Mark (mhaithaca) wrote,

Mixed feelings... (207.4)

This story about sheriff's deputies and movers refusing to carry out the eviction of a 103-year-old Atlanta woman and her 83-year-old daughter is sweet, and makes for an awesome feel-good story, but I have trouble feeling that it's really ultimately a victory for "the 99%."

Even though I'm in the weird and uncomfortable position of not knowing where my March 1st mortgage payment is going to come from, I have to believe that people who can't (or just don't) pay their mortgages shouldn't be allowed to stay in their homes indefinitely. That would make the bank the victim, not the villain.

There was just a story in USA Today Travel about freeloaders crashing free hotel breakfast buffets, and as one of the comments there says, those kinds of thefts aren't just sticking it to a big corporation -- they're stealing from what's most likely a small business owner who owns the hotel franchise, and they're creating an expense that can only ultimately raise costs (or reduce service or quality) for paying guests. The same has to be true for mortgage freeloaders, too. Even if it doesn't directly affect the mortgage rates for people who already have mortgages, it can only affect future would-be borrowers as well as other customers of the lending institution.

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded