dead sons loans should be forgiven

[Archer77]

I see what Ratard is saying. While the mom did cosign for the loan and it is her responsibility to pay it back, you would think in certain situations banks would allow for a little grey area. Things are not always so black-and-white in life. Sometimes ones moral compass could lead one to do what they would normally not do (in this case, the bank forgiving the loan). The problem is that banks have little to no morals regarding the livelihood of others. When dealing with banks its a lose-lose situation.

By law should she be required to pay it back because she cosigned and took responsibility? Yes.

However, should there be a little humanity left that allows ones moral compass make their decision? Yes.

The problem is that, to a great extent, morals are subjective. Some do not see anything moral about forgiving her loans, since she is responsible for them.

I hear you, totally.  The thing is that banks are amoral and don't care about extenuating circumstances..  People need to realize what they are doing business with when they receive a bank loan.

[Irongrip400]

So logically we the people who should step in.

We should condemn this on a not only a emotional level which is irrelevant but a logical level.

There is no valid reason why this should be the way it is.
This isn't a sign of some tragedy, but how predatory banks are, they should do their due diligence when making loan contracts.   and there should be laws on this type of shit.  

And then what?  You can't make exceptions for the rules, unless they are already stated in the loan documents.  when my grandfather died, he had co-signed on a credit card for my dirtbag uncle.  His estate had to take care of the credit card.  should the loan just have died with him?  No, it's business.  It's tragic, but it's life.

[Twaddle]

However, should there be a little humanity left that allows ones moral compass make their decision? Yes.

The problem is that, to a great extent, morals are subjective. Some do not see anything moral about forgiving her loans, since she is responsible for them.

I see it morally wrong for her to not pay back the loan.  She is basically stealing from the lender.  That's money out of the lenders pocket, and food off the lenders table.  

[MikMaq]

I see what Ratard is saying. While the mom did cosign for the loan and it is her responsibility to pay it back, you would think in certain situations banks would allow for a little grey area. Things are not always so black-and-white in life. Sometimes ones moral compass could lead one to do what they would normally not do (in this case, the bank forgiving the loan). The problem is that banks have little to no morals regarding the livelihood of others. When dealing with banks its a lose-lose situation.

By law should she be required to pay it back because she cosigned and took responsibility? Yes.

However, should there be a little humanity left that allows ones moral compass make their decision? Yes.

The problem is that, to a great extent, morals are subjective. Some do not see anything moral about forgiving her loans, since she is responsible for them.

This isn't just morals, it's about your self interest. If you were past the working age, and your son needed a cosign for a school loan, would not sign it.

Logically if your unable to assist your child, you would do what can be done.

If virtually everyone would do the same as only a sociopath or some sort of nut job would opt out in this situation, you  would have to agree that this is fucked.

The fact is if this were a major business loan, the debtor would have a thousand loop holes that let them off the hook.

[SF1900]

I hear you, totally.  The thing is that banks are amoral and don't care about extenuating circumstances..  People need to realize what they are doing business with when they receive a bank loan.

Exactly. I would hope there would be a little humanity left in the banking industry, but apparently there is not. Which is why if youre taking out a loan, you should know that come hell or high water, youre paying it back.

[SF1900]

I see it morally wrong for her to not pay back the loan.  She is basically stealing from the lender.  That's money out of the lenders pocket, and food of the lenders table. 

I never said it wasnt morally wrong for her not to pay it back. Where did I say that? :-/

I said that in certain situations the bank may decide to forgive back a loan. IF not, then she she has no choice to pay it back. That does not mean that the bank cant take action and forgive her loans (IF THEY CHOOSE).

[B_B_C]

what is the point and purpose of this thread?

[rusty kuntz]

Considering he probably only used a fraction of that money to pay for classes and such and the fact that she co-signed she is reliable.  Fuck justifying her situation.  Sure it sucks but maybe she shouldn't have taken that much money out for a community college degree.  

If it was just his loan then sure wipe that shit clean but she fucking signed for it.  Game over have a nice day!!!!!

[SF1900]

I see it morally wrong for her to not pay back the loan.  She is basically stealing from the lender.  That's money out of the lenders pocket, and food off the lenders table.  

Thats a stretch of an argument. Sure, I guess I can see what youre saying, but not paying back a 50K loan is not going to make the CEO of citibank poor. I do get where your argument is coming from, but probably would not stand up in an actual debate

[MikMaq]

And then what?  You can't make exceptions for the rules, unless they are already stated in the loan documents.  when my grandfather died, he had co-signed on a credit card for my dirtbag uncle.  His estate had to take care of the credit card.  should the loan just have died with him?  No, it's business.  It's tragic, but it's life.

Actually the governments role is too regulate banking so that extenuating circumstances, are not to be exploited. This being a democracy and all means that the system relies on public opinion to step in and change public policy.

So in fact we can make exception for extenuating circumstances and in fact should. By lobbying against this. Any loan that is for medical or educational purposes, should have very specific exceptions for extenuating circumstances.

It's down right logical, and in everyone's self interest.

[Twaddle]

I never said it wasnt morally wrong for her not to pay it back. Where did I say that? :-/

I said that in certain situations the bank may decide to forgive back a loan. IF not, then she she has no choice to pay it back. That does not mean that the bank cant take action and forgive her loans (IF THEY CHOOSE).

I never said you said it was morally wrong.  I said, I think it's morally wrong.  

Why would a bank ever choose to forgive a  loan?  

[Twaddle]

what is the point and purpose of this thread?

To expose how many liberals and socialists there are on getbig.   

[MikMaq]

Exactly. I would hope there would be a little humanity left in the banking industry, but apparently there is not. Which is why if youre taking out a loan, you should know that come hell or high water, youre paying it back.

I don't think anyone in this thread is suggesting  that banks are all of a sudden gonna start doing the right thing.

[MikMaq]

To expose how many liberals and socialists there are on getbig.  

Lol whatever dude, your an idiot. This is hardly a socialist concept.

Your gonna always side against the publics interest, this doesn't make  you a conservative, but an idiot who refuses to acknowledge the sociopathic nature of our society.

This is a textbook example of when there should be government intervention.


If we were socialistic we would be saying that they shouldn't even need loans in the first place no one is saying this.

[Twaddle]

Thats a stretch of an argument. Sure, I guess I can see what youre saying, but not paying back a 50K loan is not going to make the CEO of citibank poor. I do get where your argument is coming from, but probably would not stand up in an actual debate

Correct, it is a stretch.  And yes, a $10,000 loan would not effect a large bank.  However, if they starting forgiving everyones loans, the bank would soon be out of business.  They have to have a blanket policy.  Every loan will be paid back.  No exceptions.

Also, we don't know what kind of lender this was.  Maybe it was a small startup, "mom and pop" lender.  In that case, yes, $10,000 might put them out of business, and on the streets.

[littledumbells]

  Anyone who is not financially, and emotionally, able to pay off a loan as cosigner should not cosign for a loan. Its just that simple.

[MikMaq]

Correct, it is a stretch.  And yes, a $10,000 loan would not effect a large bank.  However, if they starting forgiving everyones loans, the bank would soon be out of business.  They have to have a blanket policy.  Every loan will be paid back.  No exceptions.

This is where your brain is steering the argument to your own simplistic views of the world.

No one in this thread is saying forgiving everyone's loans. No one is saying that they shouldn't have loans for schooling. All we is saying is that extenuating circumstances, should apply to this situation, because the risk of everyone doing the same is quite low.

Your acting as if this were put in law that young people would be dieing of natural causes every single day, just to avoid paying the loans. Obviously they are not, so the hazard to the banks is quite low.

[MikMaq]

  Anyone who is not financially, and emotionally, able to pay off a loan as cosigner should not cosign for a loan. Its just that simple.

That is nonsense, it is not that simple at all, there is no rational reason why she should of factored in her son dying before she did. This answer to this situation is quite simple.

[Twaddle]

Your gonna always side against the publics interest, this doesn't make  you a conservative, but an idiot who refuses to acknowledge the sociopathic nature of our society.

Actually, I side with the publics interest.  It is in the publics best interest that everyone pays their debts in full.  That way, the lending system can continute to survive.  If we started forcing banks to forgive loans, the banks would soon go out of business.  If the banks went out of business, we would not be able to get loan.  If we weren't able to get a loan, we would never be able to purchase our own house.  Without a lending system, everyone would basically live paycheck to paycheck and never have anything their names.

Personally, I have always had great experiences with lenders.  They loan me money, and I in turn pay it back in full with interest.  This process has given me the ability to own my own home, and cars.  Without the lending system, I would not be given these opportunities.  I fully understand that the banks are doing me a huge favor by lending me money.  They could easily tell me to fuck off.  

[MikMaq]

Actually, I side with the publics interest.  It is in the publics best interest that everyone pays their debts in full.  That way, the lending system can continute to survive.  If we started forcing banks to forgive loans, the banks would soon go out of business.

No they would not go out of business you ignorant shit. People default on their fucking loans all the time.

I can assure you the amount lost due to 20 year old kids dieing with student debt is quite fucking low.

You don't understand the banking system, by your logic bankruptcy laws wouldn't exist. But they do so smarten the fuck up.

[Twaddle]

This is where your brain is steering the argument to your own simplistic views of the world.

No one in this thread is saying forgiving everyone's loans. No one is saying that they shouldn't have loans for schooling. All we is saying is that extenuating circumstances, should apply to this situation, because the risk of everyone doing the same is quite low.

Your acting as if this were put in law that young people would be dieing of natural causes every single day, just to avoid paying the loans. Obviously they are not, so the hazard to the banks is quite low.

Like I tried explaining to you earlier.  It doesn't matter what the circumstances are.  It doesn't matter how much the loan is for.  $10,000, $100,000, $1,000,000.  The bottom line is, the bank gave them the money, and it is owed back to the bank.  Somebody has to pay for it.  The mother agreed by cosigning.  

[SF1900]

I never said you said it was morally wrong.  I said, I think it's morally wrong.  

Why would a bank ever choose to forgive a  loan?  

I don't know. Some extreme extenuating circumstances. ::shrugs:: Its hard to say, as everyones moral compass is different. Maybe there are no situations in which a bank should forgive a loan. Im just one man posting on a bodybuilding schmoe forum  

Though I am sure there are two sides to this argument/debate.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

That's a shitty story, but by cosigning on his loans, she took full responsibilty if he stopped paying.  Sucks for her.  Maybe she can write Bohama and try to get some debt forgiveness.   

The federal loans were forgiven....this is a private loan

[lulu]

The federal loans were forgiven....this is a private loan

and should be paid by the co-signer

[B_B_C]

having had a parent whose loan guarantee (even better to the bank than cosigning)  was called in by a bank withing days of a siblings burial I have some knowledge of the problem and the incompetence of the bank. This bank has since excelled it self and many others in incompetence.
 
Please do not let me spoil the smugfest but if this fellow and family were white would the thread be started and would it get as many comments?