The Republican Thread

[NorthSideSox72]

They're getting there actually. And there are new laws in place concerning the amount of information that you need to be told as you fill out the various mortgage and loan documents.

That's true too, the paperwork is changing. And basic overview sheets that have broad statements of protection for mortgager and mortgagee are now part of the process.

 

Still though, just because of the scale of money involved, I would never go to a mortgage closing without an attorney.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

That's what I was getting at. You still should have an attorney present on a mortgage closing, because the few hundred bucks that costs you is well worth it against the risk assocaited with hundreds of thousands of dollars. But just going into that closing knowing the basics of what you are doing, would go a long, long way towards avoiding some of the messes people got themselves into.

Then of course, Balta takes that, and makes it into needing a $5M legal team to do anything financially.

 

Really we should be subsidizing the cost of anything anyone ever does. In a perfect world every citizen would have a "government helper" who is tasked to fully protect you against any potential harm.

[southsider2k5]

Just more job-killing regulation.

 

The gigantic irony is that this is exactly why a mortgage requires ridiculous complex and long legal paperwork. They ahve to make sure they are following all of the reams of regulations regarding mortgages.

[Jenksismyhero]

Just more job-killing regulation.

 

Terrible attempt.

[southsider2k5]

Really we should be subsidizing the cost of anything anyone ever does. In a perfect world every citizen would have a "government helper" who is tasked to fully protect you against any potential harm.

 

Unless it is the government that wants to harm you. Then you had better just hand it over, or else.

[Jenksismyhero]

That's true too, the paperwork is changing. And basic overview sheets that have broad statements of protection for mortgager and mortgagee are now part of the process.

 

Still though, just because of the scale of money involved, I would never go to a mortgage closing without an attorney.

 

Oh absolutely.

[Balta1701]

Terrible attempt.

No it isn't.

 

Every time you guys rant about job-killing regulation...this is exactly what you guys are ranting about. New rules that require certain types of information be available in mortage documents? You guys hate that. A whole agency which is devoted to making sure that documents could be understood by people reading them? That's the worst threat the financial industry has ever faced and its creation must be blocked at every step.

[Balta1701]

I'd like to note one more time.

 

This whole discussion was started by people saying how bad it was that the average person isn't financially literate.

 

Then it immediately moved into "Well in this case you need to talk to a lawyer and anyone who doesn't do so is crazy".

 

This second statement totally and completely undermines the first. Financial literacy is useless if you can't manage to understand the contracts you're entering into without additional consultation. If the 2nd statement is true, then what ought to be taught in high school is "Never enter any agreement without a lawyer present."

[southsider2k5]

I'd like to note one more time.

 

This whole discussion was started by people saying how bad it was that the average person isn't financially literate.

 

Then it immediately moved into "Well in this case you need to talk to a lawyer and anyone who doesn't do so is crazy".

 

This second statement totally and completely undermines the first. Financial literacy is useless if you can't manage to understand the contracts you're entering into without additional consultation. If the 2nd statement is true, then what ought to be taught in high school is "Never enter any agreement without a lawyer present."

 

Then I would like to note that's because you chose to take the topic from the very basic sense and took it to an extreme example to get to that point.

[Jenksismyhero]

No it isn't.

 

Every time you guys rant about job-killing regulation...this is exactly what you guys are ranting about. New rules that require certain types of information be available in mortage documents? You guys hate that. A whole agency which is devoted to making sure that documents could be understood by people reading them? That's the worst threat the financial industry has ever faced and its creation must be blocked at every step.

 

It costs banks nothing to verbally explain things to a customer. It costs banks a negligible amount to fill out a government form that contains the same information they had previously in a different form.

 

[Balta1701]

Then I would like to note that's because you chose to take the topic from the very basic sense and took it to an extreme example to get to that point.

If "Taking out a mortgage" is the "Extreme example" in terms of the requirements of financial literacy, then we're truly screwed.

[Jenksismyhero]

If "Taking out a mortgage" is the "Extreme example" in terms of the requirements of financial literacy, then we're truly screwed.

 

I think you're just stubbornly ignoring the argument here.

[Balta1701]

I think you're just stubbornly ignoring the argument here.

Why? In terms of total money involved, taking out a mortgage on an average house is about the same order of magnitude as the amount you spend over a lifetime on health care costs, pay in taxes, and required for a normal retirement. If legal consultation is necessary for one of them because of the amount of money involved then it ought to be required for all of them.

[southsider2k5]

If "Taking out a mortgage" is the "Extreme example" in terms of the requirements of financial literacy, then we're truly screwed.

 

On the level you took it to instantly... yes it is an extreme example.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'd like to note one more time.

 

This whole discussion was started by people saying how bad it was that the average person isn't financially literate.

 

Then it immediately moved into "Well in this case you need to talk to a lawyer and anyone who doesn't do so is crazy".

 

This second statement totally and completely undermines the first. Financial literacy is useless if you can't manage to understand the contracts you're entering into without additional consultation. If the 2nd statement is true, then what ought to be taught in high school is "Never enter any agreement without a lawyer present."

No it does not. And no one other than you is saying you need a lawyer for everything you do. I said it was smart to have one for something as big as a mortgage, which for most people is the biggest financial transaction they will ever make. I cannot believe you are resorting to this sort of hyperbole. Do you really not see how it is important to go through life understanding basic finance? A lawyer at closing is NOT there to teach you what an ARM is. That rests with the consumer. The lawyer is there to look for some buried clause or hidden cost in the note somewhere.

 

[Balta1701]

No it does not. And no one other than you is saying you need a lawyer for everything you do. I said it was smart to have one for something as big as a mortgage, which for most people is the biggest financial transaction they will ever make. I cannot believe you are resorting to this sort of hyperbole. Do you really not see how it is important to go through life understanding basic finance? A lawyer at closing is NOT there to teach you what an ARM is. That rests with the consumer. The lawyer is there to look for some buried clause or hidden cost in the note somewhere.

The fact that a mortgage is "large" doesn't give it some sort of incredible increased significance. People are regularly entering contracts for financial products that last for decades. The average price of a U.S. house is close to $160k. The average retirement savings is about $70k, but you haven't sat here and told me how I needed to consult a lawyer before establishing a 401K plan with Fidelity. Hell, I'm pretty sure I asked and no one here told me I needed a lawyer for establishing a retirement plan. The average family pays >$5000 a person for health insurance, which over 30 years comes to $150k, but same deal.

[Jenksismyhero]

The fact that a mortgage is "large" doesn't give it some sort of incredible increased significance. People are regularly entering contracts for financial products that last for decades. The average price of a U.S. house is close to $160k. The average retirement savings is about $70k, but you haven't sat here and told me how I needed to consult a lawyer before establishing a 401K plan with Fidelity. Hell, I'm pretty sure I asked and no one here told me I needed a lawyer for establishing a retirement plan. The average family pays >$5000 a person for health insurance, which over 30 years comes to $150k, but same deal.

 

You're still ignoring the point that basic, fundamental understanding of how mortgages and loans work would have (and will) help thousands and thousands of people from getting into terrible situations, lawyer or no lawyer.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

The fact that a mortgage is "large" doesn't give it some sort of incredible increased significance. People are regularly entering contracts for financial products that last for decades. The average price of a U.S. house is close to $160k. The average retirement savings is about $70k, but you haven't sat here and told me how I needed to consult a lawyer before establishing a 401K plan with Fidelity. Hell, I'm pretty sure I asked and no one here told me I needed a lawyer for establishing a retirement plan. The average family pays >$5000 a person for health insurance, which over 30 years comes to $150k, but same deal.

 

Wait. Like what?

[Balta1701]

Wait. Like what?

If entering into a contract that on average costs $200k over 30 years is large an important, then how is entering into a contract that on average costs $150k over 30 years small and negligible and not worth legal consultation?

[NorthSideSox72]

The fact that a mortgage is "large" doesn't give it some sort of incredible increased significance. People are regularly entering contracts for financial products that last for decades. The average price of a U.S. house is close to $160k. The average retirement savings is about $70k, but you haven't sat here and told me how I needed to consult a lawyer before establishing a 401K plan with Fidelity. Hell, I'm pretty sure I asked and no one here told me I needed a lawyer for establishing a retirement plan. The average family pays >$5000 a person for health insurance, which over 30 years comes to $150k, but same deal.

What? Of course it's size gives it increased significance! How can you question that with a straight face?

 

A 401k plan is much simpler to understand as well, there is no 100 page stack of things specific to YOUR 401k that you need to know about... the same rules apply to ALL 401k's, except some slight differences in fees associated with the agency. A mortgage is simply not that standardized. Furthermore, losing financial investments like 401k, or stocks, has the possibility of principle loss alone. Mortgage has that PLUS lots of other risk. Your comparison makes no sense.

 

Health insurance? You are not signing a 30 year contract for that. You are taking what is available to you, which is often only one choice or a few, with very basic differences. If you don't want them, you get none. ???

 

 

[southsider2k5]

If entering into a contract that on average costs $200k over 30 years is large an important, then how is entering into a contract that on average costs $150k over 30 years small and negligible and not worth legal consultation?

 

You've gone off the deep end with this one.

[Balta1701]

What? Of course it's size gives it increased significance! How can you question that with a straight face?

 

A 401k plan is much simpler to understand as well, there is no 100 page stack of things specific to YOUR 401k that you need to know about... the same rules apply to ALL 401k's, except some slight differences in fees associated with the agency. A mortgage is simply not that standardized. Furthermore, losing financial investments like 401k, or stocks, has the possibility of principle loss alone. Mortgage has that PLUS lots of other risk. Your comparison makes no sense.

 

Health insurance? You are not signing a 30 year contract for that. You are taking what is available to you, which is often only one choice or a few, with very basic differences. If you don't want them, you get none. ???

Are you kidding? I have 40 page documents on investments and what is involved in my health insurance plan sitting on the counter beside me.

[NorthSideSox72]

Are you kidding? I have 40 page documents on investments and what is involved in my health insurance plan sitting on the counter beside me.

Telling you what a 401k is? Again, universal. It is a federal law that created it. The agency who holds it for you probably has some labrynthine rules about fees, but the loss associated with that is minimal.

 

Do you really not understand financial risk at all? Because I think you do, and I think you are being intentionally boneheaded to make some sort of point.

 

[Balta1701]

Telling you what a 401k is? Again, universal. It is a federal law that created it. The agency who holds it for you probably has some labrynthine rules about fees, but the loss associated with that is minimal.

 

Do you really not understand financial risk at all? Because I think you do, and I think you are being intentionally boneheaded to make some sort of point.

Honestly, the fact that talking to a lawyer is in your guys' opinion 100% necessary to make sure my service provider is not screwing me over in the process of taking out a mortgage scares the living f*** out of me.

[Jenksismyhero]

Honestly, the fact that talking to a lawyer is in your guys' opinion 100% necessary to make sure my service provider is not screwing me over in the process of taking out a mortgage scares the living f*** out of me.

 

It shouldn't. A lawyer drafts the legal documents required for the transaction of property. 90% of their work deals with issues before closing. They don't go through the mortgage step by step and tell you what it all means. They tell you what every other document means, from disclosures to deeds to title issues. You're blowing this thing so out of proportion.

 

Edit: More to the point, a lawyer doesn't protect you from your service provider. They protect you from the seller/buyer, and offer general assistance with the loan portion of it.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Jenksismybitch