1 edit
@Cliff-Mashburn saidGo easy, they still are coming to grips with my revelation that taxpayers do not shoulder ONE dollar of a person's bankruptcy. They make my fingers tired.
Why is Kamala promising to fix everything on day one?
The simplest of analogies does not get thru to them. If I borrow $100k from you to start a business, and lose my business, the only entity/person that loses when I bankrupt would be YOU! You took a risk and lost your $100K.
Moonbus never thanked me for the tutelage.
@AverageJoe1 saidYes, creditors lose money because of government intervention. Absent the protection afforded by bankruptcy and by limited corporate liability (also a government intervention) the creditors could seize your personal assets to collect the debt (admittedly, they'd have to use the government for that, too).
Go easy, they still are coming to grips with my revelation that taxpayers do not shoulder ONE dollar of a person's bankruptcy. They make my fingers tired.
The simplest of analogies does not get thru to them. If I borrow $100k from you to start a business, and lose my business, the only entity/person that loses when I bankrupt would be YOU! You took a risk and lost your $100K.
Moonbus never thanked me for the tutelage.
That's a "good" thing according to you, but it's a terrible thing if the government reduces or forgives loans owed to it.
Your "logic" doesn't make any sense.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidBTW, creditors can write off uncollectible debts from their taxable income. https://cleartax.in/s/bad-debt-doubtful-debt
Go easy, they still are coming to grips with my revelation that taxpayers do not shoulder ONE dollar of a person's bankruptcy. They make my fingers tired.
The simplest of analogies does not get thru to them. If I borrow $100k from you to start a business, and lose my business, the only entity/person that loses when I bankrupt would be YOU! You took a risk and lost your $100K.
Moonbus never thanked me for the tutelage.
So that reduces the amount of revenue the government collects. So that's the same thing that happens when the government reduces or forgives debts owed directly to it.
Glad to help.
@Cliff-Mashburn saidKamala is running on what she intends to do when she is President not on what happened in the past.
Why is Kamala promising to fix everything on day one?
There's never been a time in US history when everything was peachy keen and there was no room for improvement no matter how "great" the President was (not saying Biden was a "great" President).
@no1marauder saidLet's get in the weeds. Or, just recall that somebody said taxpayers 'pay' for bankruptcy. We can trace the flow of dollars from here to Sunday, the after effects of bankruptcy,..... the side-effects of music flowing out of Carnegie affects a cab driver's speed.
BTW, creditors can write off uncollectible debts from their taxable income. https://cleartax.in/s/bad-debt-doubtful-debt
So that reduces the amount of revenue the government collects. So that's the same thing that happens when the government reduces or forgives debts owed directly to it.
Glad to help.
Suzianne and Moonbus, the govt, thru tax reveues, does not reach out and pay for the cost of bankruptcy. Even the bankrupt pays the filing fees.......when he has no money!!! Answer THAT one!
Marauder correctly says there is an offset in the chain of things, but that is not what you fellers have been saying.
Make more use of your time and tell us why K has done nothing in 3.5 years. Why she gives no interviews, such as that.
@no1marauder saidYers, creditors can seize assets, and yes, with government protection.
Yes, creditors lose money because of government intervention. Absent the protection afforded by bankruptcy and by limited corporate liability (also a government intervention) the creditors could seize your personal assets to collect the debt (admittedly, they'd have to use the government for that, too).
That's a "good" thing according to you, but it's a terrible thing if the government reduces or forgives loans owed to it.
Your "logic" doesn't make any sense.
Secondly, if I follow, it is a Good thing that creditors can get anything they can from the person/entity they loaned money to. Logic, indeed.
So we agree. Logic city.
But, I say it is a terrible thing indeed if the govt reduces or forgives loans owed to it. Are you saying that it is a GOOD thing for govt to forgive such loans???? Please use the word logic in you answer.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidYou don't make any sense.
Yers, creditors can seize assets, and yes, with government protection.
Secondly, if I follow, it is a Good thing that creditors can get anything they can from the person/entity they loaned money to. Logic, indeed.
So we agree. Logic city.
But, I say it is a terrible thing indeed if the govt reduces or forgives loans owed to it. Are you saying that it is a GOOD thing for govt to forgive such loans???? Please use the word logic in you answer.
Bankruptcy is a government created way for debtors to avoid paying their creditors in full. You think that is "good".
Government, acting as a creditor, can and does voluntarily reduce or discharge various debts. When they do this to a business like the loans given out during COVID, you have no objection but if they do it in the case of student loan debt, you scream, complain, start about 100 threads about it and bring it up off-topic in hundreds more.
So where is the consistent logic in these positions?
Were you aware of this:
"The federal government has forgiven $394.6 billion in more than 4 million loans to businesses through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), according to new data published by a group of internal federal watchdogs."
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/personal-finance/government-has-forgiven-nearly-400-billion-covid-relief-ppp-loans-n1274618
1 edit
@no1marauder saidI note that he wants his share out of our share instead of out of the share already alloted to him.
Were you aware of this:
"The federal government has forgiven $394.6 billion in more than 4 million loans to businesses through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), according to new data published by a group of internal federal watchdogs."
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/personal-finance/government-has-forgiven-nearly-400-billion-covid-relief-ppp-loans-n1274618
But he calls us "parasites".
1 edit
@no1marauder saidLiberals look to govt for everything, I (conservatives) are self-reliant. So we will never meet in the middle. It is NOT good for people who make bad decisions to look to the government to clean it up. It may be practical, and good for The People to get this relief, but is it good for those who are self-relliant, pay their taxes, only to see their taxes bail people out?
You don't make any sense.
Bankruptcy is a government created way for debtors to avoid paying their creditors in full. You think that is "good".
Government, acting as a creditor, can and does voluntarily reduce or discharge various debts. When they do this to a business like the loans given out during COVID, you have no objection but if they do it in the case of stud ...[text shortened]... and bring it up off-topic in hundreds more.
So where is the consistent logic in these positions?
Again, you see this as totally acceptable, 'everyone get in line to collect', but the people who pay the taxes, the taxes which you are in line to collect, do not see it as good. It is not 'Good ' to them. Are there perchance insurance policies available for people/entities to cover them for such losses?? I do not know. Maybe there should be.
This is the same logic as the tuition parasites, Suzianne. People who pay taxes and are self-reliant are Astounded to see their tax money, which could instead help the destitute, be used for such an ill-conceived programs. I truly wonder what liberals here would say if K decides to pay down credit card debt. You know darn well that you would agree with it. I would not.
I hope this all shows that Marauder philosophy is based on liberal studies which project The People as one big happy family......K once said " we should all be in the same place at the end of the day." You see the hypocrisy of that statement when Michelle, worth $70M, tells the little people to keep just enough to live on....but, I digress.
@AverageJoe1 saidNo individual is "self-reliant". The human race does now and always has lived in societies where each person depends on the others. That is our Nature.
Liberals look to govt for everything, I (conservatives) are self-reliant. So we will never meet in the middle. It is NOT good for people who make bad decisions to look to the government to clean it up. It may be practical, and good for The People to get this relief, but is it good for those who are self-relliant, pay their taxes, only to see their taxes bail people out? ...[text shortened]... when Michelle, worth $70M, tells the little people to keep just enough to live on....but, I digress.
So you start with a fallacy and then spin a bunch of your usual, tiresome lies.
Government should do whatever the People desire except interfere with our Natural Rights. It has been proven that simple minded laissez capitalism (based on the institution of private property, an unnatural concept created and maintained by force) leads inevitably to a small group obtaining the vast majority of wealth and power while many are left in complete poverty and destitution. Reasonable societies have ameliorated these defects by various degrees of regulation and social programs. Right wingers have been complaining about that for centuries but progressive policies have marched on and delivered while laissez faire has continued to fail.
History will judge Trump and his gullible followers like yourself harshly though it's likely to be just a minor speed bump on the way to the greater prosperity and freedom progressive policies always bring.
@no1marauder saidOh, god not natural rights again. Let us just disagree, as I see natural rights, although well and good and cool, to be irrelevant in our nation of laws. If you want to keep that up, you must also start preaching 'Positive Law', which gets kicked around as well,.......I have never seen any of this stuff bandied about in a court, although I am sure some libbies have interjected it on occasion, to no avail. Just fluff in a case involving law.
No individual is "self-reliant". The human race does now and always has lived in societies where each person depends on the others. That is our Nature.
So you start with a fallacy and then spin a bunch of your usual, tiresome lies.
Government should do whatever the People desire except interfere with our Natural Rights. It has been proven that simple minded laissez ...[text shortened]... minor speed bump on the way to the greater prosperity and freedom progressive policies always bring.
Lawyer before a Jury: "In Natural Law, we........." Geez.
You think, I assume, that people have natural rights to other people's stuff? What a thread that can be. Start one!
@no1marauder saidProgressive Policies bring freedom? Do we not associate progressivism with socialism.....Socialism, which has never been successful ? Cuba?
No individual is "self-reliant". The human race does now and always has lived in societies where each person depends on the others. That is our Nature.
So you start with a fallacy and then spin a bunch of your usual, tiresome lies.
Government should do whatever the People desire except interfere with our Natural Rights. It has been proven that simple minded laissez ...[text shortened]... minor speed bump on the way to the greater prosperity and freedom progressive policies always bring.
''''Three Nations That Tried Socialism and Rejected It
The Heritage Foundation
https://www.heritage.org › progressivism › commentary
Oct 16, 2019 — But in truth, socialism has failed in every country in which it has been tried, from the Soviet Union beginning a century ago to three modern ...''
No one is Self-Reliant???
Then, pray tell, why does that phrase exist? Why does that phrase exist? Is it used to exhibit what people are NOT!?!?
Are you speaking in terms of my not being able to get to my work place without use of roads built by others? Boy, you got me there!!!!~
@AverageJoe1 saidNatural Rights theory is the very basis of on which our nation was created. See the Declaration of Independence for further details.
Oh, god not natural rights again. Let us just disagree, as I see natural rights, although well and good and cool, to be irrelevant in our nation of laws. If you want to keep that up, you must also start preaching 'Positive Law', which gets kicked around as well,.......I have never seen any of this stuff bandied about in a court, although I am sure some libbies have int ...[text shortened]... e, that people have natural rights to other people's stuff? What a thread that can be. Start one!
The Founders wouldn't have agreed with your belief that it's BS.