Forum Discussion
- i read the original NEW YORK TIMES article on the RTR and nomads
online last week, more accurate and informative
plus i read the review of the book mentioned
the article mentions the book, but is NOT by the author of the book
and is not the article linked to in the first post
if i can find it again, i will post the link fj12ryder wrote:
toedtoes wrote:
I had to go back and re-read the article, thinking I had missed something.
The writer of the article was not the messenger. She didn't tell us anything. Heck, she didn't even provide us with a book review let alone any quality information.
The book may have all the answers, but the article doesn't say "here are some short excerpts but you need to read the book". Instead, she used the book as a divine reading and expects the reader to take what is written in the article as gospel because it was pulled from a book that may or may not be well researched.
The article is basically a Q&A with the author of a book. The author of the article asked author of the book some questions and then printed her responses. The author of the article contributed very little other than posing questions.
I would suggest to the author of the article that the "little" contribution of determining what questions to ask is a MAJOR part of journalism and quality writing.- I'm reading the book now, depressing as h*ll
Nothing wrong with the writing or the author. She has camped alongside some of these people and documented their condition and how they got there. So far it's mostly about the crash of 2008, divorces, illness that contributed to their current plight.
These are hard working people that do what they can to find work, not hand outs.
It's about the message, not the messenger. Fizz wrote:
I'm reading the book now, depressing as h*ll
Nothing wrong with the writing or the author. She has camped alongside some of these people and documented their condition and how they got there. So far it's mostly about the crash of 2008, divorces, illness that contributed to their current plight.
These are hard working people that do what they can to find work, not hand outs.
It's about the message, not the messenger.
Exactly what message did the ARTICLE provide? It gave us nothing but a couple vague blurbs that have nothing to contribute to an intelligent discussion of the book or the subject of the book. It doesn't even provide anything to encourage someone to pick up the book.Fizz wrote:
I'm reading the book now, depressing as h*ll
Nothing wrong with the writing or the author. She has camped alongside some of these people and documented their condition and how they got there. So far it's mostly about the crash of 2008, divorces, illness that contributed to their current plight.
These are hard working people that do what they can to find work, not hand outs.
It's about the message, not the messenger.
So did she do any systematic community wide surveys or just a few anecdotes?
I don't doubt there are people in a tough position and some after doing everything right.
What I do question is if they are cherry picking examples because doom & gloom sells.
Of course, this is where an actual journalist doing their job would highlight if there is solid data backing the assertions.TechWriter wrote:
Grit dog wrote:
TechWriter wrote:
Grit dog wrote:
While there, again, are many who have a good reason for being in the situation they are, there are more that who spent more than they earned and somehow thought it would magically work itself out.
How do you know this?
Go back and read my post above. That’s how I know. Saw these folks daily and hung out with several of them.
Well, if I had known that you are drawing your conclusions from a whole "several" people, I never would have questioned your vast generalizations.
First before I go off on vast generalizations, remember I said I understand that there are many that get down on their luck through no fault of their own.
But think about this genius. There never would have been a crash of 2008 or 2006 depending on what part of the country if people weren't generally spending "equity" that they never had in hand in cash money.....it was like perpetual motion, fueled by millions keeping up with the joneses. Maybe I met the only 20,30, 50, however many people that went ahead and spent all the "free money" they though they had. Or maybe it was the banks' fault for handing $ out like candy at Halloween.
When I get pre approved for over a 300k loan with no money in the bank (well like only 10-20k) and a JOB OFFER LETTER only for $70k a year and no employment history the year prior. (Built a house for free....just so you don't think I was hanging out playing video games). Something is wrong. I laughed at the clown and asked him if he thought I was as dumb as he was for offering me that much.
BUT alas, few years later, after getting more offers for home eq loans than I could count, we pulled an eq loan for a quick 100k, in 10 minutes in our living room from a door to door equity loan salesman. Seriously, door to door salesman. Needed cash for a downpayment on another house and got it as easy as going to the atm machine.
What's all this matter for? Because there weren't door to door loan salesman because no one was making poor choices. It was because dang near everyone was making poor choices. Period end of story. Sorry you were either someone who made the same greedy dumb decisions or ended up supporting someone who did...- You’re taking too narrow a view on the housing crash.
It affected thousands upon thousands. Everybody who had anything to do with housing from lumberjack to drywall installer was suddenly out of work. Put that on top of some pre existing personal crisis and a lot of people suffered, especially the ones over 55. Fizz wrote:
It affected thousands upon thousands.
Not my next door neighbor. 7 series Beemer, 2 houses, spoiled teenage kids. He worked for AIG.valhalla360 wrote:
Fizz wrote:
I'm reading the book now, depressing as h*ll
Nothing wrong with the writing or the author. She has camped alongside some of these people and documented their condition and how they got there. So far it's mostly about the crash of 2008, divorces, illness that contributed to their current plight.
These are hard working people that do what they can to find work, not hand outs.
It's about the message, not the messenger.
So did she do any systematic community wide surveys or just a few anecdotes?
I don't doubt there are people in a tough position and some after doing everything right.
What I do question is if they are cherry picking examples because doom & gloom sells.
Of course, this is where an actual journalist doing their job would highlight if there is solid data backing the assertions.
Again, there is a difference between the article and the book. The BOOK may very well have done all this - but the ARTICLE is poorly written because it doesn't provide any actual information that the reader can use to understand how the author of the book made the assertions.
The ARTICLE is not even as well written as a 1st grade book report.Grit dog wrote:
TechWriter wrote:
Grit dog wrote:
TechWriter wrote:
Grit dog wrote:
While there, again, are many who have a good reason for being in the situation they are, there are more that who spent more than they earned and somehow thought it would magically work itself out.
How do you know this?
Go back and read my post above. That’s how I know. Saw these folks daily and hung out with several of them.
Well, if I had known that you are drawing your conclusions from a whole "several" people, I never would have questioned your vast generalizations.
First before I go off on vast generalizations, remember I said I understand that there are many that get down on their luck through no fault of their own.
But think about this genius. There never would have been a crash of 2008 or 2006 depending on what part of the country if people weren't generally spending "equity" that they never had in hand in cash money.....it was like perpetual motion, fueled by millions keeping up with the joneses. Maybe I met the only 20,30, 50, however many people that went ahead and spent all the "free money" they though they had. Or maybe it was the banks' fault for handing $ out like candy at Halloween.
When I get pre approved for over a 300k loan with no money in the bank (well like only 10-20k) and a JOB OFFER LETTER only for $70k a year and no employment history the year prior. (Built a house for free....just so you don't think I was hanging out playing video games). Something is wrong. I laughed at the clown and asked him if he thought I was as dumb as he was for offering me that much.
BUT alas, few years later, after getting more offers for home eq loans than I could count, we pulled an eq loan for a quick 100k, in 10 minutes in our living room from a door to door equity loan salesman. Seriously, door to door salesman. Needed cash for a downpayment on another house and got it as easy as going to the atm machine.
What's all this matter for? Because there weren't door to door loan salesman because no one was making poor choices. It was because dang near everyone was making poor choices. Period end of story. Sorry you were either someone who made the same greedy dumb decisions or ended up supporting someone who did...
So you were smart enough to see something wrong with that $300K loan. How many people didn't understand what that means? When asked "how will I pay for it?" they were told "don't worry, you'll have ARM financing. This will keep the payments low. By the time the payments increase, you'll have enough equity to refinance with a fixed rate mortgage".
Not everyone is money smart. Not everyone went out and bought stuff. Many folks trusted the experts to tell them how to do it. Unfortunately, the experts stopped caring about whether the people could pay for the loan.
When my mom was selling my grandmother's condo, she got an offer. It included a letter from the bank stating that the buyer had been pre-approved for a loan at x percent interest for $xxxK. Six weeks later, we found out the real estate agent had faked the letter and had told the buyer that "it was no problem because they were sure to get a loan at that rate in no time". They couldn't and had to renege on the deal. Who's fault was it? The buyer who trusted their real estate agent to help them buy a home? My mom for accepting an offer that looked completely legit? Her agent for believing the offer was legit? Or the other agent who lied to his clients, forged papers, and gave bad expert advice to people out of his own selfishness and greed?
Yes, greed and selfishness were at the heart of the housing collapse. But it was the greed and selfishness of the experts that allowed it to happen. Many people trusted what those experts told them through no wrong doing of their own. They were lied to by those very people who should have been preventing these events.
I always think how this would have affected my great grandmother. Widowed at a young age with 5 yound children, didn't get her citizenship because it was dependent upon her husband's and he died before his went through, didn't speak English - had she been offered the opportunity to own a home where she could raise her children and she was told by the experts that this was a great way to do it, I have no doubt she would have listened to them. Would it have then been her fault for being greedy and wanting something she couldn't afford? Or would it have been considered a scam and she the victim?
