Where we all frolic in the effluent of Fringey's political wisdom.
 

Carry on, folks.

[insert fringey's brainstorm here]
 

A couple thread titles suggested in the last couple weeks were good, but I can't remember them -- anyone care to help?

[insert fringey's brainstorm here]
 

When are you going to start linking from my new favorite political blog, http://allintensivepurposes.blogspot.com/?

First, note that I hate this bill, so I'm not trying to shoot it down here.

But - the study was way too flawed and skewed to conclude that almost half of BKs' were medical-bill driven. Their definitions encompassed far more than was proper to make such a conclusion.

"We developed two summary measures of medical bankruptcy. Under the rubric “Major Medical Bankruptcy” we included debtors who either (1) cited illness or injury as a specific reason for bankruptcy, or (2) reported uncovered medical bills exceeding $1,000 in the past years, or (3) lost at least two weeks of work-related income because of illness/injury, or (4) mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Our more inclusive category, “Any Medical Bankruptcy,” included debtors who cited any of the above, or addiction, or uncontrolled gambling, or birth, or the death of a family member."

I've seen better studies that put it at around 10%-15%. What this study shows is that at least half of all BKs include at least $1000 in medical debt (hell, I've got that right now), were caused by missing at least two weeks of wages because of illness, or were brought on by someone's death, or addiction, or gambling problem - and all of these were self-reported by the bankrupt people.

No, the case for trashing this bill shouldn't include this study, but it doesn't need it.

[insert fringey's brainstorm here]
 

that blogger is the biggest idiot i've seen- please don't tie down this board with the shit he vomits-

By the way, have you heard about the new House inititive to charge suspects for their interrogations? Good idea- bad? Discuss.

Credit Cards
 

I'm too lazy to cut and paste between threads, so I'm just going to spew here. If I didn't respond to your post, feel free to let me know.

To Bilmore: I'm surprised at you - since when do you you look down from your high post and think of all the little people that need protection. It doesn't take a law school degree to be able to manage debt or to realize that a 30% interest rate is very high. Some of the best business people I know barely graduated high school. This isn't a question of brains. The "little people" are a lot smarter than you think. It's a question or responsibility.

I don't think there should be interest rate caps.

To Fringey: Of course they have to disclose interest rates. The interest rate is a material term, the absense of which would make the contract unenforceable.

To Wonk: I view the G's roll in banking much like I do in securities. It really is not necessary because a private entity could step in (see, e.g., Nasdaq and NYSE), but all in all, it probably makes the system more efficient, so I'm OK with it.

[insert fringey's brainstorm here]
 

Um, it's difficult to know, really. But here's an "h," an "a," an "r", and a few extra full sets of alphabet letters to add some more words and spell out what you're talking about here.

Name Dropping
 

In the last thread Shape Shifter stated:

"Unlike spanky, who knew Orwell."

It has become clear to me that Wonk, Fringy, Shape Shifter and others think that I am arrogant, name dropping blowhard. Clearly they think I don't know what I am talking about on any of these subjects and that I am mainly here just to show of my connections and past experiences.

Well to reinforce this impression I have posted, with permission of a moderator, an attachment. Sometime ago I received a phone call on my cell phone while I was in Costco choosing among crates of cereal. The ID of the phone call was blocked so I did not answer it. When I listened to the voice mail it turned out to be someone thanking me and my organization for our endorsement.

Here is the link. Check it out (it is actually pretty funny).

www.lawtalkers.com/arnold.mp4

Once again, total agreement. Though, I do think there is a medical crisis and that the way charges for/access to medical treatment are a big contributor to continuing poverty for people who start out relatively poor.

Name Dropping
 

I don't think you are a namedropper. And I don't think you say anything that is untrue if viewed in isolation.

[insert fringey's brainstorm here]
 

Name Dropping
 

Congrats.


By the way, if you notice later that you start receiving flowers, candies or other forget-me-nots signed only "Love, Club," know that this was the spark.

Name Dropping
 

He claimed to have met Sidd- how is that name dropping? All you have to do is show up w/o counsel for arraignment in SF municipal court on a misdemenor charge and there is a 20% chance a judge will introduce you to Sidd-

Name Dropping
 

FWIW, I don't think you're an arrogant name dropping blowhard, but Schwarzenegger is a whore.

Name Dropping
 

I couldn't open it. What did it say?

Name Dropping
 

I guess that my post didn't come of as sarcastic and tongue and cheeck as I wanted to. In all seriousness, I prefer posts that attack me. They are more fun to respond to. Political discussions are no fun unless people are passionate about what they are talking about and sometimes take things personally. I only post to this board, because I like the fact that here, people have to back up their statements and are not allowed to get away with lazy and illogical arguments.

Name Dropping
 

To be fair, you haven't been posting here long. Soon you'll understand better that lazy and illogical is critical to this board's survival.

Name Dropping
 

You are (or your persona here is) too pedantically arrogantly serious to carry off tongue in cheek. Which should have been hyphenated in your sentence, btw, fwiw, iykwim.

ETA This should be your avatar, not the kid:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...n/10paddle.jpg

Name Dropping
 

iykwim?

"if you know what I mean" -- t.s.

Credit Cards
 

To throw in my alleged drug use at this point of the conversation is a lazy ad hominim tactic.

When I graduated law school, I opened my own office, and handled whoever walked in. I will attest that the "little people" are a whole fucking lot dumber than you think.

Name Dropping
 

Geshundeit

Credit Cards
 

If we can get them all into sex-segregated debtor's prison, working off their debt at prison (sub-minimum) wages, they probably won't breed and eventually may die out.

I'm not sure who will wash club's car under this scenario, though.

Name Dropping
 

I know that I am slow, but what the hell is that short for?

Name Dropping
 

If you know what I mean

Name Dropping
 

OK got it - thands dinasour

[insert fringey's brainstorm here]
 

Damned blogger won't even let you comment there.

Credit Cards
 

We can agree on this. People are fucking stupid. Which always drives me nuts when people bring up Adam Smith, self-interest and rational decision-making. Wonderful concepts, but the majority of people have no idea why they make certain decisions.

Name Dropping
 

Um, so just what did you "do" for him, anyway? Procurement? Bagman?

[insert fringey's brainstorm here]
 

Don't fall for it. He's trying to steal our page hits.

[insert fringey's brainstorm here]
 

Comments are all well and good for some purposes, but I have yet to see a blog with comments that in any way approach the discussion on this board. And the bigger the blog, the more useless they seem to be.

eta: It occurs to me that when I cross-post, as I've been doing, I should put a comment up over there directing people to the post and ensuing discussion here. I have gotten comments over there that don't seem to come from people on this board.

Credit Cards
 

Well that's a gene pool problem in Minnesota.

Credit Cards
 

So, do you believe that it should only be the peasants who should remain saddled with debt and bear responsibility, or would you agree that if bankruptcy is to be restricted for consumers, it should be similarly restricted for companies like Chrysler, WorldCom, Texaco, Enron, etc.?

Credit Cards
 

I'm not sure I can answer this because I haven't read the bill and don't know its contents. I was only responding to the personal responsibility part. I assume the bill makes it harder to file? How so?

Name Dropping
 

I don't think you are an arrogant, name-dropping blowhard. I just think you are a reactionary, fuck-them-if they-ain't rich-like-me, stuck-in-the-Cold-War republican.

Other than that, from all reports, you're a nice guy, and I hope to have you join me for drinks next time I get out to the Left Coast.

Name Dropping
 

Let's not go too far,

Credit Cards
 

It places limits on who can file for chapter 7. If you have the ability to pay a certain amount over time, you are forced to file a ch. 13. It also makes more debt non-dischargeable in other ways. Incidentally, it does nothing to limit the ability of corporations to file for a ch. 11 reorganization, screw their shareholders, pensioners, and employees, then walk out of court with a nice clean balance sheet.

Credit Cards
 

If the bill makes it harder to file, isn't that a giveaway to credit-card companies, which lent money under one set of background assumptions and have now had those rules changed? And if we're going to assume people are rational -- your assumption, I think -- shouldn't we assume that they understood their bankruptcy options when they signed up for credit cards, and now are having the rug pulled out from under them?

Perverse incentives.
 

Via &c., the Wall Street Journal suggests (subscription only) that the bankruptcy bill may actually increase the number of bankruptcies by lessening the incentives to lend to people who are bad risks.

• Some bankruptcy economists theorize that there's an inverse relationship between strong consumer-protection laws and bankruptcy filings. In states where it's harder for lenders to get judgments against consumers, bankruptcies might be lower because lenders are pickier about who gets credit. In states that make it easy for creditors to repossess property, bankruptcies might be higher because more consumers are extended credit.
  
  That, the economists say, might explain why many Southern states--known for the creditor-friendly laws--have higher bankruptcy rates. Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee provide a wide range of prejudgments, creditor remedies, attachments, garnishments and wage assignments with limited or no litigation, Mr. Gerdano says.

Gerdano is the executive director of the American Bankruptcy Institute, a Washington group composed of bankruptcy judges, and accountants and lawyers who represent both borrowers and lenders.

Links here.

Credit Cards
 

Credit card companies don't care about corporate bankruptcy.

Club, it is estimated that people filing for bankruptcy will have to pay more like $800 up front for filing and that many people will have to go through two proceedings (fail at 13, go to 7) -- with the associated transaction costs -- under the new system. They are required to pay for mandatory credit counseling (or, someone will have to fund this, but the bill does not call for funding for credit counseling for debtors). It does not, at least last time I heard, end the incredibly generous homestead exemptions in states like FL and TX which allow people who really do have resources to shield properties worth hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars.

I honestly don't see why credit card companies don't just build the bankruptcy laws into their algorithms. Or, why they don't use what they know more effectively, and just not extend credit (or as much credit, or unsecured credit) to bad credit risks. It's not like they don't pretty much have access to everyone's entire fucking financial history. Instead, they are lobbying for what amounts to increased regulation of the bankruptcy proceedings but apparently are pretty successfully selling it to chumps like you as "increasing personal responsibility."

Credit Cards
 

But thankfully, it continues to allow one to sock away tons-o-bux in opulent homes and then shelters that asset from creditors. Similarly, if one's assets reach that critical mass at which expensive legal help becomes cost-effective, one can easily set up a sheltered trust, fund it with as much as you want, declare BK, and continue to exercise complete discretion and control over the trust.

It's good to be king.