Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DebtBomb who wrote (150249)	9/25/2008 2:04:29 PM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

Why change the subject? I didn't change the subject I use brains over emotion. So are you implying you take advantage of people who act on emotion and/or lacking the intelligence to get a fair deal from a transaction with you? Are you saying it was OK for them to scam the public because the public is less knowledgeable than them? I'm saying they were doing what you try to do, make money. They're simply selling their product which happens to be money. Are they working for the people....or against the people? Who pays their wages? Who's working for who? Banks are working to make a profit for themselves, they aren't working for the "people". A bank is a place that sells services, people who walk in there are customers. There is no fiduciary relationship between a lender and borrower, a loan officer has responsibility to the bank, the depositors and its investors, not the customers who borrow money from them. They do have a responsibility to act within the law, to not lie about the terms of the loan. The borrower has a legal responsibility to not to lie about their financial situation and to pay back the loan. Basically what I'm trying to get across to you is that what you attempt to do to make money in the market isn't all that different. You assume you know more than the person you are making money off, that you can get a better than an even trade in a transaction. This is what you are accusing the banks of doing, using their alleged superior knowledge to get a better than even trade off naive borrowers. Truth is, in a free market where transactions do not occur at the point of a gun, transactions don't occur unless both parties are convinced that they will be better off after the transaction is complete. Whether or not they ARE better off is highly subjective to each party. You can't burden only one side of the transaction with the responsibility to answer that question. It would be like me telling you that as a professional trader that you are responsible to make sure that person on the other side of that trade does better than you do, that they can't lose from transacting with you. How could you even know that?