Mandatory Note: Whether he actually intentionally destroyed mortgages is disputed, it may be true, or it may just be popular legend of the period.
this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2025
450 points (100.0% liked)
History Memes
1332 readers
816 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism (including tankies/red fash), atrocity denial or apologia, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Piefed.social rules.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
OTHER COMMS IN THE HISTORYVERSE:
- !historymusic@quokk.au
- !historygallery@quokk.au
- !historymemes@piefed.social
- !historyruins@piefed.social
- !historyart@piefed.social
- !historyartifacts@piefed.social
- !historyphotos@piefed.social
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
Fair enough.
In recent times, I heard a joke that loosely goes something like this..
Back in the day, I used to be able to go to the store with $20 and get 2 steaks, 3 loaves of bread, a sack of potatoes and a tub of butter.
Not today though, too many fucking cameras!
ππ€£
Heh, I have family members who were raised in the 70s and 80s who we tell stories about, things like doing a week's groceries by shoplifting. Just really brazen stuff.
My late father had a little more class than that though. He would go behind the local Piggly Wiggly right after they tossed out food that was just past official expiration date, and he'd basically go dumpster diving.
He didn't do this willy nilly either, he was always observant on what foods he found that were still viable and edible. It's amazing yet very disappointing how much perfectly good food goes to waste every single day when we have so many people in the world starving.. βΉοΈ
He didnβt do this willy nilly either, he was always observant on what foods he found that were still viable and edible. Itβs amazing yet very disappointing how much perfectly good food goes to waste every single day when we have so many people in the world starving.. βΉοΈ
Yeah. For some ~200 years now, the issue (and it is a legitimate issue, though certainly one also exacerbated by human greed) has been figuring out a system of distribution rather than production.
Production we have down pat. Distribution seems to be trickier...
That being said, expiration dates are a "Covering our asses" measure to prevent cheap-ass corporations (and local stores, tbf) from selling food that could get people legitimately sick just in order to save a few bucks on their profit margins.
No. I hear this argument about the distribution problem all the time. Logistics and distribution is fucking solved. This argument completely ignores the real issue of people not being able to afford to buy food. Food stamps was a pretty good system (talking about the us, no idea about elsewhere) and it should have been expanded not cancelled.
This argument completely ignores the real issue of people not being able to afford to buy food.
That's part of the core issue of distribution. Purchasing food is reliant on the machinations of a market economy. Market economies operate by equal exchange; those who lack units of value (ie money) must be given units of value to exchange for food. The decision thus must be made how to give those units of value and to whom. The 'simplest' option is a UBI - universal basic income (ie give everyone enough money to live on at a basic level).
However, the difficulty of securely (against both fraud and theft) and universally distributing money in an age before direct deposit consumer banking (as recently as the 70s it was still not standard, and as late as the 2000s I personally knew working people without bank accounts entirely) made any such experiment difficult and costly to attempt to implement - for which reason polities simply... did not. In addition to reasoning about budget concerns and 'motivation to work' (the latter of which has been strongly disputed by the evidence provided in modern small-scale UBI projects, which suggest little change in work patterns of recipients).
At present, political capital (and lack of popular consensus) are probably more the bottleneck preventing UBI than economic issues. But it wasn't that long ago that the very real bureaucratic challenges of a pre-computerized society would have rendered it potentially entirely unfeasible.
Funny you'd mention direct deposit. I don't trust that shit a damn bit, how the fuck is that even supposed to work?
I closed my last bank account about a decade ago when they refused to accept my tax return as a direct deposit. Fuck Hancock bank!
Bank robber who also enjoys some casual pyromania: "Weee!"
Farmers: "He's a hero!"
Bank Robber: "Yup... Totally what I was going for..."
Not really man. He did it on purpose so everyone around the country would hide him and not snitch on him. Thatβs just like a more sustainable business model.
Since you seem to have knowledge on this, would destroying mortgage notes do anything in the long term? I mean surely the bank would have records of who had mortgages and surely they would be able to look up how long they had been paying those mortgages? Just destroying the original contract or a couple months worth of records probably wouldn't do much unless the bank kept really poor records?
Unfortunately, not a core area of interest for me, so I don't have much particular knowledge on the topic. All I can really say is that some early 20th century business practices were really ad hoc, so it's not unbelievable that some banks may not have kept comprehensive backups or other forms of documentation, which, in turn, could make any ongoing or subsequent civil cases over prior payment vs. nonpayment "He said vs. she said", which is certainly more favorable for any of the (many) folks at the time who were struggling to pay their mortgages.
Interesting, thank you for your assessment.
Relevant song by Woody Guthrie: Pretty Boy Floyd
Yes, as through this world I've wandered
I've seen lots of funny men;
Some will rob you with a six-gun,
And some with a fountain pen.
And as through your life you travel,
Yes, as through your life you roam,
You won't never see an outlaw.
Drive a family from their home.
If this worked, why didn't more banks just burn down?
Because for most people, most of the time, mortgages are a good deal
This was true once, but not for a long time now. And that's generally true across the board, at least in US, Canada, and most of Europe.
Idk, I got mine at 2.85%. Seems like a pretty good deal to me. Less than the rate of inflation, so the bank is essentially paying me to own a house
doubt
Proof: people keep getting mortgages
Counterpoint: The alternative is rent trap or homelessness
Jerking off a homeless dude for free is a good deal when he has a gun in your neck.
What's your point? We are always making choices between alternatives that are more or less appealing. I am drinking mediocre gas station coffee right now. The alternative is no coffee. Drinking the coffee is a good deal for me, because for me right now, mediocre coffee is better than no coffee.
An even better deal is having a house and no mortgage
Sure, but you likely don't have the cash to put down on a house you like. This is a pretty normal scenario if we look at human history. As soon as we invented cities, land in and around cities was expensive. It could take a lifetime to save up enough to buy a house. Hence a mortgage - the bank (which is mostly just the savings of other people around you) gives you the money right now to buy a house. Then you get to live in the house while you "save up" for it.
I think you misunderstand.
We need the bank to get the mortgage.
Then we burn down the bank and don't have to pay the mortgage
Profit.
If in the current day, the bank will have digital backups of everything. Also cameras everywhere. You go to jail, and still have a mortgage.
If you manage to destroy all the banks records, then this creates a crisis around cybersecurity in the financial industry. This lack of trust collapses the housing market. 2008 again.
If in prohibition era western town, fdic insurance isnt a thing. You've just burned up the wealth of everyone in the town that kept money in thd bank.
If you just burn the mortgages, then the bank fails because their whole job is using peoples savings to make loans and then pay them back interest. With no ability to make money to pay the tellers or repair the roof, the bank goes under, and people have to hide their savings in their mattresses. Also, no one can get a mortgage anymore
Get out of here with your well reasoned logic
Hahahahaha
What a literally insane take
It's a crime to steal money
To the banking industry, it would be an unforgivable crime that would require the worst punishment if you intentionally erased another man's debt.
Hey Anonymous...