Heartbreaking Story on Two Unemployed Subprime Lending Executives
 

This is a heartbreaking story of two subprime lending executives who are now facing the horrors of unemployment. This part really got me choked up:


Full Story

LOL!

"Honey, umm, we're going to have to get rid of the Gardener until I find work..."

"Fuck you, I want a divorce. This was not what I signed up for."

It's all relative.

I'm sure there's people on this board that would consider it "heartbreaking" if someone had to move from a house to an apartment (see the threads about the proposed government bail-out plans).

Definition of "rich" - someone with more money than you.

You didn't think it would disappear? You made loans to people who couldn't afford them, and your surprised?

Pretty much, best I can tell.

I think owning a Corvette makes you "rich" by any definition.

dola,

and also having a gardener

i took my gardener's corvette away

That story wasn't heartbreaking at all.

No offense, but that's silly. Capitalism is a good concept, but common sense and perspective is even greater.

No he's right. I would kill myself if I had to live in an apartment again. Apartments are for commoners. It's heartbreaking, really.

NOTHING PERSONAL, COMMONERS!

Trading in you Corvette for a cheaper car makes sense, but a Suburban? With gas prices as high as they are today (and will likely remain)? Come on. Go for something a little more practical there.

I read posts about people's lives being "destroyed" by having to move out of houses they couldn't afford in the first place (and presumably, moving to a smaller house or apartment that they can actually afford - that's a real tragedy).

It's just silly to me that there's a specific level where people are "allowed" to complain or be unhappy, based on wealth.

Ha! That is great...

Oh, one other thing - The whole capitalistic system of "gonna get mine" is backed up whole-heartedly by a lot of my fellow Christians that have been bamboozled by the republican party. It's a shame, because to me, it mocks the very figure it follows - Christ. It's a cliche', but in situations like this, Christians should follow the adage "What would Jesus do", and it's quite obvious that some of the selfishness inherent in capitalism would/does appall Jesus.

Now, I have admit, that I agree with a couple of moral points of the republican party, and conservatives in general, but I'm finding that more and more I'm swinging leftish. I would never identify myself as a party member of any kind, as I find that to be intellectually lazy and rah rah-ish, but I'm a bit more disgusted with the hypocrisy of conservatives that claim that they are Christians, than I am of the pseudo-intellectual elitism of lefties.

Leets not get too off base here, but there is a big difference between
A) I am so sorry you lost your job, let me give you some assistance until you get back on your feet.
and..
B) hey your neighbor lost is job, we will be taking 33% of your income forever to help pay him and all the ones like him.

Im pretty sure any moral person with the means would support A, few if any like B.

I dont think owning a Corvette by definition makes you rich, my closest neighbor has two (neither are less than 20 years old) but even a new one, hell they will finance them for 10 years if you want now, then its just a $450/month payment. Lets not confuse debt with rich...


But all in all, I say let them eat cake...

Yeah, I would have thought they would have opted for a camry, or something like that. Then again, a Corvette is as big of a gas hog as a suburban I believe.

All the more reason to go with something with better gas mileage. The guy had to have some idea how much he was spending on gas.

Yeah, let's poke fun at people who got an education and were successful enough to earn 100k salaries in their jobs.

THAT'LL SHOW EM! BASTARDS!

Couldn't have been too successful at their jobs if they are selling their corvette and letting their gardener go, could they?

That comment is so ridiculous, I don't even know where to start, so I won't go into detail. I will say this: Education and success are not always a product of intelligence or diligence. In fact, I would say that there is a LARGE percentage of people that are wealthy because of A) a stable childhood, B) a lot of good fortune, and C) cut-throat tactics. Of course, that's only a large percentage, but to say that every one of them is the dishwasher to famous chef situation, is wrong.

Jesus would only fire his gardner as a last resort.

As opposed to making fun of athletes who were successfull enough to earn their salaries?

Replace "subprime lending executives" with "athlete", the response would be no different.

IMO 100K isn't even close to wealthy.

Most people who earn 100K went to school, found a job with a good stable company, worked hard and earned it.

in before lock

Please, do break it down for me gently. After all, I deserve to fall into a ditch because (1) my parents actually cared enough to provide opportunities to succeed, (2) I didn't die of tragic accident or other illness, (3) I took advantage of said opportunities to make something of myself.

Also, I've found people who make similar arguments that you have made above are uneducated and bitter. You're not any of those, are you?

I think you make a good point here. Early Christian communities were more like modern-day communes and practised a form of socialism. However, even then there were people who took advantage of others, which prompted the Apostle Paul to write to the Thessalonians, the lazy person who refuses to work does not deserve to eat at the expense of others but should learn to work with his hands to care for his needs. (1Th 4:11; 2Th 3:10, 12).

Of all the modern economic systems, I think capitalism has proven to be the best, especially when the emphasis is on "reaping the rewards of your hard work."

However, like any system, taken to its extreme... i.e. social and economic Darwinism, it can become something very ugly -- think about Charles Dickens' cautionary tale "A Christmas Carol" featuring Ebenezer Scrooge.

$100k ain't even a dent in "wealthy". That amount is more like the money that wealthy people really can't account for from year to year.

Cut-throat bastards.

Does it say how long they were unemployed before having to cash out the old 401k?

Really I thought this thread was just about the entertainment and irony of two people whose entire career was based on taking advantage of people too stupid and shortsighted to understand that they couldn't afford housing... being too stupid and shortsighted to understand they were living paycheck to paycheck. But then the article mentions they "went through their savings" and really seems to fail to make a point at all of any kind so eh.

Yeah, definately agree. I know far too many people (my GF being one of them) that earn either 100k or close to it, and I don't consider any of them as "wealthy". "Doing well for themselves" is a better description.

My opinion of it is that people learn to live a certain way. When they need to scale down that lifestyle they view it as a hardship. Most of us think it is funny that they had to sacrifice their gardener and coevette, luxuries they can obviously do without, but to them it is symbolic that their lives have taken a drastic change for the worse.

Could they move into an apartment and drive an astrovan, of course they could, but that isn't the lifestyle they are accustomed to. So of course that is unthinkable to them.

It's the same concept in divorce settlements with rich people. Why does Michael Strahan have to pay 30,000 a month in alimony ( this is just a random number) when his ex could easily live on 4000-5000 a month easily. Because she has grown accustomed to a lifestyle.

You don't need to even look at a Dickens' tale to see Capitalism at it's extreme - there are plenty of real-world examples. Hell, some examples fill up nearly an entire continent.

But that's probably a human trait more than a trait of capitalism.

My biggest beef with capitalism is that it encourages people to support corporations that are out only to advance themselves at the expense of everyone else, including their own country if that will profit them.

But maybe I give capitalism too much credit for that as well.

Same here. I have worked for a very stable company for almost 20 years with relatively low turnover (and I'm just a little above average as far as longetivity). Just in IT (150 people), the average salary is not too far from that. The thing that doesn't make me "rich" is that we are a single-income family. Most of the "wealthier" people I know or aware of have two good incomes. That is a tradeoff my wife and I have and will refuse to make.

lemme ask you a question.

Lets says for whatever reason your wife had to get a part time job, would you view that as a hardship to your life?

I guess you have decided to get personal and be a dick. That's ok, I can deal. Yes, I went to college. 1) No, I was not started out on the right foot in life. It has had an affect on everything I have done in life, for various reasons. I talked about it in my FTB, and I'm not going to talk about it here, especially to a person like you. 2) Fortune and opportunities actually opening up DO have a large effect on a person's direction in life, regardless of what you think/experience on a personal level. 3) What does "making something of one's self" mean? Money? Worldly praise? Cars, houses, etc.? This is just my opinion, but I agree with Buddha, Jesus, and other much, much, much more wise people than you, or even me - Possessions do not equate to success and happiness. The fact that you seem to think so is an indictment on your own shallowness.

As far as how much money I make, and how much my family brings in, that's not your business. We get by comfortably, and have a very happy life. I don't think that my net worth expanding would make me any more fulfilled. An extra boat or driving a Corvette could never make me any happier than a day hiking with my family, or a backyard barbeque with friends, so what does an extra 25k mean? Maybe I'm naive, but I am who I am. I have made sure that my child will go to college, and because of that, I will happily shop at JC Penny. Even if I make more money, my wife will make me donate a substantial portion of it anyway. Anyone who knows her (and there are a few here), know that that's true. I'll take a person like that, over a person who is devastated over losing a sailboat any day.

Anyway, intellectually, I understand what some of you are saying. I just don't agree.

She would. Her schedule today:
7:00 - get Sean ready for school
8:00 - take him to school
9:00- take Josh to college
9:30 - gym
10:30 - washing, dishes, etc.
12:00 - errand to Target
1:30 - pick up Sean (early release)
2:30 - pick up Joshua
3:00 - help with Sean's homework
4:00 - get dinner ready

True. Plenty of examples in today's corporate world. However, I also tend to agree that this should be attributed more to the traits of those who head these corporations, specifically greed, than to capitalism itself.

Of course, but people's blind resentment of those better off than them implies that they think the opposite - that everyone with money was born with it and thus, doesn't deserve it, and even worse, is somehow evil for having it (and especially complaining about losing any of it).

As far as $100k being wealthy, that depends on a lot of things, but if you broke down responses by the gross income of those giving their opinion, you'd see a ridiculous correlation. And if you could somehow have a worldwide survey of whether $20k/year (in US dollars) is "wealthy" - a great majority of the world's population would say yes. So what I see a lot of in this country is very rich people complaining about very very rich people.

I agree - a company is not a person, and does not desire or want anything. Neither does capitalism. Companies are personified to the extreme in these kind of discussions - you'd think they were a living, breathing, conscious ogre-like creature intentionally looking to destroy us all.

That's true. molson. That's why I have advocated personal responsibility in giving and donating. It wouldn't take much to make a difference in the lives of others here and around the world but we are too lazy, selfish and materialistic.

that kind of illustrates my point. You have grown accustomed to your lifestyle and schedules. For your wife to have to get a job would drasticly change it, even though there are many people who have a family where both spouses work.

I think we were talking about "wealthy" household incomes where there are two good wage earners. Nothing wrong with that, was just saying that's how many of those that I know end up more "wealthier" than my family. Yes, she could work outside of the home but absolutely does not want to.

Schmidty is such a fucking communist he doesn't think you should have to wear a suit to a job interview.

I am starting to wonder if we should even wear clothes.... :)

That would definitely make an impression....

While that's completely true, the people who are in charge at these companies aren't working solely for themselves. They have a legal obligation to do what's best for the shareholders of the company, regardless of what that entails.

Though I can't remember the specifics off the top of my head, the classic case is some car company a good many years ago who released a dodgy car. One of the executives wanted to recall it because it was a dangerous vehicle, but it was decided that the cost of the recall would exceed the cost of the legal damages for anyone injured in accidents. The exec still wanted to push ahead with the recall, but was blocked by the shareholders in court. I may have a few details wrong, but I'm sure others know this case as well.

Depending on the industry and company you've chosen there are plenty of well educated, professional, hard-working people who could never dream of making $100K....at least based on my own anecdotal experience. On the other hand, everybody knows some douchebag in some flavor of sales/marketing who's pulling in six figures after 6 months on the job. I have no what my point is.

As far as $100K/year being wealthy...that seems entirely subjective in these times. I could certainly make $100K seem wealthy, but I'm single, relatively healthy and have very little debt to deal with. Give that $100K to a family of 4 with a pair of college loans and a couple car payments and a mortgage somewhere in California and suddenly $100K isn't going to get you through the end of the month. Ummm, once again I seem to have forgotten what my point was.

I have a feeling that Farrah is going to take me off of her myspace friends list after this thread. :(