Either they are no longer millionaires, just broke people who splurged when they had high incomes, or they are lowlife scum millionaires who are choosing to walk away from a moral obligation to pay their debts just because it's more profitable than acting with integrity. [Note: I recognize that some on FR disagree and see the mortgage as a mere contract with a penalty clause but no moral dimension. I see the mortgage as a promise to pay that carries a moral dimension, as all promises do.]
Besides the moral it is a legal contract and the banks can sue and collect. Now they haven’t done it because of the bad press. Thing is there’s no statute of limitation on mortgages. It’s only a matter of time.
It is a combination of both.
By the way, huge numbers of people, millionaires, hundred thousand aires, ten thousand aires, it did not matter, they are all walking away from underwater mortgages.
“lowlife scum” in this case is all classes top to bottom, but I blame the banks for writing non recourse loans when in Canada, all loans are recourse loans (if you walk away from the mortgage, you still have to pay unless you go bankrupts.)
How many were “Nagger Rich”?
http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/08/11/mortgage-bankers-association-strategically-defaults-on-office-space/
Mortgage Bankers Association Strategically Defaults on Office Space By: David Dayen Wednesday August 11, 2010 7:04 am And here I thought it was immoral to strategically default: Like millions of American households, the Mortgage Bankers Association found itself stuck with real estate whose market value has plunged far below the amount it owed its lenders. But the trade group for mortgage lenders is refusing to say exactly how it extracted itself from that predicament.