Repayment of debt a matter of character

I read with interest “Stop to payments … boost to economy?” in the Oct. 21 Business section, which noted that more than 74,000 Nevada households currently are delinquent on at least one mortgage payment.

If you are working, if you are not genuinely disabled and if you actually agreed to borrow the money for the home purchase, then the current value of the home and, consequently, your equity is completely irrelevant. We should move heaven and hell to honor our word and meet our obligations. We will be better people for it, and our children will be better citizens because of it.

I offer these examples for consideration:

One: I purchased a new car in 2004 valued at $42,000. When I drove it off the lot, it lost 15 percent of its value. Should I have returned it and defaulted on the note, even though I had the means to pay it?

Two: I loaned an acquaintance $1,600 about 10 years ago. Turns out he had no ability, perhaps no intention, to repay me. Should he have made an effort? Should I sue him or just let it go?

Three: I’ve paid into Social Security for the past 42 years. The federal government is now insolvent. Should I complain if I receive eight or nine Social Security payments per year instead of 12, because the government simply has too many mouths to feed and cannot meet its obligations?

Four: Thirty years ago, it would have been shameful to default on any obligation, credit card, loan or otherwise. Today, as the Oct. 21 article reminds us, the stigma of default is gone. What has changed in 30 years? The contractual relationship between borrower and lender? No. The character of the borrower. Everyone is doing it, so it is acceptable.

When I signed my loan documents, I agreed to repay the note. Period. When my home diminished in value, my mortgage company did not ask me to come up with more collateral. What does my equity or lack thereof have to do with my moral and legal obligation to pay my debts?

I suspect that many in default have not even considered putting themselves in the place of the lender. If you loaned money to someone, wouldn’t you expect it repaid regardless of the diminished value of the collateral?

The primary reason our country is crumbling is not because of any particular financial issue. It is because of the disintegration of the character of its people.

Joe Pantozzi

Las Vegas

No joke

To the editor:

You would think that after the Iran hostage crisis in 1979, there would be multiple military evacuation plans for each of the U.S. embassies and consulates in the Middle East.

It has become very apparent that the Obama administration chose the “do nothing” plan and left the consulate personnel in Benghazi, Libya, to fend for themselves. Yet the president had plenty of time to joke around on numerous variety and comedy shows.

I guess the joke is on all Americans, given the administration’s priorities.

Anthony Berkley

Henderson

Not considerate

To the editor:

A liberal (Wallace J. Henkelman, Tuesday letter) is going to vote just the opposite of the Review-Journal’s editorial page endorsements, and a conservative (Mike Bryant, Thursday letter) is going to vote the opposite of the Las Vegas Sun’s endorsements.

Whatever happened to forming one’s own opinions? If these two gentlemen are an example of an informed electorate, no wonder the United States is in the fix its in.

Fred Koshmerl

Las Vegas

No tax hike

To the editor:

Hans Bohn’s Thursday letter to the editor (“A flawed endorsement of Question 2”) really hits the target on why property taxes should not be increased for up to six years, starting in July.

There seems to be no doubt that there has been much wasteful management of the school district, including the spending of $14.5 million on new “plush” headquarters (Page 14 of the sample ballot, in the Rebuttal to Argument Advocating Passage) instead of buying a more modest building to house top executives and employees.

Apparently, the top five school district executives make more than $1.16 million a year combined in salary and benefits. During the past 14 years, the Rebuttal states, the school district built 101 new, and 19 replacement schools to seat a projected district enrollment of 374,636 students. However, today’s estimated enrollment is about 307,574.

In August 2012, the Rebuttal continues, the school district “found” $44.6 million and then decided to spend $6.6 million on a new gym instead of using all the cash to fix the schools that need all of the implied critical renovations and repairs.

All of the for and against arguments in the sample ballot make interesting reading. But none of us can escape the fact that the Clark County School District is always short of money. The way it is spent remains to be explained to all of us.

We are not a bottomless well from which money can be continually drawn. Very many property owners already are having a tough time making ends meet. Better financial management and more accurate forecasting would appear to be key elements in improving the sad financial state of the school district.

If the schools do need more money, then let there let there be some more effective drive to overcome the casino moguls’ objections to a state lottery that no doubt would be very lucrative if, say, 70 percent of the income were funneled to the district.

But then, the most obvious and easy way out of a dilemma is rarely seen or acted upon by the responsible parties.

I’m not holding my breath on this one.

G.B. Marsh

Las Vegas

Same old problems

To the editor:

In reference to the Oct. 21 letter from Brian Weldon, who believes that another $74.20 in property taxes on a $100,000 home is a small price to pay for children to be in a safe classroom where they can plug in a computer:

In this economy any more taxes to pay is too much. I, for one, am tired of the educational system taxing my property. It is a bottomless pit of frivolous spending.

When I graduated from Las Vegas High School in 1969, we had leaky roofs everywhere. In Frazier Hall, for example, we had trash cans under leaks in classrooms as well as buckets and pails in the main hallways. This was long before computers were the norm. Today everything is wireless. We can Skype, put rovers on Mars, explore the deepest parts of the ocean, but still, in 2012, can’t fix a leaky roof.

So yes, Mr. Weldon, it is too much and it still won’t fix the problem. We are being taxed enough as it is, and they will only keep asking for more.

However, if you are talking about money that would directly benefit the quality of a student’s education to improve Nevada’s weak national rating, that is a different matter.

PETER L. HASLEHURST

LAS VEGAS

UNLV stadium

To the editor:

In response to your Oct. 20 story, “Funding key for UNLV stadium”:

We need a new stadium on the UNLV campus like we need a hole in our heads. On-campus parking is already a headache for students and staff and a near impossibility for visitors. A stadium will create a parking and traffic nightmare. We already have a decent stadium with ample parking and easy access, which has rarely been filled to capacity in its 40-year history. Best of all, it’s paid for.

If the promoters can find a more suitable location and private investors to build a stadium, fine.

But not one dime of taxpayer money or one acre of public land should be committed to this scheme.

DAVID STEVENSON

HENDERSON