In that Times article on millionaires not paying their mortgages, the one concrete example they cite is a rapper:
Willingly, but not necessarily publicly. The rapper Chamillionaire is a plain-talking exception. He recently walked away from a $2 million house he bought in Houston in 2006.
“I just decided to let it go, give it back to the bank,” he told the celebrity gossip TV show “TMZ.” “I just didn’t feel like it was a good investment.”
If it’s not welfare queens getting loans with their food stamps, it’s young bucks defaulting on their multimillion-dollar mortgages to buy t-bone steaks.
Kryptik
Figures. Not that I care for Chamillionare, mind, he’s just awful. Of course you’ll never hear about Toby Keith defaulting on a debt.
scav
well, is it really news that rich white people lie?
Ash Can
I’m sure they did that because he’s so typical of these defaulting gazillionaires (if ya know what I mean and I think you do).
rachel
@Kryptik: I can’t dislike Chamillionare; If it weren’t for him, we’d never have had this.
Hunter Gathers
The Summer of White Backlash continues…….
Brian J
I really, really don’t think there’s anything racist about this article. I mean, are there a lot of rich people who are publicly defaulting? If so, where are they? As the article says, he’s an exception, because he’s talking about it so openly. And do that, I say, good.
Zifnab
@Hunter Gathers: Every summer is the summer of white backlash.
It’s important that the plebs remember who they are supposed to be angry at, least they start lynching anyone who is actually in charge.
Dugglebogey
It’s strange to me how it’s immoral for a person to walk away from a bad investment with as little loss as legally possible, but a corporation would and should do it to be “responsible to its investors.”
What a world.
New Yorker
@Brian J:
Yeah, but Rush Limbaugh will soon use it as an example of how Obama has rigged the system. Today, Chamillionaire is walking away from his mortgage. Tomorrow, Louis Farrakhan will be running the department of reparations!
Crusty Dem
Why is the NYT quoting TMZ without fact-checking?
Isn’t it more likely that Chamillionaire is Chathousandaire (edited, stolen from his interview, http://bit.ly/928wLC)? Houston is one of the few places in the country where housing values aren’t significantly below 2006 prices…
Wait, he had a $2 million house in The Woodlands? Weird. Very weird..
DougJ
@New Yorker:
Yes, exactly.
Brian J
@New Yorker:
I really couldn’t give less of a shit what he thinks. I know you couldn’t, either, so why would we pay attention to him? He’s an ignorant fuck, and a legitimate racist to boot. He’s also shown no shame when it comes to simply making stuff up. He’s going to do what he wants, when he wants, no matter how unethical or pathetic it may be.
Brian J
@Crusty Dem:
It’s not exactly new news that he decided to do this. Take a look.
Dork
How much money is a “cham”, and how did he get so much of it?
Crusty Dem
@Brian J:
None of which proves that this is a choice (rather than a move forced by other financial problems). It’s an absolutely bizarre quote to include in this article, it’s not like he’s going in front of the Senate Subcommittee to discuss the impact of his decision on the financial community (though I think he’d do well, http://bit.ly/bSwlpQ).
And I was more surprised that he bought a house in The Woodlands, TX. It’s the most ridiculous, over-planned, whitest place I’ve ever been (though I haven’t spent much time in Utah).
Shalimar
@Brian J:
Because the angry tea party mob that is eventually going to hang you for being an evil liberal listens religiously to Limbaugh and the rest of the chorus?
New Yorker
@Shalimar:
Beat me to it. It doesn’t matter that we here know the guy is a vicious bigot. All that matters is that my nutcase uncle listens to him religiously and seems to be distancing himself from the rest of my extended family (we being treasonous hate-American lib’ruls and all).
Kryptik
@New Yorker:
Exactly. Limbaugh and his ilk aren’t internet trolls. They can’t be defeated by simply not giving them attention, because they already have a self-affirming audience and rapt ears of the media. Ignoring them with their position is simply giving them even more free reign to manipulate the political process than they already have.
sven
“Is this the end of the American Dream?”
A few days ago I was watching the evening news on one of the big three (cbs, nbc, abc) and they made the above comment about the current housing market while onscreen they were showing images of what I consider McMansions.
I feel like there are two competing American Dreams:
Dream A: What’s great about this country is that you can work hard and make a decent life for your family. Your kids should never worry about food on the table, you have a comfortable place to live, if you are wise with your money your kids can go to college, and someday you should have a reasonable retirement.
Dream B: What’s great about this country is that anyone can ‘make it’. There are no guarantees, but if you fight, really fight, you just might end up at the very top and get that 9000 sq. foot house with a Porsche in the driveway.
Leaving aside whether either A or B is factually accurate, have these two ideas always been in tension or has this changed over time?
I am in my 30s now, so people who have been around a little longer please feel to correct me, but I feel like we have shifted from A to B in my lifetime.
New Yorker
@sven:
I’m 30, and I feel like B has pushed out A altogether. Or to put it another way, those pursuing B have rigged the system in order to kill the chances of those who just want A (like me).
Shalimar
@sven: And lotteries are a clear attempt to make sure those who don’t even have A and never will at least feel like they have a chance at B like that other formerly poor guy in the next county over who won $10 million. Otherwise, they might get really pissed that those who already have B rigged the system against everyone else.
John Bird
Well, there’s another way to put it, which is that Chamillionaire is the only one in the story with the balls to identify himself. Check that Silicon Valley wonder at the end who won’t say his name because any day now he’s going to reinvent himself and try to bilk some other poor rich sucker out of seed capital in the worst time to invest in decades. Right, man, right.
Man, I remember back when he was just Chameleon and he was freestyling slo-mo over DJ Skrew, pumping it in the dorm room in 2002. Never predicted that part of Dirty South would make it big, but they all did, one after the other, just a couple years after.
gbear
OT but related to Limbaugh-lovin’ trolls:
I took a scooter ride through the northwest suburbs of St. Paul over the weekend and the big red Michele Bachmann signs are already going up all over the place. They might as well put up a huge sign that says ‘Morons live here’.
Kryptik
@sven:
@New Yorker:
For us Marvel nerds, the situation is that we want America like Captain America’s. Unfortunately, the America we have is Sally Floyd’s America.
In other words, the ideals of America, the real, honest to god ones that made us respected before, have been crowded out by American Idol, Facebook, instant gratification, and damn the infrastructure because I got mine goddammit.
gbear
@Shalimar:
You nailed it. You are most likely to become a financial success in America if you were born into privilege in the first place. More doors are automatically opened for you.
John Bird
@sven:
As someone under 30, I can tell you that any shift in that direction is largely driven by the fact that without a college degree – and often with one – people my age don’t have a lot of hope that we will be in a stable financial situation by 40.
At least for men, we know that decades ago, we might work our way up in an industry and secure a pension, but nowadays what matters is your own personal brand (see Faludi’s “Stiffed” for a good anecdotal account, and Thomas Friedman’s 1999 columns for a delusional happy skippy LSD trip about the thing). That is, you better be a porn star, a rock star, a media star, or a pro sports player, or be really good at pretending to be one. Career moves will be lateral as we dodge the collapse of our employers. Working our way “up” will involve some combination of luck and absolutely cutthroat competition.
We will be raising kids, sure, but we’ll be doing it in rental properties or on homes where we owe our immortal souls. College? We’ll be helping our kids secure federal loans and seek grants and fellowships; we’ll be paying our own student loans back at the same time.
Retirement? Ha. Please. None of us expect that, really, except the ones who were born rich.
Can you blame the young for entertaining fantasies of sudden wealth and fame? Not only are they constantly presented to us as the only way to achieve worth in society (and I’d blame “personal brand” reality TV far more than gangsta rap or pro sports), we fully expect to be screwed out of any chance to have that house and send our kids to college and maybe get some vacation in before we die.
sven
@Kryptik: Wow, the example of American Idol is one I hadn’t thought of in this context but is really interesting. Feel good stories, portrayed as ‘could happen to anyone’, actually only 1 in 300 million chance to occur, owners of show are making far more money that the participants, etc…
It’s a reference I will use in the future, thanks!
John Bird
@Kryptik:
That crap still pisses me off, especially since Front Line had such promise. Civil War, when well written, remains one of the best pop-culture captures of the political climate of real-world America at the time, even if as a set of comics, it’s pretty mundane.
Southern Beale
You know when I blogged about this one of my regular commenters, a conservative who always spouts Heritage Foundation BS, wrote that he thought it was “a little misleading” to comprae the default rate of large v small mortgages “without a concept of the overall figures in question.”
He wrote: “If there are only 10,000 million dollar mortgages vs. 10,000,000 smaller mortgages than the default rate on the smaller mortgages has a bigger effect on banks and the economy.”
I guess he’s trying to say there are more total low-dollar mortgages in default than high-dollar mortgages and I have no idea of the total numbers involved but doesn’t that miss the point? The point is that the rich are different. They’re ruthless assholes who dump million dollar homes as bad investments vs working class people who work hard to stay in their homes. The story is about attitudes.
I dunno, anyone? Bueller?
Kryptik
@John Bird:
Yeah. I LIKED Civil War: Front Line, up until that point. That, and being told that Millar’s vision was that the pro-regs were in the right.
John Bird
@Kryptik:
Yeah, that’s where Jenkins, JMS and others dropped the ball, in portraying Stark as a supervillain. The Registration Act was a really usefully loose device that could be the PATRIOT Act on one hand, and sensible gun control on the other, and a lot of the left-wing writers (and it’s mostly left-wingers nowadays) managed to get so strident about the Captain America anti-authoritarianism of the whole thing that they lost the point.
ricky
I find accusations or racism concerning this article amusing.
Clearly Mr. Chamillionaire was the one example cited
because, unlike most sneaky, secretive ( and possibly smelly) rich people, Mr. C is exceptional and “plain talking.”
Brian J
@Crusty Dem:
I’m really confused about what you are saying. Exactly what are you accusing The Times of making up, if anything–because that’s what it sounds like you are doing? And what else are you suggesting as far as this being a choice or not being one?
@Shalimar:
In other words, we should be really fearful that Limbaugh is going to use a minor example of a rapper that most people have never heard of in order to stir up hysteria, and thus should discourage any mention of him in newspaper reporting. If not that, then what is your point?
John Bird
Well, one thing to keep in mind about the Times’ coverage of this story is that Chameleon can’t be hangin’ for long; put his thing in your thong, wash his thing, and he’s gone.
ThresherK
The story is about attitudes.
Would it have killed them to use the words “moral” or “hazard”? Apparently, that is also something which is only for little people, and not everyone there can be a Leonhardt or a Johnston.
John Bird
@ricky:
Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. The majority of these rich folks are sneaky weenies who won’t acknowledge their identities because the concept of responsibility is pretty alien to them in their lives; Chamillionaire, on the other hand, owns up to what he’s doing like a man. What a better world it would be if the rich weren’t trained to be sociopaths.
Pangloss
Only Black millionaires are “rich.” White millionaires are “upper middle class.”
fucen tarmal
ed mcmahon, that baldwin guy who went all in on jesus, don johnson, wretch from the teen tv show, when they default its some sort of calamity of fame and misfortune…..
Brian J
@fucen tarmal:
That’s because at least two of them that I know of, McMahon and Baldwin, were legitimately suffering financially (relatively speaking, of course). The rapper discussed in The Times article wasn’t broke. He just said it was a poor investment so he decided to stop paying.
Brachiator
@Brian J:
Depends on what you mean by “publicly.” They’re not giving interviews, but the whole point of the article was about the high number of affluent people defaulting on their mortgages.
And it’s not that it is racist. But stuff like this allows racist-minded people to focus on the irresponsible black rapper and create fantasies of responsible white folk manning the barricades. The reporter could have found other people to speak on the record, but hey, why bother?
fucen tarmal
@Brian J:
meh, there are plenty more where that list came from, all of them could have paid their mortgages easy and not borrowed against them, later.
all of which can be called “bad investing”
asdf
sven, I’ve enjoyed the discussion you started.
I’m pretty old and I think what happened was that there was a shift, something happened in the media. Let’s go back to the days when we began hearing stories about Donald Trump. That was a long time ago. He became a star of sorts but why? He was a businessman making business deals. What made that interesting to folks?
Hope that helps a little.
JGabriel
DougJ, dude, I had this observation up 4 days ago:
Can a guy get a little credit around here?
.
JGabriel
@gbear:
Or, better yet, signs that say: Rob Me.
.
Brian J
@Brachiator:
The point was that the data suggests, but it’s hard to substantiate because it’s not something you want to talk about unless you just don’t give a fuck.
As far as people focusing on what a black guy does and using that as proof to back up their racist views, I see what you are suggesting, but I don’t think it matters. People like that are going to believe what they want to believe, no matter what sort of mental gymnastics they use to get there.
@fucen tarmal:
That makes no sense. If you know of more people who have money but aren’t paying their debts because they just don’t want to, you should volunteer their names. All of the people you mentioned before had well known financial problems, but Chamillionare does not. He just doesn’t want to pay.