Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Carry on, folks.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Carry on, folks.

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

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Carry on, folks.

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

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
The study is here. To the extent that there is a bankruptcy "crisis," I suspect it is inextricably linked to the healthcare crisis. Take it away, RT.

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.

[Hank Chinaski]

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

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.

[sgtclub]

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.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
By the way, nave you heard about the new House inititive to charge suspects for thei interrogations? Good idea- bad" Discuss.

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.

[Spanky]

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

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by bilmore
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.

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.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Spanky
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

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

[Tyrone Slothrop]

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

Indeed.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Spanky
Well to reinforce this impression I have posted, with permission of a moderator, an attachment.

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.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I don't think you are a namedropper. And I don't think you say anything that is untrue if viewed in isolation.

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-

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Spanky
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

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

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Gattigap
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.

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