RkFast Posted April 15, 2005 Posted April 15, 2005 That's what personal bankruptcy is for! To give people a second chance who may have ran into financial hardship before. It's not "the easy way out" that some people make it out to be. it makes it infinitely harder to buy anything large (i.e. house, car) and stays on your record forever, even if it can't be counted against you after 7 years. This law is bad, period. 305823[/snapback] Joe...you and I and everyone else knows damn well that people yell all day long "oh, Ill just declare bankruptcy" and use it to their advantage. The bankruptcy laws as currently written are abused more often than not and needed work. My fave about this is how the Dems say the new laws hurt (suprise), EVERYONE except those EVIL WHITE MEN! "Lemmings"
UConn James Posted April 15, 2005 Posted April 15, 2005 Tis the rooster taking credit for the sun's rising. Crossfire was in part, in part, in part a victim of CNN's dwindling, nay, plummeting ratings. Stewart has a remarkably large following whom it turns out do not bother to vote for which Stewart is not responsible but it does speak to a kind of empty value to his product. After all Stewarts appearance and the resulting fame of his appearance on Crossfire was his most rememberable appearance. I find him hilarious. My question is the audience must be politically hip in order to get the joke but then the audience does not vote? Who was the other "host" Stewart skewered? 306063[/snapback] Didn't say that JS single-handedly brought down Crossfire. They did it to themselves over a long time. I don't even know who else was on it, and I don't want/need to. And you're wrong about the youth vote. Just like all of the people who don't bother to sift through the facts after the Insta-Pundits tell them something. [A]t least 20.9 million in the 18-29-year-old bracket voted, compared with only about 16 million in 2000. The exit polls didn’t register the increase because they show the percentage of young voters out of all voters. Since every age bracket voted in higher numbers than in 2000, the exit polls showed about equal youth shares of total voters for 2004 and 2000—not an accurate picture of the youth vote
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 15, 2005 Posted April 15, 2005 Joe...you and I and everyone else knows damn well that people yell all day long "oh, Ill just declare bankruptcy" and use it to their advantage. The bankruptcy laws as currently written are abused more often than not and needed work. My fave about this is how the Dems say the new laws hurt (suprise), EVERYONE except those EVIL WHITE MEN! "Lemmings" 306115[/snapback] Let me tell you about bankruptcy. No one just "uses" bankruptcy to their advantage. you have to meet stringent requirements for Chapter 7. Even IF you try and file for chapter 7, there is a chance if the trustee sees fit, that you could end up with Chapter 13, which is no picnic.
Alaska Darin Posted April 15, 2005 Author Posted April 15, 2005 Let me tell you about bankruptcy. No one just "uses" bankruptcy to their advantage. you have to meet stringent requirements for Chapter 7. Even IF you try and file for chapter 7, there is a chance if the trustee sees fit, that you could end up with Chapter 13, which is no picnic. 306305[/snapback] Be careful with blanket statements, Joe. I've seen people use bankruptcy to their advantage and alot of what happens depends on the state you reside in.
Tux of Borg Posted April 17, 2005 Posted April 17, 2005 We give sexual predators 3 chances, why not lazy Americans.
Campy Posted April 17, 2005 Posted April 17, 2005 We give sexual predators 3 chances, why not lazy Americans. 307148[/snapback] IMO, that's not a fair statement. If someone has a family, buys a house, car(s) and maintains a lifestyle representative of his 135K/yr salary, you'd say he's a success story. But what happens after his employer outsources his job? Or maybe his employer shuts down altogether and the best he can find is a 50k/yr job? Chances are very good that he'd lose everything - including his 400K house. He'd just be caught in something in which he has little to no control. Not everyone who declares bankruptcy is a deadbeat, nor are they all lazy.
VABills Posted April 17, 2005 Posted April 17, 2005 IMO, that's not a fair statement. If someone has a family, buys a house, car(s) and maintains a lifestyle representative of his 135K/yr salary, you'd say he's a success story. But what happens after his employer outsources his job? Or maybe his employer shuts down altogether and the best he can find is a 50k/yr job? Chances are very good that he'd lose everything - including his 400K house. He'd just be caught in something in which he has little to no control. Not everyone who declares bankruptcy is a deadbeat, nor are they all lazy. 307159[/snapback] But if they are living on borrowing knowing their real value is overinflated then they should either live closer to their real means or save more for the unexpected. Also if you look at the bill it really is a small amount that people have to repay and it only start for folks that are earning a certain level (40k). The basis for what they repay is dependant on salary.
erynthered Posted April 17, 2005 Posted April 17, 2005 IMO, that's not a fair statement. If someone has a family, buys a house, car(s) and maintains a lifestyle representative of his 135K/yr salary, you'd say he's a success story. But what happens after his employer outsources his job? Or maybe his employer shuts down altogether and the best he can find is a 50k/yr job? Chances are very good that he'd lose everything - including his 400K house. He'd just be caught in something in which he has little to no control. Not everyone who declares bankruptcy is a deadbeat, nor are they all lazy. 307159[/snapback] What was unfair about this part of his statment? "We give sexual predators 3 chances" ? As someone living in Florida, I'd like to hear an example.
Campy Posted April 17, 2005 Posted April 17, 2005 What was unfair about this part of his statment? "We give sexual predators 3 chances" ?As someone living in Florida, I'd like to hear an example. 307168[/snapback] No argument on the sex offender part. My only point was categorizing all people who are forced to declare bankruptcy as being lazy is an unfair generalization. I've never done it but I do know a couple of people who did. In both cases they owned a business and took second mortgages, used personal credit cards, etc to meet payroll for their employees in one case, and in the other, bought a inventory only to have the Navy cancel the contract. They both used bankruptcy to re-start their businesses, avoid letting employees go, and are now going strong, albeit a little more cautiously. They may be guilty of overextending or poor judgment, but trust me, neither one is lazy.
beausox Posted April 17, 2005 Posted April 17, 2005 Didn't say that JS single-handedly brought down Crossfire. They did it to themselves over a long time. I don't even know who else was on it, and I don't want/need to. And you're wrong about the youth vote. Just like all of the people who don't bother to sift through the facts after the Insta-Pundits tell them something. 306118[/snapback] 1)Does not the youth cohort have the poorest % voting record not only in real terms but also when the influx of the grandchildren of boomers flood the ranks? 2)Is this not because only the youth cohort can experience a significant increase in size in the short run and thus it requires that its group be treated in a special way? However is it not further true that since.... .....3)Statisticians argue that in a presidential election if everyone potentialy eligible to cast a ballot were to vote it would not effect the nationwide margin because the sample is sufficiently large already? So may it not matter and did not exit polls in Ohio show...... ...4) That the increased youth vote in that state actually broke for Bush much to Dem's chagrin? Thus as every retail politician knows.... ...5) Get YOUR voters out not ALL voters.
Chilly Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 Back to the OP... AD, you're missing something key here. The article was an AP article, not one written by Fox News. The ones written by Fox News are the ones that tend to be biased, not the AP.
RkFast Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 Back to the OP... AD, you're missing something key here. The article was an AP article, not one written by Fox News. The ones written by Fox News are the ones that tend to be biased, not the AP. 307660[/snapback] Youre kidding, right? The AP wrote a scathing article about how GWB threw out the first pitch at the Nats game last week!!!!!!!
RkFast Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 IMO, that's not a fair statement. If someone has a family, buys a house, car(s) and maintains a lifestyle representative of his 135K/yr salary, you'd say he's a success story. But what happens after his employer outsources his job? Or maybe his employer shuts down altogether and the best he can find is a 50k/yr job? Chances are very good that he'd lose everything - including his 400K house. He'd just be caught in something in which he has little to no control. Not everyone who declares bankruptcy is a deadbeat, nor are they all lazy. 307159[/snapback] Terrible example. First, if someone loses their gig, they most-likely will get a severance and benefits for a while to keep him/her afloat. Second, even if this person loses or does not get a severance, the bank's not going to pound on his door five minutes later to take all his/her things and throw him on the street and into the bankrupcy courts. Third, the person MAY find a new high-paying job pretty quick, especially if s/hes got the skills to have a $135K/year job in the first place. And finally, even if s/he stays out of work or only gets a $50/K year job, the person can sell that fancy house and boat and car and have to live off his/her NEW means. You make it sound like you lose your job and five minutes later youre in bankrupcy and thats far far far from the truth.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 Terrible example. First, if someone loses their gig, they most-likely will get a severance and benefits for a while to keep him/her afloat. Second, even if this person loses or does not get a severance, the bank's not going to pound on his door five minutes later to take all his/her things and throw him on the street and into the bankrupcy courts. Third, the person MAY find a new high-paying job pretty quick, especially if s/hes got the skills to have a $135K/year job in the first place. And finally, even if s/he stays out of work or only gets a $50/K year job, the person can sell that fancy house and boat and car and have to live off his/her NEW means. You make it sound like you lose your job and five minutes later youre in bankrupcy and thats far far far from the truth. 307709[/snapback] What about people who are unemployed for say, oh, six months, have a new child, a house that's bleeding them dry, car loans, student loans, and credit card debt up to the eyeballs? People deserve a clean start.
Terry Tate Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 What about people who are unemployed for say, oh, six months, have a new child, a house that's bleeding them dry, car loans, student loans, and credit card debt up to the eyeballs? People deserve a clean start. 307821[/snapback] I don't have an answer for bankruptcy law; I just wanted to mention that simultaneously having a mortgage, car loan, student loans and credit card debt is really unwise. Not only for the hardship due to the loss of a job, but the huge cost to you in terms of additional expenses - you're paying a premium for having everthing you want now, instead of waiting. This statement is obviously geared towards the credit card debt and car loans vs any of the other debt, but also includes not pushing your credit to the absolute limit for the house, either. If any of our dear readers are currently in this situation, please do all you can to avoid this, and make a serious effort to reduce your debt load. But you did say six months, so if our hypothetical family had that much savings to live off of, they at least planned that part of it. Many would be facing a negative balance within three months. Steel yourself against the constant barrage of "buy now, pay later" - you're paying top dollar, when you don't need to.
RkFast Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 What about people who are unemployed for say, oh, six months, have a new child, a house that's bleeding them dry, car loans, student loans, and credit card debt up to the eyeballs? People deserve a clean start. 307821[/snapback] Easy. Sell the car, move into an apartment, get a deferment on the student loans, call the credit card companies and work out a payment plan. And get a job bartending or waiting on tables. Two of them, if need be. None of that works for you.....THEN you can declare bankruptcy.
Alaska Darin Posted April 18, 2005 Author Posted April 18, 2005 Back to the OP... AD, you're missing something key here. The article was an AP article, not one written by Fox News. The ones written by Fox News are the ones that tend to be biased, not the AP. 307660[/snapback] Whether they wrote it or not, it was on their website. That means they chose to run it, despite the fact that it was contrary to the conservative bent they are so well known for.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 Easy. Sell the car, move into an apartment, get a deferment on the student loans, call the credit card companies and work out a payment plan. And get a job bartending or waiting on tables. Two of them, if need be. None of that works for you.....THEN you can declare bankruptcy. 307888[/snapback] Right, because the credit card companies are oh-so-willing to work out payment plans.
Gavin in Va Beach Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 Right, because the credit card companies are oh-so-willing to work out payment plans. 307998[/snapback] 9 times out of 10, they are. They did with me.
nobody Posted April 18, 2005 Posted April 18, 2005 The problem is the ones abusing the bankruptcy rules are not maxing out their credit cards to survive - they are bilking money from people and use bankruptcy to not have to pay back the people - not credit card companies.
Recommended Posts