True but their games are very similar, and he has quite a few years on Manu who entered the league at like 24-25 and Harden entered at about 20. If he has a Manu career with the added 4-5 years of stats and 2-3 titles he’ll be in the HOF discussion.

And really, what are we talking here, $50 mil vs. $65 million? (I’m just tossing out numbers, i have no clue if there would be a 10 or 20 million gap)

I totally agree with you, but the one thing you have to remember is that Manu was adored in SA with the large Spanish speaking population down there. I bet he made that money back and then some in endorsements. But yea to people like us $50mm is the same as $65mm, we will all take the $50mm and not make a sound. Some of these guys veiw it as a personal insult when they don’t get offered a max deal, which is stupid to me but I’m not in that situation. I hope he stays because that is a serious core they have built right there and it would be fun to watch them win the titles that Lebron and Wade thought they were getting when they joined forces.

So if we are gonna compare Harden to Manu, who is a Hall of Famer, thats a pretty solid argument for a max contract no? If he chooses to leave OKC he will get a max deal, the league execs love this guy, and so does the media which will drive his price up.

Manu is a HOF’er because of his international accomplishments, so unless Harden has a history of leading Jamaica or wherever to international victories, the Manu comparison doesn’t bite.

And really, what are we talking here, $50 mil vs. $65 million? (I’m just tossing out numbers, i have no clue if there would be a 10 or 20 million gap)

Lorenzo – if you don’t like the Manu comp, who would you prefer?

I think Manu is a great comp for Harden. I think he can get max money from somewhere, but like Manu, I don’t think he can carry a team. He’s a perfect fit for this Thunder team, and I would bet that they make it work with him in OKC.

Yes, it all comes down to personal responsibility, but people being duped did in fact happen, and as No. 73 stated, the big firms who hid the toxic assets really fucked us over.

Or the “If a little is good, a lot is better” mentality that increased the subprime portion of the mortgage backed securities from <5% to almost 50% over the period of 5 years.

Or the ratings companies who didn't even open the portfolios they were evaluating, and just pegged the ratings based on similar offerings in the past.

Or the derivative market, where for a fraction of the cost of owning an asset, people could go long or short, which caused a minor headache to spiral into a disaster.

Really, there is no shortage of blame to go around.

Why can’t the applicant look at the monthly payments and say “wow that’s almost as high as my monthly income, probably shouldn’t do this”?

Usually this isn’t the case, though. The rate is a teaser of some kind which is much lower at first. Yes, it all comes down to personal responsibility, but people being duped did in fact happen, and as No. 73 stated, the big firms who hid the toxic assets really fucked us over.

so wanting more is a crime?

No, but you should probably earn it. I certainly would love to conjure money I don’t have out of thin air, but I know I have a lot of work to do to get to where I want to be.

I have no sympathy for someone that would buy a 500K house on a 50K salary.

more blame for the folks who said yes to the guy. they have the ability to say no and should have

Why can’t the applicant look at the monthly payments and say “wow that’s almost as high as my monthly income, probably shouldn’t do this”?

What about the banker who gets a bigger bonus for selling those mortgages? It’s easy to sit there and say that he shouldn’t give that loan, but when someone puts a bigger pay check in front of you lots of things are possible.

Again, both are to blame.

good credit rating

not in this case. Im just waiting on the after effects of all of this.

Non revolving credit would include mortgages…

You’re right. My bad. I keep just looking at the revolving credit numbers.

I would think the threat of a federally subsidized student loan rate increase would have an impact on the increase in consumer credit

That’s partially true. There was a big boost in federal education loans. There were also rises in a ton of other markets if you click on the complete version of that chart.

Depends where they got the note. There are some credit unions flush with cash just giving it away, plus trucks hold up well so if they see ability (income) stability (length of and type of employment) and good credit rating, they are giving that loan out 10 of 10 times.

so wanting more is a crime?

more blame for the folks who said yes to the guy. they have the ability to say no and should have

Both sides are to blame.

Correct.