Dave thinks you are “bad” if you ever purchased a gun on a credit card, drove a financed truck hunting, or hung mounts or stored meat in a house that didn’t first have a 20% down payment and a 15 year mortgage.
Valid. Once folks achieve success for a thing, that thing tends to become their schtick and they ride that a bit too long. I had a professor in college that would says “the first book is easy; the second book is BS.”I’ve read that one a few times too, and I’m still not cant tell if Robert Kiyosaki has a better or worse grasp of leverage than Dave Ramsey!
The original principle was good, but if you follow him he has really seemed to go off the deep end. I think once these guys make a career out of dispensing advice (ie getting attention and selling books/advertising), they need to keep getting more extreme. Kind of like a shock jock, “what can I say next?” type of thing.
“Don’t go to college!” “Sell everything and buy silver!” These types of things have me searching for the off button.
Both Dave and Robert have been bankrupt.I’ve read that one a few times too, and I’m still not cant tell if Robert Kiyosaki has a better or worse grasp of leverage than Dave Ramsey!
We bought an old house on 10 acres in 2018. I've been so incredibly glad we bought when we did.
Good post @VikingsGuy. A lot of great responses. This above can't be pointed out enough. Dave either didn't understand the callability structure of the debt or he didn't make a payment. Even a "trained finance professional" can make a bad call.
Getting a mortgage with no credit isn’t difficult with a strong down payment (bad credit is another issue) but you can’t go to one of the big commercial banks. It requires manual underwriting (how loans used to be made, when they analyzed your whole situation and not just a number that is generated by debt). Mine was through a local credit union, Dave has a recommended mortgage company that specializes in it too.
Lol I bet he does
Hell if you’re going to recommend a plan that doesn’t go along with the norm it’s a good idea to make sure there’s a realistic option to support it.
That's one way to look at it
THIS
Agreed. But student debt is a little different. We have to agree that there is a difference between cousin Eddie taking on debt to buy that new Polaris and him taking on debt to get and education to become a nurse. One helps society vastly more than another. Also it doesn’t seem right that bankruptcy would clear the debt on the Polaris but not the debt taken to get an education, yet in both cases Eddie has wrecked his credit rating for a decade or more at least. If we had politicians that were interested in solving problems this could be adjusted for the benefit of us all.
We agree. My point was not to judge the merit of various debt types, but was sticking to the quoted part of your post about "feined ignorance" about debt by most. Since at least the late 1980s students getting student loans have to sit in a room and receive a 30-minute lecture describing the consequences of the debt they are about to undertake and actually have to sign a little "worksheet" that gives real-world examples of how that plays into future budgets.
There are a few differences that have to be weighed into "fair". For example, the average Polaris borrower at time of insolvency is on average older and likely has other assets at stake so is less reluctant to gleefully declare bankruptcy. In the early days of student loans it was a stated life strategy to plan to declare bankruptcy the minute you graduated - there was no reason not to. If we want to go to a Student Gift program as a policy choice, fine. But if 22 yos can all clear $100k iin debt with the flick of the pen as a part of the plan, it is not a Loan. Also, lets remember who bears the loss of default, in the snowmobile example it is Polaris. In the case of Student Loans it falls on many tax payers who didn't have the chance to go to college in the first place - a really bad policy construct and super anti-progressive.
