You know a pediatrician is making too little when...

[womp]

...when this self-absorbed New York Times "economics reporter" makes $120,000 a year bashing banks and supply-side economics, yet can't balance a family budget if his life depended on it:

NYT: My Personal Credit Crisis

And to think our taxes are bailing out this douche and others like him. With role models like him at the NYT, are we surprised that personal responsibility has become an endangered animal?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[nlax30]

Wow, remind me not to depend on him for my economics news.

Personal budgeting FAIL = buying a half million dollar home when you only have ~$2700 to play with each month.

 

[womp]

The saddest thing is I heard him on NPR the other day in my car, and he wasn't sorry one bit. He put the blame solely on the lenders. While being tens of thousands of dollars in debt, he still had $110 a month cable, ate out and blew off thousand dollar vacations, etc. He hasn't paid his $3000 a month mortgage payments for almost a year now. We taxpayers are giving this dbag a year's rent in a half million dollar mansion so he can compensate to his new wife.

Now you know why the NYT health care articles never seem to give doctors a break...

 

[cpants]

I read that this morning. Just sickening. We read his self-indulgent tale of how he and his new wife consistently lived in a dream world where they would "come up with the money later" or "get a higher paying job later", all the while adding mortgages and maxing out their credit cards, and we are supposed to place all the blame squarely on the greedy lenders? Granted it was stupid for the lender to give him the money, but the blame rests solely on him and his bad decisions. How embarrassing for the Times that one of their resident economists can't even do a simple budget to determine how much house he can afford.

From tomorrow's NYT Magazine, the story of someone who actually promotes living within your means and financial responsibility:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/magazine/17orman-t.html?scp=2&sq=suze orman&st=cse

Maybe if Andrews had called Orman's show in '04 for a reality check, he wouldn't be in this mess.

 

[cpants]

Between humongous loan balances and high rates, we had hung ourselves with the rope they gave us. In the previous December alone, we charged $2,845 on the Chase card for Christmas gifts, food, gasoline, clothing and other expenses. The charges included almost $350 for groceries, $700 in clothes from J. Crew, $179 at GapKids and $700 for airplane tickets for two of Patty’s children to visit their father in Los Angeles. Our balance climbed from $14,118 to $17,135, and in January 2006 we maxed out at our $19,000 credit limit. And there were other expenses on other cards: $1,200 in dental work for Patty’s son Ben; $1,600 to rent a beach house the previous year for us and all the children. Granted, the beach house was an embarrassing mistake. But given that Patty had landed a solid job, it seemed like an indulgence we could work off later.

It doesn't take an economist to know that when you can't make the mortgage payments, you shouldn't be setting foot in J. Crew, let alone buying plane tickets and renting vacation homes. What a joker.

 

[womp]

And he considers himself, I quote, "frugal." Apparently only with his own money (the $196 in his checking account), but not the bank's, his wife's or the public's money.

Can you say compromised in his past two years of reporting for the NYT about the evil banks and Bernanke/Geithner etc?

 

[Miami_med]

Even the openly biased papers on both sides of the issues have nowhere near the track record of sham reporters and even pure story fabrication over the last few years as the NYT. I'm really not sure why anyone still reads it beyond the desire to sit in a coffee shop and look smart. There's better reporting on Yahoo. While I don't always agree with him, but Jubak creams this guy.

 

[tibor75]

I'd say about 75% of people being forclosed upon deserve it. The other 25% of so are people who lost their jobs, etc. Only a very small proportion are actually victims of predatory lending practices.

A mortgage is a loan. if you take out the largest loan of your life, and don't understand the terms, don't undestand what ARM means, don't understand the fine print, you deserve to lose your home. And i will laugh at you and not feel sorry one bit.

And who are these idiots who don't pay off their credit cards each month? I swear these people are stupid. A credit card is used so that you don't have to carry 2000 dollars in your pocket when you go to Best Buy. It's not to be used to buy things you can't afford.

 

[Miami_med]

I'd say about 75% of people being forclosed upon deserve it. The other 25% of so are people who lost their jobs, etc. Only a very small proportion are actually victims of predatory lending practices.

A mortgage is a loan. if you take out the largest loan of your life, and don't understand the terms, don't undestand what ARM means, don't understand the fine print, you deserve to lose your home. And i will laugh at you and not feel sorry one bit.

And who are these idiots who don't pay off their credit cards each month? I swear these people are stupid. A credit card is used so that you don't have to carry 2000 dollars in your pocket when you go to Best Buy. It's not to be used to buy things you can't afford.

That sounds far too much like personal responsibility, and it won't go over well. The most hilarious thing is that the majority of these "predatory lending practices" were pushed hard by the government under threat of accusing the banks of all sorts of discrimination in home loans (not to mention the fact that Fannie and Freddie walk the walk of DC and essentially supported the entire sub-prime bubble as it happened). If you loan to people who can't pay you, you are supposedly predatory. If you don't then you aren't doing your part to promote home ownership and Barney Frank shall strike you down. You really can't win either way. I think that some of the terms of these loans were so generous and flexible to people with no way to repay them, that stupid would be a much better word than predatory to describe those who gave them. Predatory also of course assumes that someone is benefiting, and no one has been hit harder than the banks by this foreclosure mess.

 

[blanche]

And who are these idiots who don't pay off their credit cards each month? I swear these people are stupid. A credit card is used so that you don't have to carry 2000 dollars in your pocket when you go to Best Buy. It's not to be used to buy things you can't afford.

sadly, the majority of americans just don't get this. at all...

 

[NonTradMed]

Even the openly biased papers on both sides of the issues have nowhere near the track record of sham reporters and even pure story fabrication over the last few years as the NYT. I'm really not sure why anyone still reads it beyond the desire to sit in a coffee shop and look smart. There's better reporting on Yahoo. While I don't always agree with him, but Jubak creams this guy.

I read the NYT online, in the privacy of my own home and it is one of multiple sources I use to get my news. Sorry, no "showing off" at the coffee shop and "looking smart". I think people 'round these parts think I'm smart due to the fact I'm Asian.

I also read the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post (sometimes), ABC News. I don't consider the NYT any more biased or sham reporting than any of the other outlets. In fact, I'd say the quality of reporting is pretty good even if I don't always agree with their views. I don't feel that I have to agree with the news source view to appreciate a well written piece of article.

I feel that every news source will have some geographic biases. I live in a very conservative area and the reporting here is very biased towards the locals' cultural sensibilities. The WSJ is very biased towards management and while I don't always agree with their viewpoints (especially their editorials), I still read it as a primary source because it still offers good writing and a nuanced articles lacking in my local papers.

The NYT writer in the OP is probably just writing what a lot of people think of themselves----frugal people who 'somehow' ends up with wasteful spending habits. Also, everyone's idea of splurging is different. Before we start criticizing other people's budgets, it may be wise to look at our own spending habits.

For me, I'm surprised so many students are willing to go into deep debt so that they don't have to live at home and be 'independent' while attending medical school while I am laughed at for "not cutting the apron strings" since I live at home to save money. I doubt those that choose to live away from home would consider themselves wasteful, yet I'm sure if those same students had their budgets opened to the public, plenty of people would criticize them for not utilizing the home option to save money.

Again, everyone's idea of what is financially doable is different. I know that, despite my self proclaimed frugality, I've done things and purchased stuff that I'm not proud of. That's why I try to refrain from complaining about others. I figure everyone has their frugality limit. For some, it's living at home. For others, it's nice clothes.

Although I'd point out the picture of the writer's 'half a million dollar mansion' in the article is pretty crappy. The guy is hardly living it up in his 'mansion'. Around here, the house would probably go for $150-500k in a nice neighborhood. The guy lives in a very expensive area, although I can't blame him if he has kids who attends the local public school.

 

[Miami_med]

It's one thing to report with bias. It's something entirely different to just make things up, and NYT has been guilty with some frequency of the latter as of late. There is a benefit to seeking a variety of opinions, but I'm not overly fond of the idea of pure fabrication as news.

I'm also a lot more forgiving of bias when the producer of the news admits the bias or atleast the perspective that may cause the bias. Also, I'm not sure why anyone would want to take their economic facts from this guy. His involvement is intimate but entirely wrong. It would be like taking child rearing advice from Brittany Spears.

 

[Rendar5]

Any pure fabrication in the last 2 years? as i recall it was just a couple rotten apples a few years ago.