The Two Way Moral Aspect of Subprime
We've all seen the millions of words written about the technical aspects of the subprime mess; the fingerpointing; the "who's most responsible"; blah blah blah.
And all of this begs the lynchpin question of our age - the question that goes far beyond the subprime issue - the question that is at the core of who we are as a nation in 2008 - the question that is hinted at by William Buckley in his famous ditty "The problem with socialism is socialism. The problem with capitalism is capitalists." (get it?).
To be plain, where is the outcry of the moral component? Weren't you taught to pay back your debts? Didn't your lesson include the corollary that you have to evaluate the size of the loan you're willing to take based upon your ability to pay it back? If you're confident that you can pay back a $50,000 loan, but uncomfortable about the prospect of paying back a $75,000 loan, which loan should you take? Obviously the $50,000 loan, if you place a value on your integrity.
Likewise, if you have been entrusted with stockholders' (or stakeholders') money to commercially lend out, do you know have an ethical responsibility to loan only in those instances where you are confident that the loan can and will be repaid by the borrower?
And so, in both cases we have had a zillion instances of borrowers and lenders exhibiting no value of their personal integrity or ethics. Furthermore, where were the persistent voices of ethical and moral outrage among overseers in our government who saw what was going on and did nothing - put nothing on the line - to try and stop it? (and writing a letter once, or mentioning it in a speech once is not 'trying to stop it').
Where are the examples borrowers who refused to take extra loan amounts that they were encouraged to take? Where are the examples of lenders who refused pressure from Fannie and showed courage in refusing to loan money to unqualified borrowers? Where are the examples of government regulators and elected officials who showed integrity and courage in proclaiming loud and long about what was going on and that it must stop, even if they risked their careers to do so?
Which raises two questions:
1) Is this appalling failure of ethics/morality/integrity a 24-hour virus in the makeup of the body American, or is it now a structural reality that we no longer produce a 'tipping point' majority of people who have the training, desire, and self discipline to Do. The. Right. Thing. ?
2) How can any society prosper if its foundation rests upon a lack of integrity?
And all of this begs the lynchpin question of our age - the question that goes far beyond the subprime issue - the question that is at the core of who we are as a nation in 2008 - the question that is hinted at by William Buckley in his famous ditty "The problem with socialism is socialism. The problem with capitalism is capitalists." (get it?).
To be plain, where is the outcry of the moral component? Weren't you taught to pay back your debts? Didn't your lesson include the corollary that you have to evaluate the size of the loan you're willing to take based upon your ability to pay it back? If you're confident that you can pay back a $50,000 loan, but uncomfortable about the prospect of paying back a $75,000 loan, which loan should you take? Obviously the $50,000 loan, if you place a value on your integrity.
Likewise, if you have been entrusted with stockholders' (or stakeholders') money to commercially lend out, do you know have an ethical responsibility to loan only in those instances where you are confident that the loan can and will be repaid by the borrower?
And so, in both cases we have had a zillion instances of borrowers and lenders exhibiting no value of their personal integrity or ethics. Furthermore, where were the persistent voices of ethical and moral outrage among overseers in our government who saw what was going on and did nothing - put nothing on the line - to try and stop it? (and writing a letter once, or mentioning it in a speech once is not 'trying to stop it').
Where are the examples borrowers who refused to take extra loan amounts that they were encouraged to take? Where are the examples of lenders who refused pressure from Fannie and showed courage in refusing to loan money to unqualified borrowers? Where are the examples of government regulators and elected officials who showed integrity and courage in proclaiming loud and long about what was going on and that it must stop, even if they risked their careers to do so?
Which raises two questions:
1) Is this appalling failure of ethics/morality/integrity a 24-hour virus in the makeup of the body American, or is it now a structural reality that we no longer produce a 'tipping point' majority of people who have the training, desire, and self discipline to Do. The. Right. Thing. ?
2) How can any society prosper if its foundation rests upon a lack of integrity?
posted by Lawrence 3X at 7:47 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home