I loved your post Phillip....I left my corporate job a couple of years ago to become a massage therapist and it was the best decision of my life. The healthcare was the big snafu, but I was able to get a decent plan from an association I belong too.
If Universal healthcare is working in every other "civilized" country in the world, why are we not embracing that concept? I think this bill is a great step in the right direction.
As for the "me" vs. "them" mentality....I am amazed at how many grown up people have forgotten how the share with others, help others, and respect others. Many people will go to church, but will not follow the commandments where it says to "honor thy neighbor".
Just grow up....not everything is about money...you CANNOT take it with you at all when you die!
I am 35, lived in CA for 5 years, worked for Wamu, started off with 50k and was laid off at 100k, left and went back to Germany after that without ever collecting a dime of unemployment. Big paycut to 60k in my new job here, but at least I get six weeks of vacation. I was surprised in CA how many Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Why is it necessary to have the biggest apartment/house, car etc. you can afford. I had roommates, paid cash for my car, and saved more than 50% of my income. And btw I have been doing the same even during university (at 500 Euros a month sponsored by my sponsor company),and in my first crappy jobs out of school earning 20k, that meant a crappy apartment and old car, low cost entertainment such as mountain biking and parties at home with friends instead of going gout. I do not have a cent of debt, always paid my credit card in full by direct debit every month. Having less than 2 years of full living expenses saved up is financial suicide in the long run in my opinion, especially if you have kids (I am currently 7 months pregnant). Getting unemployed is terrible and traumatic, but it is exacerbated by having lived at or close to your means, or even above, for years - instead of well below, and not having saved much. A lot of people will have to get used to a permanently lower standard of living as a result of this "Greater Depression". Downsize now, do not wait until your unemployment runs out or savings are exhausted. If you then end up getting another well paid job, all the better. You will sleep very soundly with lots of cash to spare at the end of the month.
These announcements about the feds hiring are not accurate. Sure, they CLAIM to be hiring more people but the incompetence that is rife in the government is clearly demonstrated in their hiring process. MANY in the DC area have been given firm job offers, strung along with a promised start date for months and then told their "tentative" offer was nullified. This is after people have turned down other jobs because they had a FIRM, NON-TENTATIVE offer from the feds.
The fed employees are not held accountable for their inability to perform their jobs, they hide behind the fed bureaucracy and continue to do NOTHING at their desks all day. Sure, there are a few- like 15% at best- that actually give half a crap about doing a good job but the rest are just sucking on the taxpayers who are required to perform to keep their jobs- unlike the feds.
Be careful- if you are accustomed to working and performing and being rewarded for doing a god job- throw those ideas out the window. You will be shunned, ridiculed, and mocked for your farcical belief that you actually have to WORK while in the government employ.
However, if you enjoy sitting on your lazy, unproductive butt all day getting paid the same if you put forth any effort or not, then a government job is for you. If you enjoy the priveledge of ignoring people, "working" your own hours, taking 3 hour lunches and weeks of vacation from your non-job, then being a fed might be for you. If you want to join the feast of laziness, sloth, gluttony, greed and fraud that is government employment, then be sure to sell your soul before joining the party.
It's a step in the right direction. It's eliminating some loop holes that insurance companies have been generously taking advantage of for far too long. I think it's totally fair and acceptable to eliminate them being able to benefit twice from one law. How much have they banked from that alone?
Without the reform, taxpayers would be footing the ever increasing bill for those who cannot afford health care. And those with health care see their premiums increase each year anyway.
I think it's taking away a little power from insurance companies, who have a huge role in health care in this country but aren't the ones receiving or giving care directly. I don't think any other business could have gotten away with all this for so long.
I also think that more jobs will be created to give care to more people now able to seek health care.
Americans who are happy with their insurance plans are generally the ones who have been lucky enough to not really need it. Only when something goes devastatingly wrong do you discover the limits, loopholes, and exclusions. Most people have no idea what costs can be for cancer care, strokes, traumatic injuries. Could you pay 10 to 20% of $250,000? $500,000? Something like 30% of all bankruptcies are related to medical bills and this does not happen in other developed countries.
I agree with Phillip the purpose of insurance is to spread the risk around a large group of people, so the one person unlucky enough to get rundown by a drunk doesn't have their life ruined. I think a "healthy habits" discount similar to "good driver discounts" should be sufficient to motivate people to quit smoking, wear their helmets and seatbelts, lose weight/exercise. I don't think those whose health problems are not under their control should be penalized.
Finally to everyone who trumpets "preventative care" and healthy habits as a way to bring down costs I have to caution you that this is probably a fallacy. Better preventative care improves health and helps people live longer, but the longer you live the more health care dollars you consume over your lifetime. Who is the better health care "bargain" the guy who never sees a doctor and drops dead of a cardiac arrest at 60, or the one who exercises and eats right and goes on to require cancer treatment and nursing home care in his 80's? We can extend the quantity and quality of life, but it's not cheap. A big part of Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid's problems relate to the fact that are seniors are now living much longer on average than was ever anticipated when the programs were set up.
Thanks for the post, you have precisely articulated my thoughts about the unfairness of our current structures. I considered starting my own business, but knew that I could never afford my own insurance. I have never understood why the conservatives wouldn't want health care off the backs (and books) of American business. It strangles their ability to compete worldwide. And to everyone who questions the ability of the goverment to control costs I would say that they already are the primary limiting factor on costs limiting Medicare reimbursement to "reasonable and customary" levels. Other insurers then adopt Medicare's standards. This is how it has been working for years.
I find that large binder clips work better than clothes pin. They are wider and grip harder. They're also usually fairly easy to find in the supply closet when you realize you've forgotten your clothes pins. :)
Alternatively, you can use an eye shade. Same idea, just on your head and, if you're flying extra long distances, you should already have one in your pack. Although some people find them uncomfortable.
Big thanks for the very valuable information. I'm also interested to know about debt and debt elimination like unsecured debt elimination. Looking forward to your discussion on that. Keep it coming! :)
I'm 21 and I've been using my Netspend card since I was 18. I don't mind the $10 fee and direct deposit is free. I understand why someone more fiscally responsible would have a problem with the program. I also believe for a young adult terrified by the thought of debt, it helps.
This, so much. We can argue all year on whether the new health care laws are the best way to fix things (probably not), but the fact of the matter still remains that insurance was already irreparably broken - through rescission, through being so tightly bound to what type of job you have, through its unavailability to anyone with a previously existing condition, through forcing doctors to spend more time and effort getting their money than they do doing their actual damn job, through...I could go on forever. In my own small circle of friends, there's three people at least who have been horribly screwed over by the current health care system. At least this offers a chance for change.
I work for small local government, and while the benefits are decent, the pay is just ok. Unfortunately I was downsized out of a company I had worked with for 25 years. I consider it a blessing to have the stability, and won't have to worry about looking for another job. Because at age 56, it is very difficult, even in an area with better than average employment rates. The job itself is mind-numbing, however, so that is definitely one of the downsides.
Can someone explain to me why we don't have a problem with suing the doctor/hospital for $100m when someone dies on the operating table due to doctor error?
But when the doctor successfully saves a life...people think it is rediculous that the procedure was $250,000? Shouldn't the person be charged $100m for the chance to continue living?
OK...a little extreme, but tort reform would cut HUGE costs out of the system. I guess there are trial attorneys who have more money to lobby Congress than I do.
"First of all, I think that this health insurance reform will only RAISE health premiums--not lower them. How in the world can insurance companies keep premiums low if they have to cover everyone including those with pre-existing conditions? Sure, the idea sounds nice, but the cost to the company is going to skyrocket. They will be left with no other option than to raise premiums or go out of business."
This brings forth my biggest concern with the health care bill. Insurance companies are for-profit entities. Whether you like it or not, they are. Just like "small entrepreneurs" or other huge corporations, the goal is to make money. The government is creating a "fund" with $5B to work with high-risk individuals. I cannot see there being enough "healthy" individuals entering a the system to keep premiums at the lows the government wants them.
Let us say, then, that insurance companies begin to "bow out" as they cannot make money at the artificially low premiums the government wants them at. I fear that the lack of profitability will drive private enterprise from the picture. Enter the government. The government will be forced to create an option (or whatever label they want to put on it) to provide coverage.
We've been told that our country cannot afford to NOT have this health bill.
The truth is we cannot afford to be wrong. We've got a couple of other entitlement programs that need fixed...before we create another one. The President said this is a Congress that "must make difficult decisions" - they then need to address social security, earmark (pork) spending and ridding Capitol Hill of the lobbyist that lend a bigger voice to corporations/special interest groups than the people.
If this bill was created to help our people, then I'm for it. If it was created with the heavy influence of corporations and special interest groups...with the people 2nd...then there is no "change" in this country yet.
Thank You for this one. It's not a good idea to run off to set up a still in the backyard without giving a thought to the dangers which may be many. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
I recall when ATF was testing downstream waters in all the small tributaries to the Chattahoochee river in Georgia because the local rednecks were dumping their thump kegs in the water to quickly dispose of evidence and unwanted leftovers. The fish and Turtles loved it, but so did the ATF. Those meters they used were very delicate, they could sniff out an extremely small percentage of alcohol in a stream. Consequently many a good ol boy got busted.
I remember the days when a pick up truck loaded with empty milk jugs or bags of Corn and sugar got more attention than an Arab with a hand grenade.
I have dreamed of doing this but have never had enough privacy and so...Ah well.
To a brew that won't hold a bubble.
Paul, let me first thank you for sharing. I'm sorry you're going through what you are (and many are), but interested in the range of emotions/opinions it has brought forth.
First of all, Citi/BofA/etc. have no real vested interest in how you feel. Your loan was sold before you signed off on it, and they simply kept the "servicing" (or lack thereof). This allows them to do a loan, essentially get their money back + additional for doing the loan, and THEN get paid to "service" the loan. This is how not only the super banks do it, but any bank that sells mortgages to Fannie/Freddie and keep servicing the loan. Some do it well, others do not. This is also what allowed banks to book subprime loans at high interest rates...but not shoulder the risk, as the sold the loans off to Fannie/Freddie too. This is what allowed all the loans to keep getting done...regardless of inflated prices, inflated risk, inflated interest rates.
Second, several above referenced "lending practices" are being blamed for the bubble and subsequent collapse. While my first point addresses part of the lending side, I'd like to mention the "borrowing demand" that disappears in the discussion. In order for a bank to "lend", there has to be demand for the lending product. What amazes me is the market's IGNORING of the "market bubble" warnings! Yes, they warned of a bubble for what...5 years?!?!? But people kept buying, buying, buying! Do you all remember the boy who cried wolf? This is absolutely what happened - they warned about it for so long, that the market grew oblivious to it! I think consumers grew complacent. I think there were MANY *IGNORANT* consumers. Did the lenders (keep in mind some were not banks) take advantage of this? In some cases, yes. In other cases, no. I'm NOT going to place 100% of the blame on the banks - it took 2 to tango.
As for your particular situation, Paul, you signed up for this ride. I'm not a fan of "principal reduction", unless you can prove that Citi fabricated the value of the home specifically to get you into the loan. If you wish to maintain your credit through all of this your best situation may be to work with Citi to sell your home and get a note from them for the difference. Argue that this would essentially put them in the same position they are now, but they could make a little money on it! You'll have to rent, and you'll have a rent payment plus this smaller loan payment but you'll keep your credit solid and be in the best position upon exiting the situation. If you walk away from it, they could come after you for the deficiency. They could throw a 1099 your way, and then you'll owe the IRS instead of Citi...I'd MUCH RATHER owe Citi. The IRS is just evil.
As for the "nuclear" option put forth by Richard - I think this is terrible advice. My primary reason for saying this is you give up ALL control of the situation. You don't control the selling price. You don't control the outcome after the sale (which you can possibly negotiate if you do it as I said above).
I don't like relying on a credit score, but if you're looking at another house in the next 5 years...I'd recommend trying to broker a deal that gets you out of the house, into renting and with a small note for the difference. Hope this helps! Thank you again for sharing!
Dollar General has started selling a knock off cookie, Ive only tasted the "thin mints" (because they are the only flavor they are selling I like) and they taste just like them!!! Only 1.85 a box!
I was a girl scout and I know I should support the local trooops and all but the price of them have just skyrocketed. (But again, what hasnt?)
I'm a regular here, but in the interests of keeping my job, I'm going to post anonymously. I'm a fed in DC, and I have to say, federal jobs are great in terms of benefits - but they can be absolutely soul sucking. As someone just beginning their 30's, I'm still young and idealistic, apparently, which means that the bureaucracy still really really grates on me.
That said, as my coworkers and I remind ourselves, we really like paychecks, and we're so thankful to be employed. And we're always looking for a new job.
Defnitely agree that you shouldn't use this as a substitution for supporting your local group. However, if you find yourself needing a Thin Mint in the off season, or you didn't buy enough to meet your needs, this is a great way to get through until the next order date!
If you do make your own Girl Scout cookies, I implore you to make a donation to your local Girl Scout Council. Girl Scouting provides so many opportunities to girls and young women, but much of that wouldn't be possible without the money cookie sales provide.
Your guess is completely wrong and insulting. There are financially responsible people on both sides on the political spectrum, so please don't try to draw that line in the sand because we are probably on the same side.
Since you seem to be missing the point completely; how about this comparison? I bought stocks on margin that depreciated during the economic collapse. I should walk away from that as well.
I hate Girl Scout cookies. Girl Scouts themselves are cool, and I support them, but goodness me, do I ever hate those cookies. This alone has saved me hundreds of dollars over the course of my life.
I highly recommend learning to loathe things like cookies.
Pretty much everything in this article describes way to lower your blood sugar, but your father obviously needs to discuss this with a physician first. Green tea and cinnamon have helped lots of people, as does exercise (even disabled people should be able to do small forms of exercise, sitting or even lying down).
This is not a forum for medical advice, so make sure that your father is treated by a physician.
I mean, in a sense, all insurance "shifts" the cost of catastrophes from the people who have them onto the people who are lucky enough not to. But I think that misses the point—which is that insurance is supposed to insure that when bad luck strikes, your family's finances are protected.
The problem was, the way health insurance worked in the US, it wasn't really insurance. (It was more like a weird pre-paid medical plan for healthy people.) It didn't really protect your finances. Soon it will.
I loved your post Phillip....I left my corporate job a couple of years ago to become a massage therapist and it was the best decision of my life. The healthcare was the big snafu, but I was able to get a decent plan from an association I belong too.
If Universal healthcare is working in every other "civilized" country in the world, why are we not embracing that concept? I think this bill is a great step in the right direction.
As for the "me" vs. "them" mentality....I am amazed at how many grown up people have forgotten how the share with others, help others, and respect others. Many people will go to church, but will not follow the commandments where it says to "honor thy neighbor".
Just grow up....not everything is about money...you CANNOT take it with you at all when you die!
I am 35, lived in CA for 5 years, worked for Wamu, started off with 50k and was laid off at 100k, left and went back to Germany after that without ever collecting a dime of unemployment. Big paycut to 60k in my new job here, but at least I get six weeks of vacation. I was surprised in CA how many Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Why is it necessary to have the biggest apartment/house, car etc. you can afford. I had roommates, paid cash for my car, and saved more than 50% of my income. And btw I have been doing the same even during university (at 500 Euros a month sponsored by my sponsor company),and in my first crappy jobs out of school earning 20k, that meant a crappy apartment and old car, low cost entertainment such as mountain biking and parties at home with friends instead of going gout. I do not have a cent of debt, always paid my credit card in full by direct debit every month. Having less than 2 years of full living expenses saved up is financial suicide in the long run in my opinion, especially if you have kids (I am currently 7 months pregnant). Getting unemployed is terrible and traumatic, but it is exacerbated by having lived at or close to your means, or even above, for years - instead of well below, and not having saved much. A lot of people will have to get used to a permanently lower standard of living as a result of this "Greater Depression". Downsize now, do not wait until your unemployment runs out or savings are exhausted. If you then end up getting another well paid job, all the better. You will sleep very soundly with lots of cash to spare at the end of the month.
These announcements about the feds hiring are not accurate. Sure, they CLAIM to be hiring more people but the incompetence that is rife in the government is clearly demonstrated in their hiring process. MANY in the DC area have been given firm job offers, strung along with a promised start date for months and then told their "tentative" offer was nullified. This is after people have turned down other jobs because they had a FIRM, NON-TENTATIVE offer from the feds.
The fed employees are not held accountable for their inability to perform their jobs, they hide behind the fed bureaucracy and continue to do NOTHING at their desks all day. Sure, there are a few- like 15% at best- that actually give half a crap about doing a good job but the rest are just sucking on the taxpayers who are required to perform to keep their jobs- unlike the feds.
Be careful- if you are accustomed to working and performing and being rewarded for doing a god job- throw those ideas out the window. You will be shunned, ridiculed, and mocked for your farcical belief that you actually have to WORK while in the government employ.
However, if you enjoy sitting on your lazy, unproductive butt all day getting paid the same if you put forth any effort or not, then a government job is for you. If you enjoy the priveledge of ignoring people, "working" your own hours, taking 3 hour lunches and weeks of vacation from your non-job, then being a fed might be for you. If you want to join the feast of laziness, sloth, gluttony, greed and fraud that is government employment, then be sure to sell your soul before joining the party.
It's a step in the right direction. It's eliminating some loop holes that insurance companies have been generously taking advantage of for far too long. I think it's totally fair and acceptable to eliminate them being able to benefit twice from one law. How much have they banked from that alone?
Without the reform, taxpayers would be footing the ever increasing bill for those who cannot afford health care. And those with health care see their premiums increase each year anyway.
I think it's taking away a little power from insurance companies, who have a huge role in health care in this country but aren't the ones receiving or giving care directly. I don't think any other business could have gotten away with all this for so long.
I also think that more jobs will be created to give care to more people now able to seek health care.
Americans who are happy with their insurance plans are generally the ones who have been lucky enough to not really need it. Only when something goes devastatingly wrong do you discover the limits, loopholes, and exclusions. Most people have no idea what costs can be for cancer care, strokes, traumatic injuries. Could you pay 10 to 20% of $250,000? $500,000? Something like 30% of all bankruptcies are related to medical bills and this does not happen in other developed countries.
I agree with Phillip the purpose of insurance is to spread the risk around a large group of people, so the one person unlucky enough to get rundown by a drunk doesn't have their life ruined. I think a "healthy habits" discount similar to "good driver discounts" should be sufficient to motivate people to quit smoking, wear their helmets and seatbelts, lose weight/exercise. I don't think those whose health problems are not under their control should be penalized.
Finally to everyone who trumpets "preventative care" and healthy habits as a way to bring down costs I have to caution you that this is probably a fallacy. Better preventative care improves health and helps people live longer, but the longer you live the more health care dollars you consume over your lifetime. Who is the better health care "bargain" the guy who never sees a doctor and drops dead of a cardiac arrest at 60, or the one who exercises and eats right and goes on to require cancer treatment and nursing home care in his 80's? We can extend the quantity and quality of life, but it's not cheap. A big part of Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid's problems relate to the fact that are seniors are now living much longer on average than was ever anticipated when the programs were set up.
Thanks for the post, you have precisely articulated my thoughts about the unfairness of our current structures. I considered starting my own business, but knew that I could never afford my own insurance. I have never understood why the conservatives wouldn't want health care off the backs (and books) of American business. It strangles their ability to compete worldwide. And to everyone who questions the ability of the goverment to control costs I would say that they already are the primary limiting factor on costs limiting Medicare reimbursement to "reasonable and customary" levels. Other insurers then adopt Medicare's standards. This is how it has been working for years.
I find that large binder clips work better than clothes pin. They are wider and grip harder. They're also usually fairly easy to find in the supply closet when you realize you've forgotten your clothes pins. :)
Alternatively, you can use an eye shade. Same idea, just on your head and, if you're flying extra long distances, you should already have one in your pack. Although some people find them uncomfortable.
Big thanks for the very valuable information. I'm also interested to know about debt and debt elimination like unsecured debt elimination. Looking forward to your discussion on that. Keep it coming! :)
I love Girl Scout cookies it’s going to save me a fortune! Thanks for all the other great tips and ideas. Definitely making some cookies this weekend!
Thanks again,
Matt
I'm 21 and I've been using my Netspend card since I was 18. I don't mind the $10 fee and direct deposit is free. I understand why someone more fiscally responsible would have a problem with the program. I also believe for a young adult terrified by the thought of debt, it helps.
This, so much. We can argue all year on whether the new health care laws are the best way to fix things (probably not), but the fact of the matter still remains that insurance was already irreparably broken - through rescission, through being so tightly bound to what type of job you have, through its unavailability to anyone with a previously existing condition, through forcing doctors to spend more time and effort getting their money than they do doing their actual damn job, through...I could go on forever. In my own small circle of friends, there's three people at least who have been horribly screwed over by the current health care system. At least this offers a chance for change.
I work for small local government, and while the benefits are decent, the pay is just ok. Unfortunately I was downsized out of a company I had worked with for 25 years. I consider it a blessing to have the stability, and won't have to worry about looking for another job. Because at age 56, it is very difficult, even in an area with better than average employment rates. The job itself is mind-numbing, however, so that is definitely one of the downsides.
One thing I forgot: tort reform
*WHY* was this not in the bill?!?!?
Can someone explain to me why we don't have a problem with suing the doctor/hospital for $100m when someone dies on the operating table due to doctor error?
But when the doctor successfully saves a life...people think it is rediculous that the procedure was $250,000? Shouldn't the person be charged $100m for the chance to continue living?
OK...a little extreme, but tort reform would cut HUGE costs out of the system. I guess there are trial attorneys who have more money to lobby Congress than I do.
"First of all, I think that this health insurance reform will only RAISE health premiums--not lower them. How in the world can insurance companies keep premiums low if they have to cover everyone including those with pre-existing conditions? Sure, the idea sounds nice, but the cost to the company is going to skyrocket. They will be left with no other option than to raise premiums or go out of business."
This brings forth my biggest concern with the health care bill. Insurance companies are for-profit entities. Whether you like it or not, they are. Just like "small entrepreneurs" or other huge corporations, the goal is to make money. The government is creating a "fund" with $5B to work with high-risk individuals. I cannot see there being enough "healthy" individuals entering a the system to keep premiums at the lows the government wants them.
Let us say, then, that insurance companies begin to "bow out" as they cannot make money at the artificially low premiums the government wants them at. I fear that the lack of profitability will drive private enterprise from the picture. Enter the government. The government will be forced to create an option (or whatever label they want to put on it) to provide coverage.
We've been told that our country cannot afford to NOT have this health bill.
The truth is we cannot afford to be wrong. We've got a couple of other entitlement programs that need fixed...before we create another one. The President said this is a Congress that "must make difficult decisions" - they then need to address social security, earmark (pork) spending and ridding Capitol Hill of the lobbyist that lend a bigger voice to corporations/special interest groups than the people.
If this bill was created to help our people, then I'm for it. If it was created with the heavy influence of corporations and special interest groups...with the people 2nd...then there is no "change" in this country yet.
(Sorry for the politics.)
Thank You for this one. It's not a good idea to run off to set up a still in the backyard without giving a thought to the dangers which may be many. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
I recall when ATF was testing downstream waters in all the small tributaries to the Chattahoochee river in Georgia because the local rednecks were dumping their thump kegs in the water to quickly dispose of evidence and unwanted leftovers. The fish and Turtles loved it, but so did the ATF. Those meters they used were very delicate, they could sniff out an extremely small percentage of alcohol in a stream. Consequently many a good ol boy got busted.
I remember the days when a pick up truck loaded with empty milk jugs or bags of Corn and sugar got more attention than an Arab with a hand grenade.
I have dreamed of doing this but have never had enough privacy and so...Ah well.
To a brew that won't hold a bubble.
Paul, let me first thank you for sharing. I'm sorry you're going through what you are (and many are), but interested in the range of emotions/opinions it has brought forth.
First of all, Citi/BofA/etc. have no real vested interest in how you feel. Your loan was sold before you signed off on it, and they simply kept the "servicing" (or lack thereof). This allows them to do a loan, essentially get their money back + additional for doing the loan, and THEN get paid to "service" the loan. This is how not only the super banks do it, but any bank that sells mortgages to Fannie/Freddie and keep servicing the loan. Some do it well, others do not. This is also what allowed banks to book subprime loans at high interest rates...but not shoulder the risk, as the sold the loans off to Fannie/Freddie too. This is what allowed all the loans to keep getting done...regardless of inflated prices, inflated risk, inflated interest rates.
Second, several above referenced "lending practices" are being blamed for the bubble and subsequent collapse. While my first point addresses part of the lending side, I'd like to mention the "borrowing demand" that disappears in the discussion. In order for a bank to "lend", there has to be demand for the lending product. What amazes me is the market's IGNORING of the "market bubble" warnings! Yes, they warned of a bubble for what...5 years?!?!? But people kept buying, buying, buying! Do you all remember the boy who cried wolf? This is absolutely what happened - they warned about it for so long, that the market grew oblivious to it! I think consumers grew complacent. I think there were MANY *IGNORANT* consumers. Did the lenders (keep in mind some were not banks) take advantage of this? In some cases, yes. In other cases, no. I'm NOT going to place 100% of the blame on the banks - it took 2 to tango.
As for your particular situation, Paul, you signed up for this ride. I'm not a fan of "principal reduction", unless you can prove that Citi fabricated the value of the home specifically to get you into the loan. If you wish to maintain your credit through all of this your best situation may be to work with Citi to sell your home and get a note from them for the difference. Argue that this would essentially put them in the same position they are now, but they could make a little money on it! You'll have to rent, and you'll have a rent payment plus this smaller loan payment but you'll keep your credit solid and be in the best position upon exiting the situation. If you walk away from it, they could come after you for the deficiency. They could throw a 1099 your way, and then you'll owe the IRS instead of Citi...I'd MUCH RATHER owe Citi. The IRS is just evil.
As for the "nuclear" option put forth by Richard - I think this is terrible advice. My primary reason for saying this is you give up ALL control of the situation. You don't control the selling price. You don't control the outcome after the sale (which you can possibly negotiate if you do it as I said above).
I don't like relying on a credit score, but if you're looking at another house in the next 5 years...I'd recommend trying to broker a deal that gets you out of the house, into renting and with a small note for the difference. Hope this helps! Thank you again for sharing!
darn, the charging station blog has been removed by the author...
Dollar General has started selling a knock off cookie, Ive only tasted the "thin mints" (because they are the only flavor they are selling I like) and they taste just like them!!! Only 1.85 a box!
I was a girl scout and I know I should support the local trooops and all but the price of them have just skyrocketed. (But again, what hasnt?)
I'm a regular here, but in the interests of keeping my job, I'm going to post anonymously. I'm a fed in DC, and I have to say, federal jobs are great in terms of benefits - but they can be absolutely soul sucking. As someone just beginning their 30's, I'm still young and idealistic, apparently, which means that the bureaucracy still really really grates on me.
That said, as my coworkers and I remind ourselves, we really like paychecks, and we're so thankful to be employed. And we're always looking for a new job.
Defnitely agree that you shouldn't use this as a substitution for supporting your local group. However, if you find yourself needing a Thin Mint in the off season, or you didn't buy enough to meet your needs, this is a great way to get through until the next order date!
Linsey Knerl
If you do make your own Girl Scout cookies, I implore you to make a donation to your local Girl Scout Council. Girl Scouting provides so many opportunities to girls and young women, but much of that wouldn't be possible without the money cookie sales provide.
my daughter's Daisy scout troop to go on trips! I support buying the real deal.
Margaret Garcia-Couoh
Your guess is completely wrong and insulting. There are financially responsible people on both sides on the political spectrum, so please don't try to draw that line in the sand because we are probably on the same side.
Since you seem to be missing the point completely; how about this comparison? I bought stocks on margin that depreciated during the economic collapse. I should walk away from that as well.
I hate Girl Scout cookies. Girl Scouts themselves are cool, and I support them, but goodness me, do I ever hate those cookies. This alone has saved me hundreds of dollars over the course of my life.
I highly recommend learning to loathe things like cookies.
Pretty much everything in this article describes way to lower your blood sugar, but your father obviously needs to discuss this with a physician first. Green tea and cinnamon have helped lots of people, as does exercise (even disabled people should be able to do small forms of exercise, sitting or even lying down).
This is not a forum for medical advice, so make sure that your father is treated by a physician.
@wmarcy:
I don't think that's it at all.
I mean, in a sense, all insurance "shifts" the cost of catastrophes from the people who have them onto the people who are lucky enough not to. But I think that misses the point—which is that insurance is supposed to insure that when bad luck strikes, your family's finances are protected.
The problem was, the way health insurance worked in the US, it wasn't really insurance. (It was more like a weird pre-paid medical plan for healthy people.) It didn't really protect your finances. Soon it will.