And again.

the answer is false. sometimes things like a death or a firing happens. but 'lack of awareness of economic and financial conditions' does not a good underwriter make imo. maybe it does in yours.

(notice that, again, i made a distinction between old/traditional bk'y circumstances and new/relevant to the topic of this thread circumstances)

"do you think the underwriters considered the economic environment behind those jobs

the underwriters that you are defending apparently would allow me the mortgage.

I am defending my underwriters and those like them who did not make subprime loans, did not make option arm loans, did not make interest only loans, did not make 100% ltv loans and maybe did not add economic conditions into their underwriting calculus.
"

I don't know why I would think you were arguing that is was an underwriting issue?

Clearly I can't read.

Whatever Ron. Keep backpedaling.

umm, straw, the NEW bk'y issue certainly is an underwriter issue imo.

i notice in your selective quoting you included "do you think the underwriters considered the economic environment behind those jobs" which i believe was how i first introduced the idea that perhaps what they used to do overall wasn't adequate.

So now you are saying it is an underwriting issue. Jesus, make up your freakin mind already.

i think that means:

ron 1 - straw 0

not once have i backpedaled here unless me clarifying something for YOU is me backpedaling.

Fine Ron. You're right. I have no idea what you are saying so I guess you aren't backpedaling, you are just the most ineffective and inarticulate writer I have ever come across.

Ron 1 - straw 0

If you feel the need to stroke your ego by keeping score, I concede the point that I have no idea what you are talking about.

"now"? as far as the cause/effect of the new bk'y law, that is what i am/have been saying all along.

Ron 2 straw 0

do i need to call the whaaaambulance for you, straw?

No you need to call a writing coach.

Ron 3 straw 0

even X knew what i was talking about and the distinctions that i was making!

(For those of you, like me, who have the misfortune of having wasted time reading his opinion on the subject...)

oh noes! the dreaded partisan popularity contest!

Well if X knew, well it must have been clear.

Ron 4 straw 0

Well Ron, you'd know where the nearest ambulance is, seeing as how your profession is to chase them!

ZING!

i'm just saying, man. i'm just saying. (does that mean X is smarter than you? )

Ron 5 straw 0

man you are really racking up the points today.

what can i say, i'm in a zone.

you must have forgotten your wheaties today, dude.

Straw don't be so hard on yourself. By the looks of the poll its Straw 100% Ron 0%. Do you see why I have him on ignore. Because, why do you want to argue with someone who seems to comprehend nothing about what you are talking about, and cannot articulate what he is talking about. Its just a lot easier to put him on ignore. Lots of people have done it.

Is this in the wrong thread? Did X mean to post this in the "Jokes" thread?

you are priceless.

can anyone that doesn't have me on the dreaded 'ignore' explain what i have failed to comprehend here in this thread? can these same people explain how X, the BOL community pariah, has been able to comprehend what i've been saying?


fixed

now back to those files (i lied, you do have a price: minimum wage).

Im sure Ron is attempting to seem valid. Ron, seriously delete your account. No one cares what you have to say.

i'm sure that you should attempt to finish your filing obligations. worthwhile employees might be looking for them!