay interest for the first year. You can have all this furniture for your new home for nothing.

All this for a house 10 miles from the Mexican border.

Now, is it a stretch of the imagination to see that this environment creates the perfect opportunity for someone to completely rennovate his house in Reynosa? I mean, take out the loan, buy and furnish the house, live in it for, what, a few weeks, then gut it, load up a truck, and head south.

Do I have any sympathy for these people? No, they're thieves. Do I have any sympathy for the lender, the appliance store or the furniture store? No, they're fools.

Now, that's a far cry from someone who was conned into taking out a loan he couldn't afford only to lose his house to foreclosure. Do I understand why he would trash the house before he was evicted? Yes. Do I condone it? No, not in the least. Do I have any sympathy for him? No, and the reason why is very simple. Because I've been conned more than once in my life, and no one ever had any sympathy for me.

I don't do politics, mainly because I got out of junior high in 1974. I believe in free people, free markets and free enterprise. But one cannot have free people without the rule of law. Nor can one have free markets without regulation or free enterprise without accountability.

What I have witnessed over the last decade or two is a complete disregard for the rule of law (illegal immigration, not to mention predatory lending), a total disintegration of regulation (shadow banking system) and an absolute dissolution of accountability (bailouts by the Fed). Some might refer to this as the Brave New World. I refer to it as Hell.

When asked what kind of government the Framers had given us, Ben Franklin famously said, "A republic, if you can keep it." Well, from what I've seen recently, we're doing a pretty damn good job of losing it.

Is that a joke? No, and I'm not laughing.
Gawain's Ghost | 03.30.08 - 12:16 pm | #

sdrenter writes:
Didn't White write the Once and Future King? And so was capable of style and verve.

Strunk and White doesn't even follow Strunk and White, as no competent writers would. Us professional linguists generally just ignore self-appointed language mavens, but the LanguageLog folks have tracked down a lot of S & W's inconsistencies.

I'll never get why people think that just because someone uses language, they're necessarily experts in how it works. We don't have people writing newspaper columns on biology just because they have lots of kids, or about the economy just because they're rich. Oh, wait...
sdrenter | 03.30.08 - 12:18 pm | #

Marcus Aurelius writes:
The 3 Stooges are a guy thing.

Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck...

...why, I ought'ta...

...Moe! Larry! Cheese! Moe! Larry! Cheese!...

...no, the Camembert!...

That's funny stuff.

P.S: Misean, I love Curly and Shemp. Joe and Curly Joe were just sad.
Marcus Aurelius | 03.30.08 - 12:18 pm | #

radman writes:
"but it's limited entertainment because we are often dealing with heads over which such a response tends to fly at a fairly high altitude."

The most masterful use of words I've seen in a long time! BRAVO!!
radman | 03.30.08 - 12:19 pm | #

Tanta writes:
One of these days I am going to figure out the psychology of people who insist on telling me that I used too many words to make a point that could have been made in two sentences/paragraphs. I haven't yet done so, but given that I seem doomed to endless exposure to this type, some day I will.

What is it with you philistines? I understand that you are philistines--you have no conception of reading and writing as anything other than strictly "efficient" information transfers, the linquistic equivalent of changing a twenty at the teller window--but I don't know why, as philistines, you keep exposing yourself to a writer whom you have to have learned by now doesn't play by your rules. Or why, having supposedly read all the way to the bottom, you keep trying to reform me. Have you never noticed that it doesn't work? Have you never run into that definition of repeating a failed strategy over and over again, the one with "insanity" in it?

I am not planning on reforming any time soon. I am here to amuse those in our readership who enjoy playing with words. Who rather like an oblique approach that opens up--rather than "foreclosing"--thought. Who do not want the executive summary, do not want the bullet points, do not want the cross-stitch sampler version.

The rest of you are free to be here--we don't card at the door--but you should have enough basic social skills to figure out that you aren't the one this piece was written for.

It's a big internet. Go read Instapundit if you want to be told what you think in as few words as possible. If you want to be adventurous and see what all the fuss is about on the other side, you do have to actually try the dishes on the buffet table. It does you no good to look 'em over once and then demand a bowl of tomato soup.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 12:20 pm | #

sdrenter writes:
Now, is it a stretch of the imagination to see that this environment creates the perfect opportunity for someone to completely rennovate his house in Reynosa?

Humorless *and* racist.
sdrenter | 03.30.08 - 12:22 pm | #

lawyerliz writes:
Ok, then I don't like anything about the Stooges.

Lawyerliz eats humble pie.

I guess I used to like Abbott and Costello occasionally when I watched it as a kid in the 50s.

I really like the Marx brothers thing where they stuff a bizillion people in a stateroom (OT of course).
lawyerliz | 03.30.08 - 12:22 pm | #

Misean writes:
Marcus,

Shemp had his moments. But Curly is Glod. Joe and Curly Joe...that's like saying Temple of Doom was an Indiana Jones movie.

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 12:23 pm | #

Glenda writes:
I would love to be alone in a room with the guy from Washington Mutual that dreamed up the scheme to keep billing my memory impaired mother for a flood insurance policy at 2x the cost of her policy already in force. This happened every year despite terse letters from me telling them to cut the crap. Bullshit like that is not accidental, and I would happily rip out all the wiring from his house right now.
Glenda | 03.30.08 - 12:27 pm | #

Misean writes:
Tanta,

Not to be a tpyo fnatic, but,

"Go read Instapundit if you want to be told what you think in as few words as possible."

The "you" before think is misspelled. I believe it is "to".

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 12:28 pm | #

lawyerliz writes:
Ok, I think I can be funny. People have laughed at my witticisms at parties. (You'll have to take my word for it.) Please explain to me the cheese joke.

Is it that one of them doesn't know the names of cheeses? As in Camenbert? Is that funny? Is there something else to it? I think this sailed 'way far UNDER me.
lawyerliz | 03.30.08 - 12:28 pm | #

Tanta writes:
Really? Not even karmic prophylactic sympathy? Not even like, it's in my own self interest to cut a little slack to someone who misjudged his own margin of error in case I ever misjudge my own? Your reach never exceeded your grasp on anything? What a dour world you must inhabit.

Damn, I nearly missed that one. May I steal "karmic prophylactic sympathy" some day? It's wonderful.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 12:31 pm | #

BirdsEye writes:
I don't know if this is a profoundly new view, or not, but the question of a bailout (in any of its forms) misses the point that we are 7-8 years into a string of bailouts. I got to go out, but at least since the dot.com implosion, there has been successive bailouts: 9-11, airlines, auto, ailines, again, housing, autos, housing again etc...
BirdsEye | 03.30.08 - 12:31 pm | #

ac writes:

I've met a few of them, and I can tell you homeowners in general are a very nasty lot.

ac | 03.30.08 - 12:32 pm | #

Tanta writes:
No, Misean, I did mean that one.

When I want your opinion, I'll tell you what it is. Was the phrase lurking in context there.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 12:33 pm | #

Rob Dawg writes:
lawyerliz,
Cheeze is funny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=B...feature=related
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 12:34 pm | #

Keep It Simple, I'm Stupid writes:
Those that claim to have no sympathy for people being foreclosed on are, at best, pretending to sociopathy. A lot of them, I think, can't distinguish between having sympathy for someone and thinking that they need to be bailed out. For most of these people, I have a great deal of sympathy, but also think that the best way forward is to have the foreclosure proceed and for everyone to get on with their lives. However, I do think that it's a good idea for the rest of us to provide ways to help them move forward.

There are another set of people who claim to have no sympathy who seem to think that they will never make a catastrophic mistake. Therefore, they have nothing but ridicule for those who do make such errors. This is a set of people who I can't really fathom. I feel sorry for them, actually, and when some of them make catastrophic mistakes of their own, I will feel sympathy. I still reserve the right to tell them that the best way forward is for them to suck it up and move on. Maybe not, though.

There is a third set who not only can't see themselves making a catastrophic mistake, but don't really believe that anyone else will, either. Therefore, they ascribe all behavior that might be interpreted as a catastrophic mistake to malice. No one made an honest mistake in taking on a mortgage that they couldn't afford; they were just trying out a get rich quick scheme. My inclination is to think that these people are projecting, and that they would be more than happy to take advantage of a get rich scheme at someone else's expense if only they can convince themselves that it has no downside.
Keep It Simple, I'm Stupid | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 12:35 pm | #

baron samedi writes:
I just finished rereading the op, and there is one type of humor that isn’t accounted for- the cop/emergency room/crisis response kind. There are times when you can’t look away, you can’t ignore what’s in front of you, and you can’t run from the room screaming. The only option is make jokes, usually at the expense of the parties to the incident.

The more I look at the fallout from subprime, the more I think the jokes are headed in this direction.

Is it fair? No, but hurt feelings are going to have to be put aside for now.
baron samedi | 03.30.08 - 12:36 pm | #

Marcus Aurelius writes:
lawyerliz:

Curly goes crazy and can only be calmed by the smell and taste of cheese. Moe explains that Curly reacts to cheese this way because his mother was scared by a rat.

When Moe and/or Larry come to his aid and offer him cheese, Curly smells it and says, "No, Camembert!" (in different episodes, it's different kinds of cheese - Limburger, etc.)

Guess you had to be there.

And a guy.
Marcus Aurelius | 03.30.08 - 12:37 pm | #

Nova writes:
Tanta,

What about my sq. ft analogy? Huh? You can use that. It was witty. I know it was cause, well, it just was.
Nova | 03.30.08 - 12:37 pm | #

Allen C writes:
Some Sunday reflection...Many of us here gathered calling BS to the nonsense around us and quietly cheering with every revelation.

Now that most see the bubble, we're looking to see how bad it will get. It seems many are in the disillusion stage and many want to avoid the panic stage which seems inevitable.

Perhaps a year from now, we'll see real pain all around as we debate whether we're in a depression. Our monitoring and positioning for the bubble burst will turn to looking for signs of anything positive.
Allen C | 03.30.08 - 12:39 pm | #

Anthony writes:
We live in a selfish society, where everybody only cares about number one. The bankers have prayed on the more vulnerable and less intelligent classes to make large salaries and bonuses. (Still that does not excuse the wanton destruction of property, which in the end, is owned by somebody.) The whole system needs to be thoroughly cleaned up.
Anthony | 03.30.08 - 12:40 pm | #

Nova writes:
Perhaps a year from now, we'll see real pain all around as we debate whether we're in a depression. Our monitoring and positioning for the bubble burst will turn to looking for signs of anything positive.

By then we will all be in the litterbox.

Ok, I go now. Off on my wafe of caffiene
Nova | 03.30.08 - 12:41 pm | #

Nemo writes:
Tanta --

I don't know why, as philistines, you keep exposing yourself to a writer whom you have to have learned by now doesn't play by your rules.

Oh, that's easy; some of us value not your words, but the ideas and expertise behind them. We would prefer to spend less time getting at those ideas and that expertise, but of course you are free to write however you please. (Just as we are free to complain about it.)

I am here to amuse those in our readership who enjoy playing with words. Who rather like an oblique approach that opens up--rather than "foreclosing"--thought.

Very well. But could you do a small favor for a poor philistine? Try to be careful that your wordiness does not merely become an excuse for responding to any criticism with, "Shorter [xxx]: You need to take out all of the parts of the post that aren't validating my point of view. It would make more sense to me that way." Such dodging of criticism makes your "baroque" style look less like art and more like an attempt to disguise fuzzy thinking.

Really? Not even karmic prophylactic sympathy?

Yawn. I made it perfectly clear, repeatedly, what I meant by having no sympathy: No bail-out, thanks.

Of course my own reach has exceeded my grasp, and it will again, but I will never ask (much less demand) that somebody else bear the cost. I pay for my mistakes; I do not even argue over speeding tickets. In my world, we all take full responsibility for our own choices. And it is not a dour place at all; quite the opposite, in fact.

Some truths really are simple, and sometimes brevity really is the soul of wit.
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 12:44 pm | #

Anthony writes:
NO BAIL OUT.

NO BAIL OUT.

NO BAIL OUT.
Anthony | 03.30.08 - 12:48 pm | #

ErikR writes:
I have sympathy for bad journalists. Heck, I even have sympathy for whiny bloggers who love to complain about bad journalists. Do you think they ever considered doing something about it, like, I dunno, maybe becoming a journalist for a mainstream publication? But that would be too hard, it is much more fun to whine about it.
ErikR | 03.30.08 - 12:48 pm | #

Rob Dawg writes:
For the record my frequent and public pronouncements of having no sympathy whatsoever are nothing but a dumbed down oversimplification because explaining the complexities of why actions need consequences for the ultimate good of those in trouble merely confuses and stirs up the rabble.
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 12:48 pm | #

Tanta writes:
some of us value not your words, but the ideas and expertise behind them. We would prefer to spend less time getting at those ideas and that expertise

But there's no free lunch, Nemo. There's no get-expertise-quick scheme around here. You gotta work for it, you gotta earn it, and you don't get bailed out if you blow it.

Besides, I am not an "expertise mine" that you can decide to exploit more efficiently. I've never even had someone who was paying my salary say such a thing to me. Seriously.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 12:50 pm | #

YLSP writes:
Can I just say... Thanks baby boomers?

You all took a wonderful country and royally screwed it up. You are all full of doo-doo and willingly gave up the rights of future generations so you could live in your happy utopia of blue ED pills, boats, SUVs, and second and third homes. But now that all of your boats, SUVs, second and third homes are starting to look like poor investments, you will pawn off the tab to your sons, daughters, and grandchildren. A true testament to those who saw the BS upclose... after all I suppose you are the people who ushered in the era of a "no fault divorce". Even in this time, I'm sure you'll end up electing another boomer to run the country, in-spite of the failures of the last two boomer presidents. You are truly a generation of people who have "manned up" and taken responsibility for your government and their actions.

I'm sorry, but I just can't take this anymore, because whenever I look at "who" is leading "everything" in our "country" it's always some darn awful boomer. I'm sorry but most of you are stuck in a Cold War mind-set... I'd really like someone to show me otherwise... but your policies are killing the younger generations. From health care costs, to college costs, to energy costs, to housing costs.
YLSP | 03.30.08 - 12:52 pm | #

El Cliffo writes:
"Karmic Prophylactic Sympathy" was on the second Jefferson Airplane album.
El Cliffo | 03.30.08 - 12:53 pm | #

Rob Dawg writes:
Tanta writes:
But there's no free lunch, Nemo.

TANSTAAFL. Now that definitely violates the nutshell rule of words to live by.
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 12:53 pm | #

WestSideGeorge writes:
The smart patrol
Nowhere to go
Suburban robots who monitor reality
Common stock
We work around the clock
We shove the poles in the holes
WestSideGeorge | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 12:55 pm | #

Viewing with alarm writes:
Tanta sounds like my dear dparted granny if she, my granny, had had a PHD in Finance. No BS, call'm as you see them, if you don't like it take a hike. Great fun!
Viewing with alarm | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 12:56 pm | #

bacon dreamz writes:
this probably would have been a good post to try out the new auto-response buttons before the comments.
bacon dreamz | 03.30.08 - 12:57 pm | #

burnside writes:
El Cliffo, you are fabulous.
burnside | 03.30.08 - 12:57 pm | #

lawn grass writes:
A farmer reports on his blog that the suprim, motgat metdown, is efeckting his grain markiting plan.



http://johnwphipps.blogspot.com/...-factor- in.html


That's contanement.
lawn grass | 03.30.08 - 12:57 pm | #

Tanta writes:
NO BAIL OUT.

NO BAIL OUT.

NO BAIL OUT.

You are winning no hearts and minds to your cause. You just aren't. I take seriously your right to your cause. I am giving you some advice.

Repeating yourself with the volume turned up to 11 is not a species of using persuasive language or engaging in honest debate with someone else. It is, well, having a tantrum.

Since it's literary Sunday, I will also point out that using caps or boldface or exclamation points or all of the above does not increase the truth-value or utility of a statement. These things merely call attention to a statement. Rather desperately, in many cases.

RED IDEAS SLEEP FURIOUSLY!
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 12:59 pm | #

Anthony writes:
Tanta, I reserve my right to have a tantrum, if I wish!!!!!!!!
Anthony | 03.30.08 - 1:01 pm | #

Misean writes:
ac,

"I've met a few of them, and I can tell you homeowners in general are a very nasty lot."

Coffee everywhere.

Side hurts, can't stop laughing.

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 1:03 pm | #

Keith writes:
Foreclosed tenent simply refers to a person who is foreclosed upon _and_ is living in the house. If you don't "get it", then do some research - if would have taken you less time than writing a rambling entry that added nothing to the blogsphere.
Keith | 03.30.08 - 1:03 pm | #

Misean writes:
Tanta,

"No, Misean, I did mean that one.

When I want your opinion, I'll tell you what it is. Was the phrase lurking in context there."

Right after ac, STOP! I'm dying here!.

ROFL....

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 1:04 pm | #

Rob Dawg writes:
Tanta,
Strunk & White is of no help. Even Arthur Plotnik appears unwilling to broach the subject. What are the rules for "I told you so?"
Rob Dawg | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 1:05 pm | #

Tanta writes:
Anthony, I reserve my right to assume that your reasons for your belief are as childish as your delivery.

There is waaay too much emotion invested by the anti-bailout crowd. They can no longer read any post, on any subject, without launching into it. You can even write a post begging people to stop being so self-involved, and they just fire back with IT DOES TOO MATTER HOW I FEEL ABOUT EVERYONE ELSE!

I therefore suggest not having a tantrum, even if you're tempted.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 1:06 pm | #

Anonymous writes:
OT:

Why California Isn't Buying Warren Buffett's Bond Insurance

http://www.cnbc.com/id/23858468

California's Treasurer Bill Lockyer sees it differently. He sees decades of history in which almost no muni bonds have fallen victim to a default. (MBIA and Ambac got in trouble not because they guaranteed munis, but because they branched into riskier areas, backing bundles of other loans, including those notorious sub-primes.)

Lockyer argues that the main reason muni bond buyers think insurance is needed at all in most cases is because the big credit ratings agencies don't evaluate state and local government debt the same way as corporate debt, artificially lowering credit ratings for those governments.
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 1:06 pm | #

Yearning to Learn writes:
again,
I'll echo that others seem to feel as I do, although they word it differently.

to be concise (since above I rambled over several posts)

-many of us have empathy but not necessarily sympathy

-the goal IMO is to separate having empathy with that of fiduciary responsibility to the involved parties

-and too many people confuse the above two very separate ideas.

you can:
-have empathy and want a bailout
-have empathy but oppose a bailout
-have no empathy and want a bailout
-have no empathy and oppose a bailout.

but it gets lost, especially when people simply scream "NO BAIL OUT"

and it is also lost as those like me (with empathy but opposed to a bailout) get angry when we see the bailout comin'

reminds me of my crystal meth brother. I have empathy and sympathy for him. Am I going to bail him out of jail again, or give him money? hell no. been there, done that. Doesn't mean I hate him, but I sure hate what he's done to our family. and sometimes it's hard to separate out that hurt.

and I'm not sure I want to give any more of my money to the finance/homeowner addicts either.
Yearning to Learn | 03.30.08 - 1:08 pm | #

Anthony writes:
Tanta, maybe the whole country will be having a tantrum before too long, and I'm just one of millions.
Anthony | 03.30.08 - 1:09 pm | #

Tanta Protection team writes:
Re: Tanta, I liked the point you made, but you could have done it in 2 paragraphs instead of 200. This post was way too rambling.

Shut up Jake!
Tanta Protection team | 03.30.08 - 1:09 pm | #

Nemo writes:
Tanta --

Besides, I am not an "expertise mine" that you can decide to exploit more efficiently. I've never even had someone who was paying my salary say such a thing to me. Seriously.

Point taken. I apologize, and today is the last day you will find me complaining about your writing style.

That said, in my experience, "oblique" writing is often precisely an attempt to "foreclose" -- rather than open up -- thought and debate. Just something to consider.

"When you fight with monsters, take care lest you become a monster; and when you stare into an abysss, the abyss also stares into you."

Have a great day, all. I am off to enjoy the sunshine.
Nemo | Homepage | 03.30.08 - 1:09 pm | #

Tanta writes:
Foreclosed tenent simply refers to a person who is foreclosed upon _and_ is living in the house.

Really? So the third sentence of Megan's little post doesn't imply she's talking specifically about people who can't make their mortgage payments?

Perhaps it would help to get all legalistic and persnicketty and point out that loans are foreclosed. Not people, not houses.

Otherwise I should have written a post that observed how difficult it often is to tell the difference between a joke and a stupid. My bad.
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 1:11 pm | #

Anonymous writes:
Nemo,

Nix on comments, knock it off
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 1:13 pm | #

Tanta writes:
Tanta, maybe the whole country will be having a tantrum before too long, and I'm just one of millions.

Maybe they just did.

Maybe the whole boom was fueled by a kind of tantrum about getting one before they're out of reach. Getting one NOW, not later.

Maybe another tantrum doesn't sound promising.

Maybe now might be a good time to . . . fail to oversimplify?
Tanta | 03.30.08 - 1:14 pm | #

Misean writes:
I HAVE A RIGHT TO HAVE A TANTRUM!!!!!!!!!!

I WANT MY RIGHT TO HAVE A TANTRUM!!!!

I CAN HAZ BAILZOUT NOW? PLEEZE!

Cheers,
Misean | 03.30.08 - 1:15 pm | #

Tom writes:
Given that we're already bailing out Wall Street, specifically including Bear shareholders, through the Fed with the public blessing of the Ownership Society Administration, shouldn't the tantrums read NO MORE BAILOUTS rather than NO BAILOUTS?
Tom | 03.30.08 - 1:16 pm | #

sk writes:
Excellent and enjoyable post Tanta. Your comments were also good - I particularly liked you have no conception of reading and writing as anything other than strictly "efficient" information transfers, the linquistic equivalent of changing a twenty at the teller window - I plead guilty to that of course but I claim my saving grace has always been the ability to laugh at myself.

There were many gems in your post. Wonderful.

Regarding the subject at hand - sympathy and empathy I have aplenty - for all parties, lenders too at that - you can't have spent 50 years on this planet and not become aware of the insanities and absurdities that abound - but, OT ( since the main post was not about this aspect and I explicitly acknowledge that but its an aspect I focus on( yeah I know what that makes me )), when it comes to money there is zero chance that I'll dip into my pocket voluntarily, at this stage of the game, and will work hard to escape the clutches of silent pickpockets (i.e. the Fed and their trashing of the US$) and other assorted thieves who want to dip and ARE DIPPING into my pocket.

They can call on me when we get to the havela, shanty town or Mumbai slum, (Hooverville 2010 style?) level but not till then.

-K
sk | 03.30.08 - 1:19 pm | #

Anonymous writes:
OT: Misrepresentation. A representation (other than a representation under Section 3(e) or (f)) made or repeated or deemed to have been made or repeated by the party or any Credit Support Provider of such party in this Agreement or any Credit Support Document proves to have been incorrect or misleading in any material respect when made or repeated or deemed to have been made or repeated;
Anonymous | 03.30.08 - 1:20 pm | #

Wab writes:
One of us is never going to be happy here, and I think it should