Bankruptcy Bill to Pass!

[Jadow]

People always say "but people file bankruptcy because of medical bills"

well, how do the doctors and hospital WHO SAVED YOUR LIFE feel always being shrugged off as "ok to screw"

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: randym431
Just see how outrageous this bill is to elderly, single parents and folks devastated by medical bills.

Awwwww, you obviously didn't get the Memo.

This all going 100% according to Republican and the Wealthy plan.

If you are elderly and have no money or just plain have no money you do not belong in the U.S. You must flee to other Countries or just off yourself ASAP

Fixed for you

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Jadow
People always say "but people file bankruptcy because of medical bills"

well, how do the doctors and hospital WHO SAVED YOUR LIFE feel always being shrugged off as "ok to screw"

:roll: If they charge you $10K for a bandage and a tylenol, and you only pay them 5K before you file for bankruptcy, you aren't exactly "screwing" them.

 

[dmcowen674]

OP needs to update the thread Title, the Senate voted this down.

 

[daveshel]

The only regret here is that the credit industry has the lobby power to get this law on the table. When I was 20 in the late 70s, I couldn't get a credit card, nobody could without being well established. Now they go after college freshmen and it seems like all anybody needs to get a credit card is a signature. Irresponsibility begets irresponsibility. (But I'm glad I couldn't get one as a kid - I learned to respect credit and have never left a balance unpaid at the end of the month.)

 

[ciba]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: Jadow
People always say "but people file bankruptcy because of medical bills"

well, how do the doctors and hospital WHO SAVED YOUR LIFE feel always being shrugged off as "ok to screw"

:roll: If they charge you $10K for a bandage and a tylenol, and you only pay them 5K before you file for bankruptcy, you aren't exactly "screwing" them.

No, you're "screwing" people with a real need for medical attention by going to a doctor/hospital because you need a band-aid and tylenol.

 

[razor2025]

Heard from NPR that some politicians tried to tack an amendment that'll raise the current minimum-wage to that Bill, but both Dem and Repubs couldn't vote it in.... It's a sad day for average americans....

Rich gets richer, Poor gets screwed..... We just need once, mere ONE term of government where every single official have no ties to the financial institution / corporations. Then things will definitely look up for the better.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: ciba

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: Jadow
People always say "but people file bankruptcy because of medical bills"

well, how do the doctors and hospital WHO SAVED YOUR LIFE feel always being shrugged off as "ok to screw"

:roll: If they charge you $10K for a bandage and a tylenol, and you only pay them 5K before you file for bankruptcy, you aren't exactly "screwing" them.

No, you're "screwing" people with a real need for medical attention by going to a doctor/hospital because you need a band-aid and tylenol.

Maybe you need more, but you only get a band-aid and a tylenol.

 

[randym431]

Medical issues...a great point. If a bill like this becomes law, protection for families against medical catastrophe "should" be the next issue taken up by the congress. But they wont. You know they wont. So it shows where their priorities are.

What I find shocking here is how many people have no clue how fast your family can be devastated by a medical nightmares, like cancer. Sure, you got a good job and sure, you have insurance. But...no job = no insurance. Your kid has cancer, your company lays you off, your really screwed.

Sure, those doctors should be paid, and deserve to. But its time for the government to address these issues. The formula job=insurance, no job=no insurance is the whole problem.

 

[ciba]

Originally posted by: randym431
Sure, those doctors should be paid, and deserve to. But its time for the government to address these issues. The formula job=insurance, no job=no insurance is the whole problem.

Why not just buy catstrophic (high-deductible) insurance when you get laid off?

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: ciba

Originally posted by: randym431
Sure, those doctors should be paid, and deserve to. But its time for the government to address these issues. The formula job=insurance, no job=no insurance is the whole problem.

Why not just buy catstrophic (high-deductible) insurance when you get laid off?

because on the list of paying the rent, providing food for your kids, and keeping the heat turned on, it's pretty far down.

 

[ciba]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: ciba

Originally posted by: randym431
Sure, those doctors should be paid, and deserve to. But its time for the government to address these issues. The formula job=insurance, no job=no insurance is the whole problem.

Why not just buy catstrophic (high-deductible) insurance when you get laid off?

because on the list of paying the rent, providing food for your kids, and keeping the heat turned on, it's pretty far down.

While no job doesn't necessarily mean no insurance, I guess I impose my own planning on others. Fair enough, loki.

 

[joshw10]

Originally posted by: ciba

Originally posted by: randym431
Sure, those doctors should be paid, and deserve to. But its time for the government to address these issues. The formula job=insurance, no job=no insurance is the whole problem.

Why not just buy catstrophic (high-deductible) insurance when you get laid off?

Do you even have a clue what that costs?

 

[Darkhawk28]

Top Ten Bankruptcy Filing States as a % of Households

1 Utah
2 Tennessee
3 Georgia
4 Nevada
5 Indiana
6 Alabama
7 Arkansas
8 Ohio
9 Mississippi
10 Idaho


Isn't that ironic, eh? Enjoy your Republican representation! :laugh:

State-by-State Breakdown Of Bankruptcy Filings

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Top Ten Bankruptcy Filing States as a % of Households

1 Utah
2 Tennessee
3 Georgia
4 Nevada
5 Indiana
6 Alabama
7 Arkansas
8 Ohio
9 Mississippi
10 Idaho


Isn't that ironic, eh? Enjoy your Republican representation! :laugh:

State-by-State Breakdown Of Bankruptcy Filings

it's HARD WORK ruinin you fine 'muricans
quite a find DH sad, but not surprising

 

[razor2025]

wow... my state's in 3rd. But I'm not surprised. Poverty in Georgia is pretty bad. I feel frustrated that so many average joe voters can be so stupid to vote these corrupted official into power. But then again, our political system has been rigged to the point where you CAN'T have a "clean" official on the ballot anymore. Giant Douche or Turd Sandwich anyone?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Top Ten Bankruptcy Filing States as a % of Households

1 Utah
2 Tennessee
3 Georgia
4 Nevada
5 Indiana
6 Alabama
7 Arkansas
8 Ohio
9 Mississippi
10 Idaho


Isn't that ironic, eh? Enjoy your Republican representation! :laugh:

State-by-State Breakdown Of Bankruptcy Filings

Bahahahaha

The Elitist's in here chided me for leaving Georgia, they insisted the State is doing so well compared to Louisiana, gee I don't see Louisiana in the top 10 list at all.

The real kicker is all those Red States bankrupt especially Ohio the newest Red State. Good you Ohioans deserve it.

 

[piasabird]

What about corporations?

How many times have you seen airlines restructuring their debt. It is almost a given that the more money you have the easier it is to get a bank to restructure your debt, because it is cheaper than calling in the loan.

 

[piasabird]

I can see a day when the credit bureaus will come up with a simple program that just calculates a persons total debt, so you can not hide your debt level.

One thing I see is some people who are running up debt on over 10 credit cards with multiple banks and the banks dont see what each other are doing.

Still I have little sympathy for the banks that keep sending you credit card applications like credit is water that you can keep drinking.

Banks should be able to spot spending patterns.

 

[ciba]

Originally posted by: joshw10

Originally posted by: ciba

Originally posted by: randym431
Sure, those doctors should be paid, and deserve to. But its time for the government to address these issues. The formula job=insurance, no job=no insurance is the whole problem.

Why not just buy catstrophic (high-deductible) insurance when you get laid off?

Do you even have a clue what that costs?

Let me dig up my COBRA packet from when I got laid off and I'll tell you.

 

[chowderhead]

Originally posted by: piasabird
What about corporations?

How many times have you seen airlines restructuring their debt. It is almost a given that the more money you have the easier it is to get a bank to restructure your debt, because it is cheaper than calling in the loan.

exactly. All these airlines go in and out of bankrupcy to clear debt and sheep investors fall for it every time. Who in the telecom sector has the BEST balance sheet - MCI Worldcom which had massive accounting scandals and went into bankrupcy and came out smelling like a rose and primed to be bought up. Where is the corporate bankrupcy reforms?

 

[CubicZirconia]

Still I have little sympathy for the banks that keep sending you credit card applications like credit is water that you can keep drinking.

I'm not an expert but I think that if the banks were losing money overall on this strategy they would have put an end to it a long time ago. The fact that they haven't tells me that they're not.

 

[dmcowen674]

They went back and passed this thing.

OK :thumbsup:

More people that will be oppressed and ready for Revolution :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[BBond]

I found this article by Cynthia Tucker, the editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (re-printed in the Baltimore Sun), on the bankruptcy law just passed and it brings up a core question that I've had.

Why would American voters elect people whose economic policies work against average Americans?

I still can't explain it but read this op-ed piece and you'll see the point as well as a possible motive. This is a bankruptcy law that benefits banks and credit card companies, forgives the rich and rich corporations, but penalizes average, elderly and disabled Americans.

Bush deals another blow to the middle

By Cynthia Tucker

Originally published March 14, 2005

ATLANTA - President Bush didn't campaign on a promise to make it harder for average Americans to regain their financial footing after filing for bankruptcy. Even if he had, he probably would have been re-elected anyway.

Most Americans haven't noticed the president's relentless assault on programs and policies that protect the middle class against the caprice of the marketplace. If average Americans are living with a higher degree of financial anxiety, they blame outsourcing or high taxes or illegal Mexican immigrants. They haven't recognized that the Republicans have middle America in their crosshairs and that President Bush has given the order to fire.

The war on working- and middle-class America continued apace last week when a piece of legislation favored by bankers and credit card companies - and pushed by the president - gained steam in the Senate. The new bankruptcy bill would make it harder for middle-income individuals to file under Chapter 7, which usually allows some debt-forgiveness. Under the new law, individuals (with very few exceptions) have to keep working to pay off their debts, even if it takes several years.

Financial industry lobbyists claim they are only going after deadbeats who can afford to pay, but the research suggests otherwise. A few deadbeats may indeed file for bankruptcy to get out of paying for cars or big-screen TVs they knew they couldn't afford. But the vast majority, experts say, have been forced into substantial debt by some unforeseen personal catastrophe - death of the major breadwinner, job loss or medical crisis, for example.

Meanwhile, the rich will not be held to the same standard. They are free to be deadbeats. Senators defeated an amendment to the bill that would have closed loopholes allowing the wealthy to hold onto their mansions and other assets when they file for bankruptcy. They also turned back an amendment that would prevent corrupt companies, such as Enron, from sheltering assets that ought to go to former employees. But the Senate wouldn't accept an amendment that would have allowed the not-rich elderly to keep their houses if they go bankrupt.

Years from now, sociologists and political scientists will explain how Republicans persuaded so many voters to act against their own economic interests. Even as the GOP heaps more and more benefits on the wealthy and big business - tax breaks, so-called tort reform, anti-union policies - and strips them from average workers, the party continues to get much of its support from those same workers.

It's a mystery.

Perhaps it can be partly explained by the virtue of self-reliance, an ethic embedded in the American psyche that is often associated with conservatives. But a sense of invulnerability has also made it easier for the GOP to carry out this assault on average Americans: Most people don't think they'll be the victims of a financial crisis until the crisis befalls them.

The rewrite of the bankruptcy laws comes after a series of other developments that have frayed the safety net for average families. Even as job security declines, unemployment compensation has been reduced. Guaranteed pensions are disappearing, as is employer-provided health insurance. While wealthy Americans are coddled, working Americans are being subjected to the whims of a rapacious capitalism.

But Mr. Bush didn't say that during the last campaign. Instead, he talked about an "ownership society."

He neglected to explain that most of the owning would be done by the very rich.

Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Her column appears Mondays in The Sun.

 

[Buz2b]

Originally posted by: BBond
I found this article by Cynthia Tucker, the editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (re-printed in the Baltimore Sun), on the bankruptcy law just passed and it brings up a core question that I've had.

Why would American voters elect people whose economic policies work against average Americans?

I still can't explain it but read this op-ed piece and you'll see the point as well as a possible motive. This is a bankruptcy law that benefits banks and credit card companies, forgives the rich and rich corporations, but penalizes average, elderly and disabled Americans.

Bush deals another blow to the middle

By Cynthia Tucker

Originally published March 14, 2005

ATLANTA - President Bush didn't campaign on a promise to make it harder for average Americans to regain their financial footing after filing for bankruptcy. Even if he had, he probably would have been re-elected anyway.

Most Americans haven't noticed the president's relentless assault on programs and policies that protect the middle class against the caprice of the marketplace. If average Americans are living with a higher degree of financial anxiety, they blame outsourcing or high taxes or illegal Mexican immigrants. They haven't recognized that the Republicans have middle America in their crosshairs and that President Bush has given the order to fire.

The war on working- and middle-class America continued apace last week when a piece of legislation favored by bankers and credit card companies - and pushed by the president - gained steam in the Senate. The new bankruptcy bill would make it harder for middle-income individuals to file under Chapter 7, which usually allows some debt-forgiveness. Under the new law, individuals (with very few exceptions) have to keep working to pay off their debts, even if it takes several years.

Financial industry lobbyists claim they are only going after deadbeats who can afford to pay, but the research suggests otherwise. A few deadbeats may indeed file for bankruptcy to get out of paying for cars or big-screen TVs they knew they couldn't afford. But the vast majority, experts say, have been forced into substantial debt by some unforeseen personal catastrophe - death of the major breadwinner, job loss or medical crisis, for example.

Meanwhile, the rich will not be held to the same standard. They are free to be deadbeats. Senators defeated an amendment to the bill that would have closed loopholes allowing the wealthy to hold onto their mansions and other assets when they file for bankruptcy. They also turned back an amendment that would prevent corrupt companies, such as Enron, from sheltering assets that ought to go to former employees. But the Senate wouldn't accept an amendment that would have allowed the not-rich elderly to keep their houses if they go bankrupt.

Years from now, sociologists and political scientists will explain how Republicans persuaded so many voters to act against their own economic interests. Even as the GOP heaps more and more benefits on the wealthy and big business - tax breaks, so-called tort reform, anti-union policies - and strips them from average workers, the party continues to get much of its support from those same workers.

It's a mystery.

Perhaps it can be partly explained by the virtue of self-reliance, an ethic embedded in the American psyche that is often associated with conservatives. But a sense of invulnerability has also made it easier for the GOP to carry out this assault on average Americans: Most people don't think they'll be the victims of a financial crisis until the crisis befalls them.

The rewrite of the bankruptcy laws comes after a series of other developments that have frayed the safety net for average families. Even as job security declines, unemployment compensation has been reduced. Guaranteed pensions are disappearing, as is employer-provided health insurance. While wealthy Americans are coddled, working Americans are being subjected to the whims of a rapacious capitalism.

But Mr. Bush didn't say that during the last campaign. Instead, he talked about an "ownership society."

He neglected to explain that most of the owning would be done by the very rich.

Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Her column appears Mondays in The Sun.

This "journalist" is talking out of he "lower" mouth. There is no "protection" for the wealthy to keep their mansions or other assets in this bill. Quite the contrary, the bill provides that those in a better position to pay (wealthier) will be made to pay and not file bankruptcy (or at least chapter 13). The bulk of the bill is based on need: Those that really need bankruptcy, will have it available. People like Trump will find the door closed.
Typical scare tactics so predictably used by the left anytime something demanding personal responsibility is passed. Look at the hell they raised when the republicans managed to get welfare reform passed under Clinton. You'd have thought we were going to starve every child in the nation. Instead we saw a reduction in the welfare roles as (at least some) of those able to, went to work. Nope, it wasn't perfect or good enough but it was needed and it was a start. The same thing is going on here. It ain't perfect and I don't think it goes far enough but the Bankruptcy reform bill is a start in the right direction. This will bear out over time, I'm sure.