It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: New Bankruptcy Bill Protects Rich: Squeezes Troops, Everyone Else

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
What I know about this bill is that the principal change in the bill is a means test for anyone who wants to file chapter 7 bankrupcy. People who earn less than the median income are exempt from median testing.

In 2003 the median income in South Florida for a 4 people family was $58,605. I don't know what the median income is at now, but it should be around $60,000 for a family of 4.

Here is a list of median income in all states up to 2003.
www.census.gov...

The bill proposes a limitation in the amount of money that can be exempted in bankrupcy. This limitation also applies only to people who have recently moved to South FLorida.




posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I am not a bu#e, but i am conservative. Our economy is capitalist and not socialist. It is based on survival of the fittest. Rich people are rich for a reason: they know how to work the system. My family gained their wealth through hard work as an immigrant family and wise investing. People are not predestined to be rich. Being smart money wise is how people get out of debt. Fiscal responsiblity should be a required course in schools (though i despise the public school system).

Americans have many rights but we seem to forget that with these rights come responsibilities. The most important one is if you borrow money you have to pay it back. Otherwise you return what you bought. If you don't that is like stealing. I am not cold hearted, there are cases where i am lax on this, but it is not a right or left wing issue, it is what is good for the nation. People are dumb enought to not pay off their bills the month they get them and then their debt gets out of control. Ignorance is not an excuse.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

That's the point Crakeur - the laws are set up to protect the rich - and leave folks who are seriously in trouble out to hang.


actually, the old laws are what allowed trump to get away with what he got away with. The new laws should be stricter in that regards. I feel that the credit card issue is a good thing. I've seen many people who run up bills with the knowledge that they can always file for bankruptcy if they have to. Hell I had a client who rang up 15 grand on her mom's credit card because her mother was on life support and she figured "when she dies, she can't pay it"

she lived.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by CAConrad0825
I am not a bu#e, but i am conservative.





Conservatives used to be against big government.






Our economy is capitalist and not socialist.





Mussolini said that when governments run the corporations it's communism, and when corporations run the government it's fascism. Looks to me like corporations are running this government.






Americans have many rights but we seem to forget that with these rights come responsibilities. The most important one is if you borrow money you have to pay it back. Otherwise you return what you bought. If you don't that is like stealing.





Then why are corporations off the hook? They are protected for bankruptcy, class action suits and in tax and accounting law.

There are loopholes everywhere for corporations - and for the rich in personal bankruptcy, but not for the ordinary people who really need it.

The rich can hide their money in other countries - but the sick and vulnerable take it where it hurts. ...46% of personal bankruptcies in the USA involve health problems - and it's about to get worse.





the real winners will be the credit-card companies, ...And their profits, which are at already at record levels, will climb even higher.

www.prospect.org...

.........

(The new bankruptcy bill makes it) harder for low-income, elderly and sick people to dissolve their debts while allowing the wealthy to shelter assets.

www.sddt.com...






maudib

I am not cold hearted, there are cases where i am lax on this, but it is not a right or left wing issue, it is what is good for the nation.





What's coming down is good for the rich and the corporations - but NOT for the nation (if you count ordinary Americans).






Ignorance is not an excuse.





Americans are faced with rampant infectious epidemics, rising health care and insurance costs, rising costs for housing and more - at the same time the economy has been "restructured" to result in job losses and massive unemployment and homelessness. ...Many people are holding down 2 and 3 jobs, and still have trouble. And it's not getting any better.



.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:27 PM
link   
i am just amazed that people want to turn anything and everything into a political tool....and i am sick and tired of it...

If people would actually "do some research" they would be able to "deny ignorance" and find when issues are exagerated and being turned into political propaganda....



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow- at the same time the economy has been "restructured" to result in job losses and massive unemployment and homelessness. ...Many people are holding down 2 and 3 jobs, and still have trouble. And it's not getting any better.



"Employment took off last month at its fastest clip since October, with 262,000 new jobs added across all sectors of the economy. "

www.nydailynews.com...



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow


maudib

I am not cold hearted, there are cases where i am lax on this, but it is not a right or left wing issue, it is what is good for the nation.



That was not me who said that sofi.... It was another member.

And the bill is a change in the ammount of money that can be exempted in bankrupcy which applies to people who have recently moved to South Florida and people who earn more than the median income...

How many people in here earn an average of $60,000 for a family of 4?



[edit on 5-3-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
But you want ordinary people to take personal responsibility for this mess? I don't think so.


We are talking about personal bankrupcies or at least I was. If an individual creates a mess they should be responsable for it. Or is this a new form of socialism you are attempting to create here?



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Well, let me illustrate an example of bankruptcy Fraud.

A company was securing Defense contracts and issuing work as a Prime contractor. There were several million dollars involved, and the prime contractor simply closed his doors and refused to pay any of the contractors on the projects. The amounts embezzled was over 2.2 Million
Several contractors banded together and took the Prime to court. He filed for bankruptcy the day before superior court would issue Formal ruling, the preliminary was in favor of the contractors.
The bankruptcy court has luckily opened a formal investigation and is reviewing checking account records, and is slowly finding the missing and hidden monies.
The reason the Prime did this, is he got away with it 6 years earlier. I understand medical and unusual circumstances, but not to hide fraud under Federal contracts.
Bankruptcy needs overhaul, but for criminal intent, not the trash they are trying now.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

That was not me who said that sofi.... It was another member.




Ooops. Sorry bout that.







And the bill is a change in the ammount of money that can be exempted in bankrupcy which applies to people who have recently moved to South Florida and people who earn more than the median income...





I think it's abit more complicated - and looks to exempt credit card debt totally.

I know some people have been irresponsible - but the fact remains - 46% of personal bankruptcies in the USA involve health problems. ...and IMO - the credit companies should stop predatory marketing - they set people up to go in debt - and they this up too.

...If people have "stolen" money - they should be charged on criminal charges. But that not really what this bill is about - the big boys know darn well that people are sick and can't find work, so they're going after every little thing they can possibly get.

...and rich people and corporations are STILL of the hook, and able to scam the system - because it's their system.



.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
...and looks to exempt credit card debt totally.

...46% of personal bankruptcies in the USA involve health problems. ...


So they're protected from their health-related debts, which cannot be helped by the average person, right?
But the new computer or widescreen TV they put on their credit card isn't protected, right?

Okay, so where's the problem here?

Personal responsibility comes into play when people carelessly spend using the magical piece of plastic and expect to be bailed out when they get in over their heads.
That's not the individual's fault?
C'mon.

Now, if somone needing to file Ch. 7 couldn't claim their medical bills, that could well be seen as an issue. Medical costs are high and insurance companies are out of control. Yes, protect these people. Help them.

But someone who goes on a spending spree with the Visa card and a year later realizes they've made a huge mistake?
Nope.
I know how much money I make, I know how much "fun stuff" I can afford. If I can't afford it, I don't buy it. Why is this so hard?
How is this political?

It's not.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Here is a link to the bill, in case anyone wants to read it.

thomas.loc.gov...:SN00256:@@@L&summ2=m&



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Banshee

Originally posted by soficrow
...and looks to exempt credit card debt totally.

...46% of personal bankruptcies in the USA involve health problems. ...


So they're protected from their health-related debts, which cannot be helped by the average person, right?
But the new computer or widescreen TV they put on their credit card isn't protected, right?

Okay, so where's the problem here?

Personal responsibility comes into play when people carelessly spend using the magical piece of plastic and expect to be bailed out when they get in over their heads.
That's not the individual's fault?
C'mon.





A lot of people live on their credit when they sick - thinking it "will pass" and they can catch up. ...Then they just get sicker, or get sick again chronically.





How is this political?

It's not.




I think it's clearly political - it has to do with how the government is run, and whose priorities are being served by government.

...This is after all a bill before the Senate - how much more political can you get? I mean if it's not a political issue, why is it being addressed politically by the government? ...They made it political - not me.



EDIT - I do agree that this should NOT be a political issue - IMO - criminal theft should be dealt with in the criminal courts. However, BushCo and buddies are using the federal legal system to protect themselves and to hamstring ordinary, sick and vulnerable people. Sucks, but there you have it.


.

[edit on 5-3-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Here are some excerpts from the bills for those people who actually don't want to read the whole bill.....


Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 - Title I: Needs-Based Bankruptcy - (Sec. 101) Amends Federal bankruptcy law to revamp guidelines governing dismissal or conversion of a Chapter 7 liquidation (complete relief in bankruptcy), to one under either Chapter 11 (Reorganization), or Chapter 13 (Adjustment of Debts of an Individual with Regular Income).

Permits the bankruptcy court to convert a Chapter 7 case to either Chapter 11 or 13 with a debtor's consent. (Current law requires the debtor's request for such a conversion.)

(Sec. 102) Permits the court upon its own motion, or upon the motion of the bankruptcy trustee, bankruptcy administrator, or any party in interest, to move for a dismissal. (Current law prohibits a party in interest from entering such motions.)

Lowers the "substantial abuse" standard for dismissal or conversion to one of simple abuse.

Replaces the presumption in favor of granting the relief sought by the debtor with a presumption that abuse exists if the debtor's current monthly income exceeds an amount determined according to specified formulae.
......




Here is an excerpt concerning Corporate bankruptcy abuse.


Title XIV: Preventing Corporate Bankruptcy Abuse - (Sec. 1401) Extends the look-back period for such priority wages and benefits from 90 days to 180 days prior to bankruptcy (or cessation of debtor's business). Raises the ceiling for employee wages and benefits entitled to third order priority from $4,000 to $10,000.

(Sec. 1402) Extends from one year to two years the look-back period during which the bankruptcy trustee may avoid fraudulent transfers and obligations incurred by either a debtor or partnership debtor (including any transfer to or for the benefit of an insider, or obligation incurred to or for the benefit of an insider, under an employment contract and not in the ordinary course of business).

(Sec. 1403) Instructs the court, upon motion of a party in interest, to order reinstatement of retiree benefits if the debtor modified them during the 180-day period prior to petition filing, and was insolvent on the date of modification (unless the court finds that the balance of the equities clearly favors such modification).

(Sec. 1404) Declares nondischargeable in bankruptcy the debt of an individual that results before, on, or after the date on which the petition in bankruptcy was filed. Identifies the effective date of such stricture as July 30, 2002,( the date of enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act).

(Sec. 1405) Requires the bankruptcy trustee to move for the appointment of a trustee if there are reasonable grounds to suspect that current members of the governing body of the debtor, the debtor's chief executive or chief financial officer, or members of the governing body who selected the debtor's chief executive or chief financial officer, participated in actual fraud, dishonesty, or criminal conduct in the management of the debtor or the debtor's public financial reporting.


Both ecerpts taken from.
thomas.loc.gov...:SN00256:@@@L&summ2=m&


[edit on 5-3-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 04:26 PM
link   
.
.
.
People need to ask themselves a few questions:

Why aren't credit card thefts dealt with in the criminal courts, where they belong?

...Why is everyone getting tarred with the same brush?

...Why are there loopholes for rich people?

....What happens to ordinary Americans who get sick, and live off credit thinking they'll get better - but then don't?


.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 06:19 PM
link   
The credit card issue isn't what bothers me really. In my humble opinion, credit cards are an incredible mistake for most people who use them, and for those who choose to use them, they are assuming a certain risk for which they should be liable. There should obviously be provision for extenuating circumstances though- if a family feeds their kids on the credit card while one of the parents is in the hospital and not working, that's not irresponsible and there needs to be consideration for that.
Personally, the only reason I would own a credit card is because many video stores wont rent to you without one. I prefer to keep a savings of several thousand dollars for just in case- it's saved by butt a few times and kept me credit card free.

What got my attetion first when i was looking over the bill on govtrack was section 102, specifically the presumption of abuse. It doesn't seem necessary. If blatant irresponsibility and abuse is there, the courts will certainly get it. On the other hand, don't we want to know to a certainty that decent hard-working people can not be abused or denied protection by mistake.
People who steal from lenders intentionally have bigger problems than bankruptcy- they are in fact thieves and if it can be proven they need to go to jail. If somebody doesn't belong in prison for theft or fraud though, neither should they be at the mercy of creditors with no protection.

There are good hard working people with higher than average incomes who become bankrupt without being irresponsible. My parents started as a tradesman and a nurse respectively. They worked like nuts, invested every spare penny they had, soon were on their way to their first million. The bottom fell out of real estate and they were nearly wiped out. They eventually rebuilt themselves. Good thing for them that back then there was no risk of some judge deciding that they hadn't quite proved that they were responsible enough, otherwise with assets seized and wages garnished they may have found themselves on the street, or dang near it.


I know that a few people think I'm a selfish lazy socialist just because I remember that the whole point of our economy is a system whereby people get the things they need to survive. The truth is that I believe in the market, I believe in personal rights and responsibilities, and I also believe that we have to be very careful that the quest for wealth doesn't trump the basic needs of honest working people.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:07 PM
link   
There are alot of predatory lenders out there that charge outrageous
interest rates to people with lower FICO scores.
They prey on the uninformed, the elderly, or the very desperate.
That leads to increased foreclosures and bankrupcies.

This new bankrupcy law should come with new laws to control
predatory lenders more.

I think FICO scores are stupid and don't tell the real story about
a person though. The credit bureaus mess up alot sometimes and
it's trouble to "fix" your report and sometimes takes alot of effort.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Sad to see that everything that the administration has done so far it seems to go against our hard-working class.

It’s not doubt that we have, people that abuse their credit and credit cards.

But we also have a big majority of people that circumstances come into play when it comes to credit, not only medical bills, but also the lost of a job, and emergency and many other ways in which a hard-working American can find himself in trouble of full fill a debt.

People talk about responsibilities but until you walk on a person that becomes a victim of the circumstances shoes you don’t know how it feels like it.

It’s not regulation against the money making empire. Their job is to target not the rich but the hard-working American.

I see more and more how this administration is favoring the big corporations and profiteers and protecting them with laws while the working class Americans are to become victims.

Obviously none of the people in that defend this new rape on the regular citizens has to worry about their income and how to pay bills. Thank god for that, you are the lucky ones.

I see it this way this administration is making harder for the average American to be able to live the American dream.

More and more the elderly, disable, our vets and poor are only finding that living in their beloved country is becoming a nightmare.



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

But we also have a big majority of people that circumstances come into play when it comes to credit, not only medical bills, but also the lost of a job, and emergency and many other ways in which a hard-working American can find himself in trouble of full fill a debt.








Excellent points marg.

The Bush Republicans are pitching this new Bankruptcy Act as a way to deal with people who purposefully abuse credit - which is clearly a crime.

People who commit crimes should be dealt with in the criminal courts. Why create all-new legislation that tars everyone with the same brush, and lets the rich and wealthy off the hook to boot?



.



posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Seekerof,

I do hope your not suggesting a Marxist revolution !!



Karl Marx, though noble hearted in certain regards, was an idealist; his social science was interesting in that it added verbosity to an already waging class war the world knew of for too long. It's not an answer to this, however.

Why are people surprised by this? Did you forget that you live in a capitalist country that has no intention in the collective will? Self-suffiency, my freinds. If you cannot cope with the highly competetive market, than you are obviously not fit to live; Social Darwinism at it's finest. America is a country driven by profit, it always has been, always will. This is not a country that will adhere to a socialist or even liberal perspective, it will be stuck in a Laissez faire dream that adheres Adam Smiths fundamental intruments of government:

1 - Infrastructure should be maintained
2 - Protect the country
3 - law and order must be maintained.

The infamous invisible hand will somehow benefit the entire society, rich and poor..

Deep

[edit on 6-3-2005 by ZeroDeep]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join