• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Damn You, Tom Selleck!

Rexedgar said:
Tom must have been catching some heat for his sponsorship.....The backdrop and the tones are starkly different...

. Check out the view here!

Ads separated by about three years.

. A bit more folksy.
Click to expand...


I love it. Look at the ads. The sponsor is obligated by law to disclose certain realities in their advertising. They 'fulfill' this obligation by putting a massive wall of small text with all the potential downside listed on the screen for about 4 seconds.

Well played Madison Avenue, well played.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
So you think that if the lonely old widow is convinced by that handsome young man at the bank to sign over her home to him, and it's a bad deal for her, it is all on her.
Click to expand...


Absolutely it's all on her unless the seller engaged in fraud--- ADULTS need to be responsible for their own decisions. Sadly too many people trust strangers. I was raised to trust NO ONE--- then after that do the research for myself and ask a lot of questions. There is a reason they are called "salesmen"--- they make their living off of selling people something they probably don't need.


Stealers Wheel said:
Tom Selleck stars in and produces a TV show in which he plays this upstanding straight arrow who always does the right thing. In these commercials, he cashes in on that character, convincing millions of seniors that he is looking out for them.
Click to expand...

Reverse mortgages are a product no different than cans of soup or or electric grills sold on TV between episodes of The Andy Griffith Show. Just because somebody is selling a product doesn't mean it is a great product, and like I said, as long as fraud isn't involved it is incumbent upon the consumer to do their own due diligence in determining if they need that product of if there are better products out there for them. Therefore how is what Selleck is representing any different than George Foreman and his crap grills, of Alex Trebec and that lousy Colonial Penn life insurance?


Stealers Wheel said:
And your attitude is "If the seniors are so stupid and naive as to fall for a pitchman and piss away their life savings, screw them, they deserve what they get."
Click to expand...

I'm not a big fan of "the nanny state" if you haven't figured that out yet. Along with personal liberty comes personal responsibility AND accountability. So unless you believe there needs to be some law which prevents "seniors" from making their own life choices barring any senior abuse or fraud, then what else can you do other than keep seniors in protective custody and strip them of all autonomy?

This is why everyone needs family and friends to look out for each other. Reverse mortgages aren't illegal, they just are lousy deals. But for some people they are easier than managing their own investments themselves. I look at a reverse mortgage the same way I look at whole life insurance policies; if someone convinces you that you need it and sells it to you then good for them.
 
Court Jester said:
Absolutely it's all on her unless the seller engaged in fraud--- ADULTS need to be responsible for their own decisions. Sadly too many people trust strangers. I was raised to trust NO ONE--- then after that do the research for myself and ask a lot of questions. There is a reason they are called "salesmen"--- they make their living off of selling people something they probably don't need.




Reverse mortgages are a product no different than cans of soup or or electric grills sold on TV between episodes of The Andy Griffith Show. Just because somebody is selling a product doesn't mean it is a great product, and like I said, as long as fraud isn't involved it is incumbent upon the consumer to do their own due diligence in determining if they need that product of if there are better products out there for them. Therefore how is what Selleck is representing any different than George Foreman and his crap grills, of Alex Trebec and that lousy Colonial Penn life insurance?




I'm not a big fan of "the nanny state" if you haven't figured that out yet. Along with personal liberty comes personal responsibility AND accountability. So unless you believe there needs to be some law which prevents "seniors" from making their own life choices barring any senior abuse or fraud, then what else can you do other than keep seniors in protective custody and strip them of all autonomy?

This is why everyone needs family and friends to look out for each other. Reverse mortgages aren't illegal, they just are lousy deals. But for some people they are easier than managing their own investments themselves. I look at a reverse mortgage the same way I look at whole life insurance policies; if someone convinces you that you need it and sells it to you then good for them.
Click to expand...

It must have pissed you off when the government banned the sale of lawn darts. They weren't illegal, no fraud, just a lousy deal. Nanny state government had no business stopping those entrepreneurs from making a buck with their little toy.

Where does the government get off telling parents they have to secure their infants in car seats and seat belts? Shouldn't parents be allowed to make their own life choices?

Yeah, reverse mortgages are just like that. The only alternate, according to you, is "keep seniors in protective custody and strip them of all autonomy." They must be allowed to impoverish themselves, otherwise they are not free.

I knew a guy who took senior's money and invested it in high risk/high reward investments. Wiped out dozens of old people's life savings. And you say "Good for him. Those old people deserved it, because they were stupid."
 
Stealers Wheel said:
So you think that if the lonely old widow is convinced by that handsome young man at the bank to sign over her home to him, and it's a bad deal for her, it is all on her.

Tom Selleck stars in and produces a TV show in which he plays this upstanding straight arrow who always does the right thing. In these commercials, he cashes in on that character, convincing millions of seniors that he is looking out for them.

And your attitude is "If the seniors are so stupid and naive as to fall for a pitchman and piss away their life savings, screw them, they deserve what they get."
Click to expand...

Fortunately your lonely old widow scenario doesn't apply to reverse mortgages. There are still enough reasons to view a reverse mortgage cautiously, there is no reason to make stuff up to put them down.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
It must have pissed you off when the government banned the sale of lawn darts. They weren't illegal, no fraud, just a lousy deal. Nanny state government had no business stopping those entrepreneurs from making a buck with their little toy.
Click to expand...

As a kid we had lawn darts and played with them all the time. But I don't believe "the government" banned lawn darts if I recall; it was more likely lawyers/product liability at play in that decision (i.e., the FREE market).

Stealers Wheel said:
Where does the government get off telling parents they have to secure their infants in car seats and seat belts? Shouldn't parents be allowed to make their own life choices?
Click to expand...

Usually it is liberal feel good types who make those laws. Personally I don't care if parents drive around with their children in the open beds of pick up trucks as long as when the kids go flying out of them they don't dent my car.

You are barking up the wrong tree here; I don't need the government to tell me what is or is not safe.... that is more in the liberal end of the political perspective. I'm the guy who bought my 7 year old grandchild his first rifle this year.

Stealers Wheel said:
Yeah, reverse mortgages are just like that. The only alternate, according to you, is "keep seniors in protective custody and strip them of all autonomy." They must be allowed to impoverish themselves, otherwise they are not free.
Click to expand...

Who says they have to impoverish themselves? In the vast majority of cases here in America poor people are that way because they were stupid. How hard is it America to be at least in the middle class? You can pretty much coast through life in this country and end up a millionaire.


Stealers Wheel said:
I knew a guy who took senior's money and invested it in high risk/high reward investments. Wiped out dozens of old people's life savings. And you say "Good for him. Those old people deserved it, because they were stupid."
Click to expand...

Why do you think I believe "good for him"? I never said that. But did the guy hold a gun to their heads to get them to invest in high risk investments, or did they do so out of their own misguided greed? Yeah, if they were stupid then of course they deserved it. Play stupid games--- win stupid prizes as the saying goes. Or as P.T. Barnum said, "there is a sucker born every minute".

Like I said, short of fraud, people need to look out for themselves. Because if you ask me the real bandits are not the grifters out convincing people to part with their money--- the real crooks are the government and the taxman taking MY hard earned money looking to redistribute it to the moronic losers who couldn't manage their own lives without help. That friend is the real tragedy--- when government supports and bails out people who make poor decisions in life. LET THEM FAIL. There needs to be moral hazards in life.... it is the natural way of things.
 
BahamaBob said:
The truth is the Reverse Mortgage problem is secondary. The real problem is most people are not financially capable of retirement. People who don't invest or save for retirement soon find out that they can't survive on Social Security alone. Their choices are go back to work, reduce their lifestyle to the level of their income or borrow against the equity in their homes via a Reverse Mortgage. But alas, there is no such thing as free money. Sooner or later the piper needs to be paid. All these people knew what they were getting into and all of them got the money they were promised. These loans just delayed the inevitable. It allowed them to live better for a few more years or do things they wanted to do, but then they ended up in the same place they started except they have no more assets to fall back on. Welcome to the world. Life is tough, it is even tougher if you are stupid.

Tom Selleck is not responsible for that, he is doing nothing but hawking a legal service. He is no more responsible for your financial ignorance than Matthew McConaughey is responsible for your broken down car that he hawked.

The real question is why do liberals always want to blame others for their failures. That is all this thread is about.
Click to expand...

Blame the conservatives for doing nothing about the problems.
 
Court Jester said:
As a kid we had lawn darts and played with them all the time. But I don't believe "the government" banned lawn darts if I recall; it was more likely lawyers/product liability at play in that decision (i.e., the FREE market).
Click to expand...

Effective on December 19, 1988, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) banned the sale of all lawn darts in the United States and asked consumers to discard or destroy their games immediately. Please be more informed.

Court Jester said:
Usually it is liberal feel good types who make those laws. Personally I don't care if parents drive around with their children in the open beds of pickup trucks as long as when the kids go flying out of them they don't dent my car.
Click to expand...

Do you know why there are mandatory seat belt laws in every state? Not because people are stupid. Not because seat belts save lives. Every state has enacted seat belt laws (many make it a primary offense, meaning you can be stopped and cited even if no other violation exists) because seat belts save money.

Whose money, you might ask. Your money. Your tax money to be precise.

Every state funds county hospitals. Quite often, the county-owned hospital is the only level one trauma facility in the area, regardless of how many private hospitals are in the area. The reason is simple: Level one trauma centers are very expensive to build and maintain. And they are not profitable. Nevertheless, the counties have them because they are a vitally necessary service in the event of serious auto accidents, earthquakes, tornadoes, mass disasters, fires, etc. And state legislatures underwrite them to the tune of millions every year.

Every state is strapped for money, and as legislators reviewed annual budgets, what they saw in these trauma centers costs were shocking. A few fact-finding trips to the county ER where they would ask the doctors and staff what they could do to reduce costs without compromising services. When someone goes through a windshield or is ejected from a moving vehicle in a collision, the trauma is very time consuming and labor intensive to provide vital life saving emergency aid. It was almost unanimous: Make people wear their damn seat belts! You will literally save millions of dollars over time.

It is your tax dollars they are saving. You're welcome, says the nanny state.
 
Last edited:
Court Jester said:
You are barking up the wrong tree here; I don't need the government to tell me what is or is not safe.... that is more in the liberal end of the political perspective. I'm the guy who bought my 7 year old grandchild his first rifle this year.
Click to expand...

Congratulations. Statistically, you have just increased the likelihood that your grandson or someone in his home will suffer a gunshot.

Court Jester said:
In the vast majority of cases here in America poor people are that way because they were stupid. How hard is it America to be at least in the middle class? You can pretty much coast through life in this country and end up a millionaire.
Click to expand...

You have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know what rose colored glasses you wear, but stupid is not the leading cause of poverty, not even close. Just because the world has not kicked you in the teeth doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Do you know that bankruptcy due to medical debt is one of the most common causes of personal bankruptcy?

Court Jester said:
Why do you think I believe "good for him"? I never said that. But did the guy hold a gun to their heads to get them to invest in high risk investments, or did they do so out of their own misguided greed? Yeah, if they were stupid then of course they deserved it. Play stupid games--- win stupid prizes as the saying goes. Or as P.T. Barnum said, "there is a sucker born every minute".
Click to expand...

These seniors trusted him to fulfill his fiduciary responsibility to them, to protect their life savings. He was a duly licensed professional. Greed was not a factor on their part. Most didn't even understand how he was able to dispose of their funds. They in no way deserved what happened to them.

Court Jester said:
Like I said, short of fraud, people need to look out for themselves. Because if you ask me the real bandits are not the grifters out convincing people to part with their money--- the real crooks are the government and the taxman taking MY hard earned money looking to redistribute it to the moronic losers who couldn't manage their own lives without help. That friend is the real tragedy--- when government supports and bails out people who make poor decisions in life. LET THEM FAIL. There needs to be moral hazards in life.... it is the natural way of things.
Click to expand...

Do you walk on the sidewalk or in the middle of the road? That sidewalk is for your seven year-old grandson's safety. My tax dollars paid for it. You're welcome. The fact is, you won't acknowledge that you personally have benefited in numerous ways from the society you live in. All you want to do it bitch about how YOUR hard earned money is being confiscated. You like the benefits of living in a place where building codes are enforced, but you don't want to help pay for them. You like having banking regulations in place so someone doesn't take your money to a casino like happened to millions back in 1929. You like having access to healthcare via Medicare, but you don't acknowledge that private insurance companies have no interest in insuring the health of millions of old people. You like to access the Internet but refuse to acknowledge that the precursor to the Internet was a government project funded by you and me.

If your grandson ever needs life-saving medication, remember that virtually every vital drug available today was underwritten by a government grant. Again, your tax dollars at work.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
Effective on December 19, 1988, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) banned the sale of all lawn darts in the United States and asked consumers to discard or destroy their games immediately. Please be more informed.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess we never got the memo, and we continued to play with our lawn darts, horseshoe irons, bow and arrows, pellet guns, and other toys without incident. Although there was a kid down the street who died when he broke his neck while jumping up and down on his bed. But that kid was a loner and never went outside.... I think his parents were liberals. Hehehe.



Stealers Wheel said:
Do you know why there are mandatory seat belt laws in every state? Not because people are stupid. Not because seat belts save lives. Every state has enacted seat belt laws (many make it a primary offense, meaning you can be stopped and cited even if no other violation exists) because seat belts save money.

Whose money, you might ask. Your money. Your tax money to be precise.


Every state funds county hospitals. Quite often, the county-owned hospital is the only level one trauma facility in the area, regardless of how many private hospitals are in the area. The reason is simple: Level one trauma centers are very expensive to build and maintain. And they are not profitable. Nevertheless, the counties have them because they are a vitally necessary service in the event of serious auto accidents, earthquakes, tornadoes, mass disasters, fires, etc. And state legislatures underwrite them to the tune of millions every year.
Click to expand...

Maybe they would be profitable if they stopped treating people who don't have insurance or can't pay?

Stealers Wheel said:
Every state is strapped for money, and as legislators reviewed annual budgets, what they saw in these trauma centers costs were shocking. A few fact-finding trips to the county ER where they would ask the doctors and staff what they could do to reduce costs without compromising services. When someone goes through a windshield or is ejected from a moving vehicle in a collision, the trauma is very time consuming and labor intensive to provide vital life saving emergency aid. It was almost unanimous: Make people wear their damn seat belts! You will literally save millions of dollars over time.
Click to expand...

How do insurance companies make profits? Underwriting means having a larger pool of PAYERS than those collecting services--- it's quite simple. But when you ADD to the pool of people who are guaranteed services who WILL NEVER PAY, then you either have to increase the cost for premiums to payers, or find more payers for the pool.

In this country we worry too much about giving services to people who don't contribute to society. The easy answer is to turn them away at the door.

I
Stealers Wheel said:
t is your tax dollars they are saving. You're welcome, says the nanny state.
Click to expand...

I didn't vote for it, and I do all I can to avoid paying those taxes. And one method currently is supporting leaders who are closing the flow at the border--- people who take more than they contribute.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
Congratulations. Statistically, you have just increased the likelihood that your grandson or someone in his home will suffer a gunshot.
Click to expand...

Guns don't just jump off the shelf and shoot innocent people, it takes a someone with half a brain in the chain of events to cause that to happen. Easy solution is don't be stupid around guns. If we can train a kid to get 1600 on a SAT score, we can surely train them about the physics involved with the business end of a firearm.


Stealers Wheel said:
You have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know what rose colored glasses you wear, but stupid is not the leading cause of poverty, not even close. Just because the world has not kicked you in the teeth doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Do you know that bankruptcy due to medical debt is one of the most common causes of personal bankruptcy?
Click to expand...

The world has kicked me in the teeth. My household has probably had over 2 million in medical expenses over the last two decades, and that is why we have insurance. GOOD insurance which has a high premium. The kind of insurance that makes the difference when things go wrong. The kind of insurance your typical liberal progressive socialists want to destroy so that everyone else gets healthcare for free. People who were stupid in life. People who's priorities were $1000 cell phones and 24 inch rims on their leased cars probably.


Stealers Wheel said:
These seniors trusted him to fulfill his fiduciary responsibility to them, to protect their life savings. He was a duly licensed professional. Greed was not a factor on their part. Most didn't even understand how he was able to dispose of their funds. They in no way deserved what happened to them.
Click to expand...

If fraud was involved they should hire an attorney. Problem is if there is no money to go after then tough lesson learned I guess. Once again: "let they buyer beware".


Stealers Wheel said:
Do you walk on the sidewalk or in the middle of the road? That sidewalk is for your seven year-old grandson's safety. My tax dollars paid for it. You're welcome. The fact is, you won't acknowledge that you personally have benefited in numerous ways from the society you live in.
Click to expand...

I live in a private gated community, we pay for our own sidewalks and roads--- no taxpayer money. My kids went to private schools as well. I pay for OUR stuff and your stuff too basically.

Half the people in this county don't even pay any Federal income tax. At one end of the spectrum some of us are paying other people's share, so go after the ones who don't pay. If I complain it is because I have EARNED the right to complain. Maybe that is the problem; voting should be limited to people with actual skin in the game.


Stealers Wheel said:
All you want to do it bitch about how YOUR hard earned money is being confiscated. You like the benefits of living in a place where building codes are enforced, but you don't want to help pay for them. You like having banking regulations in place so someone doesn't take your money to a casino like happened to millions back in 1929. You like having access to healthcare via Medicare, but you don't acknowledge that private insurance companies have no interest in insuring the health of millions of old people. You like to access the Internet but refuse to acknowledge that the precursor to the Internet was a government project funded by you and me.

If your grandson ever needs life-saving medication, remember that virtually every vital drug available today was underwritten by a government grant. Again, your tax dollars at work.
Click to expand...

Come back after you have made everyone else pay SOMETHING for everything you just mentioned. But that isn't how you liberals work, you have traded MY wealth for votes and power from the poor and the stupid. At some point "the bow breaks"--- at some point YOUR way of doing things ends up like Venezuela. You point your finger at people like me saying we begrudge the entitlements which go to so called poor people in this society. Well, go ahead and volunteer to pay more on your own if you like. But for some of us we want to see people told they need to stand on their own feet first and not rely on the government to bail them out for poor life choices.
 
When I am swept into office by popular acclaim, I will make Tom Selleck shave his mustache off using only his tears for shaving cream.
 
Hamish Howl said:
This sort of **** is precisely why I am a socialist.
Click to expand...

"Thou shalt not steal". Clearly socialists never read that commandment.

"Life, liberty, and property" are natural rights. To take MY life, liberty, and property by others to redistribute to others without my consent goes against natural rights. All attempts to do so will be met with sudden violent retributive justice.
 
Court Jester said:
"Thou shalt not steal". Clearly socialists never read that commandment.

"Life, liberty, and property" are natural rights. To take MY life, liberty, and property by others to redistribute to others without my consent goes against natural rights. All attempts to do so will be met with sudden violent retributive justice.
Click to expand...

So how many IRS agents have you shot, hero?
 
My parents have a reverse mortgage. I helped them sort through the paper work and attended the closing. They receive monthly installments from a lender who pays them instead of the other way around. They never pay anything back as long as at least one of them lives in the house, the taxes and insurance are timely paid which they are easily able to do from the money they receive. It's been an ideal arrangement. The OP has put up a hit piece. The way it goes these days.
 
Well logically it makes sense. When you have a mortgage your buying your house from the bank. So if you reverse that process the bank is getting your house back !
 
Rexedgar said:
Seniors were sold a risk-free retirement with reverse mortgages. Now they face foreclosure.

Seniors face foreclosure in retirement after failed reverse mortgage



Check out Tom’s view.........
Click to expand...


I read the article and didn't see Sellick mentioned although three other celebrity pitch men were.

I also didn't see AAG mentioned although a few other loan companies were.

I researched the outcomes of these things in the interest of my in-laws and found that the reward was not sufficient to justify the risk.

I suppose desperation would change the equation for some.

A reverse mortgage probably beats doing business with a loan shark, but a better solution is to start planning AND SAVING now if you plan to retire in 30 or 40 years.
 
JackA said:
My parents have a reverse mortgage. I helped them sort through the paper work and attended the closing. They receive monthly installments from a lender who pays them instead of the other way around. They never pay anything back as long as at least one of them lives in the house, the taxes and insurance are timely paid which they are easily able to do from the money they receive. It's been an ideal arrangement.] The OP has put up a hit piece. [/B]The way it goes these days.
Click to expand...

It would have reflected better on you, had to chosen to “quote “ the OP, rather than hide your comments.

Glad the RM has worked out for you and yours. See post # 175 and pay attention to the differences in tone and setting. Selleck and AAG must have been receiving some major push-back.

The OP is.was an opinion piece, much as yours was.......
 
Rexedgar said:
It would have reflected better on you, had to chosen to “quote “ the OP, rather than hide your comments.

Glad the RM has worked out for you and yours. See post # 175 and pay attention to the differences in tone and setting. Selleck and AAG must have been receiving some major push-back.

The OP is.was an opinion piece, much as yours was.......
Click to expand...

Hiding my comment by publishing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom