Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!) (updated: 04/28/2015)

Welcome to the Bankruptcy Forum. Bankruptcy (BK) Forum is known as BKForum.com and will be referred to as BKF hereinafter. In order to ensure a long term success of our vibrant community, we have established certain rules and guidelines to which everyone must adhere to. Please take your time to carefully read our rules, before you start to participate in the community.

Things you agree to do:
BKFORUM.com (BKF) users agree to use the search function before starting a new thread. This prevents duplicate discussions and allows for better organized topics.

All BKF users agree to read the sticky posts which may be available at the top of a forum page. These Sticky posts often contain valuable information. They may also outline more rules and guidelines specific for that particular forum, stickies are put in place by that forums moderator(s) or admin(s).

Things you agree not to do:

All BKF users agree not to call people names or write a post simply to make a personal attack, or get a negative reaction; this behavior is not allowed on our forum. The use of derogatory language aimed at anyone will be severely dealt with. There is no need to agree with each other, or to even like each other. However, by signing onto BKForum.com you agree to treat each member and guest with the respect they deserve. No threats or personal attacks will be allowed.

All BKF users agree not to discuss, engage, or encourage any behavior or activity which violates the law. Discussion of drugs, violence, murder, theft, vandalism, fraud or any other issue which could be used to help individuals break the law is strictly forbidden.

All BKF users agree not to "bump" old threads, unless there is a specific benefit to the community by doing so. But in most cases, please don't post in very old threads, instead start new threads.

All BKF users agree not to attempt/use another members account. It is against BKF rules to use any account other than your own. Impersonating another member will result in an immediate ban. It is also against the rules to open more than one account in your own name without permission from a moderator or administrator. If you have been banned for any reason, it is against the rules to open another account. If you were banned temporarily and you are caught using another account you will be banned permanently. Choosing a moniker which is similar in either sound or spelling as a moderator or administrator is strictly forbidden.

All BKF users agree not to private message any moderator, admin, or other member with questions related to their personal circumstances (Questions about the forum or issues with the forum are ok). This forum only works when members share their experience and insights with everyone.

Things you agree not to post:
All BKF users agree not to post any derogatory/racist/or sexist remarks. This includes attachments, links and all information contained within posts, signatures, and avatars, failure to comply with this rule will result in a permanent ban.

All BKF users agree not to post any copyrighted or trademarked information without the express written permission of the owner(s) / proper citation of source.

All BKF users agree not to post any real names, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, social security numbers, or any other personal details (their own or other people's).

All BKF users agree not to post links, pictures, attachments, videos, or the like of pornographic content, objectionable material or extreme violence, whether cartoon or real.

All BKF users agree not to use BKF for advertising purposes without a written contract between yourself/company/agent and the administration of BKF. Blatant advertising will result in a ban.

All BKF users agree not to spam the forums. Spam includes but is not limited to posting erroneous, non-relevant-useless, off-topic, or meaningless posts. Spam may also include posts which contain no text, or large areas of blank space between lines. Simply posting emoticons without text is considered spam. BKF is the largest bankruptcy message board and all the content is intended to help other users. Please help us improve the quality of our forum by making sure that your posts are well-worded, spell checked, grammatically correct and syntaxed.

Regarding actions of moderators and administrators:

The forum is no place to air out your opinion or be judgmental of our staff and its capabilities.

All BKF users agree not to abuse or mistreat moderators or administrators. It is against BKF rules to post any information regarding bans or any other action taken by a member of the moderating or administrative team. If you wish to discuss bans or warnings please do so via PM. To place a complaint against a moderator, send a PM to a super moderator. All Moderators are equal, any decision made by a moderator must be adhered to. If a moderator tells you something you do not like, do not go to another moderator looking for a different answer. If you are caught doing this you will be banned. The moderators work as a team and respect the decisions made by their peers and will help enforce them unless an administrator tells them differently.
If you have an issue with how the forum is run, then notify one of our administrator and we will look into the situation. We have in the past and still do appreciate any input that you offer this forum. But critical input and/or judgmental postings towards the staff will result in you getting banned.


Should you find a thread offensive or out of line, then notify a Mod in a PM so they can evaluate the situation and do the action deemed necessary.

All moderators do have active "other" lives outside of the forum and help moderate this forum in their spare time throughout the days and weeks.

If you have a problem with a member or Mod follow the proper channels of reporting it.

BKF reserves the right to delete any posts which contain anti-BKF comments or discussion. Any bashing of moderators or administrators, or any of their discussion or actions will also be deleted, and the responsible posting party(s) will be banned. Any public anti-BKF advertising, communication, or posts on another forum will result in permanent bans as well.

All warnings and bans are decided by individual moderators and administrators. Warnings are preferable to bans however, for serious offenses and repeat abusers bans will go into effect. The length of the bans can vary from several hours to permanent.

All messages posted or sent including through PM are the property of BKforum.com.

All BKF users agree not to advertiser on the forum (Niether by posting, private messaging or using your signature). If you are a company/attorney/legal adviser wishing to advertise on the site or sell a product, you must contact the head administrator and inquire about our advertising packages.

All bankruptcy related opinions expressed on BKForum.com are those of their authors and not necessarily of BKF, its staff or representatives.

You agree not to copy any material/post/content from BKF without written permission from our head administrator .

By posting on this forum you agree to these terms and conditions, including any punishment deemed appropriate by moderators or administrators in the event of an offense.

Administrators/Moderators can change these rules at any time without prior notice.
See more
See less

Political Discussion

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by backtoschool View Post
    Well, as my screen name implies, I am in school (although I am now working full time as well), and I can assure you that I am very much facing the "real" world. I think many college students today are getting more exposed to economic realities as their parents struggle to finance their educations and they are forced to make tough choices as to what school they are going to go to, and how to pay for it.
    I certainly don't see you in the same way I might see a 18 year old college freshman.

    My point was meant to imply that it's just as plausible to effect a high school student's understanding of economics as it is a college student's. I believe economics must be taught to our youngsters.
    Well, I did. Every one of 'em. Mostly I remember the last one. The wild finish. A guy standing on a station platform in the rain with a comical look in his face because his insides have been kicked out. -Rick

    Comment


    • Originally posted by backtoschool View Post
      Of course there is no way of knowing what percentage of people filing bankruptcies, are posting regularly on bkforum. My guess is that it is a statistically insignificant number.
      I never indicated it was statistically significant but did mention anecdotal significance. If you read the original study claiming 54% of bankruptcies are medically related the concept of statistics was ignored to meet the agenda of the publishers.
      Well, I did. Every one of 'em. Mostly I remember the last one. The wild finish. A guy standing on a station platform in the rain with a comical look in his face because his insides have been kicked out. -Rick

      Comment


      • Originally posted by backtoschool View Post

        I agree with you that the Constitution was always meant to be a living, breathable document that would grow and change as our country grew and changed. Interpreting the Constitution literally is impossible anyway, since it was written by men from a completely different historical context. We cannot see the world the way they saw it, as our historical context not the same as theirs.

        I am a closet post-modernist, and like to trot out those views from time to time.
        This statement is beyond my ability to understand. Of course I'm just a simple conservative not a nuanced progressive.

        Why did the framers even bother to write the Constitution if it was intended to me changed by radical legislators, Marxist presidents or activist judges? I believe the framers actually created a mechanism for altering the Constitution via amendment requiring approval of 2/3's of the states. Our Constitution is not a livable breathable document.
        Well, I did. Every one of 'em. Mostly I remember the last one. The wild finish. A guy standing on a station platform in the rain with a comical look in his face because his insides have been kicked out. -Rick

        Comment


        • That debunking was applicable to a different study from 2001.

          The research I refer to was published in August 2009.

          If you have something that debunks this new research study, I would be interested to see it.

          Of course, any study can turn on the wording of a phrase or even a single word.

          But to say that a 2005 white paper debunks one earlier study, therefore it debunks ALL future studies is a bit of a stretch.

          If we followed the path of cause and effect using your logic, then my own BK wasn't even a result of crime. We would then have to go back even further. Perhaps it was a matter of birth control. If my parents had not conceived me, I would no be filing. Ergo, it is a birth control issue?

          That sort of logic breaks down quickly when applied in the real world, and from my perspective, it doesn't matter so much what caused me to file, but rather that I had to file at all.

          Originally posted by OhioFiler View Post
          That myth has been debunked. Read here: Interesting reading

          I understand your bk is medically related but the truth is it is more criminally related than medically related. The problems you've suffered are not the result of any medical condition. I find what was done to you to be deplorable and wish only the best for you.

          I can also use bkforum for anecdotal evidence that medical expenses are not the cause of anywhere near 60% of bankruptcies. Look around. Very few posters here mention their medical debts when asking for information.
          11-20-09-- Filed Chapter 7
          12-23-09-- 341 Meeting-Early Christmas Gift?
          3-9-10--Discharged

          Comment


          • Originally posted by momisery View Post
            DMC, you are correct. I still believe that if we could shut the talk radio voices up, and resort back to real news where the news is told honestly, not someone tell you what to think we would all be better off. Growing up I was raised on politics and voices did raise from time to time over issues. But people never made things up back then, they told it like it was. Honestly, the last 10-15 yars have grown more and more stressful with all the news hype. I enjoy reading posts from all view points until they move in to the are of not being factual or honest, or resort to name calling. The trigger is always someone who take a broad sweep at liberals or right-wing-nuts and a poster feels attack by that post so they get more personal and so it continues. The person who took the broad sweep can not understand, until a broad sweep is taken at them then they respond the same way. We need to go back to being honest, and to doing some research of our news sources before we start blaming one party of the other. Easy for me to say since I think both parties are on the wrong path.. lol... I have enjoyed your thread, thanks for starting it!

            When we start to silence any voice we become less free. That's why we have a 1st Amendment
            May 31st, 2007: Petition Filed by my lawyer
            July 2nd, 2007: 341 Meeting Held
            September 4th, 2007: Discharged and Closed.

            Comment


            • I agree JR. I think they meant we may be able to have a real discussion if we were all wise enough to ignore those who profit from turmoil, at least long enough to have a reasonable debate.

              That, however, is unlikely to say the least.
              11-20-09-- Filed Chapter 7
              12-23-09-- 341 Meeting-Early Christmas Gift?
              3-9-10--Discharged

              Comment


              • I don't think it's about shutting up the talking heads on TV or radio. It's more about the American eloctorate being to lazy (?) to educate themselves on the issues. It doesn't matter who anyone votes for during the elections, just study the candidates and vote for whichever one you think is best. By just doing that I think we will end up with better people in office. I have friends & family that strickly vote according to party affiliation. That bothers me.
                Stopped Payings CC's: 8/14/2009 | Retained Attorney: 9/23/2009 | Filed CH 7: 12/7/2009 | 341 Meeting: 1/21/2010 - Complete | Discharged: 4/9/2010
                "One person pretends to be rich, yet has nothing; another pretends to be poor, yet has great wealth."

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DeadManCrawling View Post
                  That debunking was applicable to a different study from 2001.

                  The research I refer to was published in August 2009.

                  If you have something that debunks this new research study, I would be interested to see it.

                  Of course, any study can turn on the wording of a phrase or even a single word.

                  But to say that a 2005 white paper debunks one earlier study, therefore it debunks ALL future studies is a bit of a stretch.

                  If we followed the path of cause and effect using your logic, then my own BK wasn't even a result of crime. We would then have to go back even further. Perhaps it was a matter of birth control. If my parents had not conceived me, I would no be filing. Ergo, it is a birth control issue?

                  That sort of logic breaks down quickly when applied in the real world, and from my perspective, it doesn't matter so much what caused me to file, but rather that I had to file at all.
                  Well if we believe the 2005 report that the original "study" only showed 17% were medical related if would take a hugely significant change in health care insurance, medical issues or medical costs to justify a increase from 17% to 60% of bankruptcies caused by medical expenses. I find it implausible.

                  I disagree on your analysis of my logic. You have to exist as an adult citizen of the USA to be considered part of the data. As such, there is really only one event that led you to bankruptcy. I would still however consider your situation as a medical cause for filing for purposes of this discussion. My point of using your assault as an example was to indicate how unique your situation is and should not really be considered in the data when discussing medical related bankruptcies.
                  Well, I did. Every one of 'em. Mostly I remember the last one. The wild finish. A guy standing on a station platform in the rain with a comical look in his face because his insides have been kicked out. -Rick

                  Comment


                  • Was a great speech...a refreshing change from the eight years of babbling lies from George W. Bush.
                    The information provided is not, and should not be considered legal advice. All information provided is only informational and should be verified by a law practioner whenever possible. When confronted with legal issues contact an experienced attorney in your state who specializes in the area of law most directly called into question by your particular situation.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by OhioFiler View Post
                      That myth has been debunked. Read here: Interesting reading

                      I understand your bk is medically related but the truth is it is more criminally related than medically related. The problems you've suffered are not the result of any medical condition. I find what was done to you to be deplorable and wish only the best for you.

                      I can also use bkforum for anecdotal evidence that medical expenses are not the cause of anywhere near 60% of bankruptcies. Look around. Very few posters here mention their medical debts when asking for information.
                      All bankruptcies are "debt" related - you cannot file bankruptcy without debt. All it takes is a serious medical event to occur and it can throw anyone into bankruptcy without good medical insurance, lots of savings or if they lose their job at the same time. Then there are those that just run up debt because they can't stop buying things and then the job loss hits or the hours are cut and they wonder why they have to file. Debt causes bankruptcy; in most circumstances, most of us know that going crazy with credit cards, loans, overspending on houses, etc. put us in the spot to file as soon as the job loss hit or the hours cut. If we did not have the debt when the job loss hit, we would not have had to file. Those that file due to high medical bills are hit with debt beyond their control and they did not go out and charge up operations for the heck of it on their Visa and Mastercard. All it takes is a heart attack or other major medical event to run up all sorts of bills not covered by insurance. There were recent programs on some of the major news channels on medical costs and filing bankruptcy and the figure was quoted at around 50% (bankruptcies filed due to health related bills). Also, either Newsweek or Time did a fairly recent article on the same quoting about the same average (50%).
                      _________________________________________
                      Filed 5 Year Chapter 13: April 2002
                      Early Buy-Out: April 2006
                      Discharge: August 2006

                      "A credit card is a snake in your pocket"

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by HRx View Post
                        Was a great speech...a refreshing change from the eight years of babbling lies from George W. Bush.

                        I wouldn't so much describe it as a "great speech" or "refreshing change", but at least we no longer have bush's babbling lies.

                        Now we will have a few more years of obama's babbling lies. I say a few years because unless he cures aids, cancer and finds bin laden as well as invent a car that gets 100mpg all in the same day there is no chance in hell Americans will welcome him back with open arms.

                        Whether or not all these problems are his fault he still will get blamed and won't be welcome back.

                        His policies are destroying the economy and even if he does the right thing by balancing the budget that will still cause a lot of pain and suffering to the many. He is a one term president for certain.
                        The essence of freedom is the proper limitation of Government

                        Comment


                        • Flamingo, this report basically says the same thing you have found, that debt causes BK and medical related causes can be the final trigger. It is the same report referenced here by DMC, and which I mentioned back in December:

                          This is what the 2009 American Journal of Medicine Report, with researchers from Harvard/Cambridge hospitals, Harvard law School, and Ohio University, concluded in their 2009 report. I suggest you all read the actual report pdf listed below to understand their methodology.

                          Medical Bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: Results of a National Study
                          David U. Himmelstein, MD, Deborah Thorne, PhD, Elizabeth Warren, JD, Steffie Woolhandler, MD, MPH
                          Department of Medicine, Cambridge Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, Mass; Department of Sociology, Ohio University,
                          Athens; and Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Mass.

                          BACKGROUND: Our 2001 study in 5 states found that medical problems contributed to at least 46.2% of
                          all bankruptcies. Since then, health costs and the numbers of un- and underinsured have increased, and
                          bankruptcy laws have tightened.

                          METHODS: We surveyed a random national sample of 2314 bankruptcy filers in 2007, abstracted their court
                          records, and interviewed 1032 of them. We designated bankruptcies as “medical” based on debtors’ stated
                          reasons for filing, income loss due to illness, and the magnitude of their medical debts.

                          RESULTS: Using a conservative definition*, 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92% of these
                          medical debtors had medical debts over $5000, or 10% of pretax family income. The rest met criteria for
                          medical bankruptcy because they had lost significant income due to illness or mortgaged a home to pay medical
                          bills.
                          Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations. Three
                          quarters had health insurance. Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable
                          to medical problems rose by 49.6%. In logistic regression analysis controlling for demographic factors,
                          the odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause was 2.38-fold higher in 2007 than in 2001.

                          CONCLUSIONS:
                          Illness and medical bills contribute to a large and increasing share of US bankruptcies.
                          ● 62.1% of all bankruptcies have a medical related cause.
                          ● Most medical debtors were well educated and middle class; three quarters had health insurance.
                          The share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 50% between 2001 and 2007.

                          http://download.journals.elsevierhea...4309004045.pdf

                          The 2005 report, sponsored by the insurance industry, which attempted to debunk an older 2001 report, was a clever political parsing job of what defines a medical bankruptcy, written to justify the change in bankruptcy laws. They basically reduced the definition of what a medical BK is until they got the numbers low enough for political purposes. Then they narrowed it again by taking the product of two percentages from different questions to reach the 17% figure. Poor analysis, politically motivated, and paid by the insurance industry.

                          The new 2009 report clearly defines who is included in the 62% filing for medical related bankruptcy:
                          *Bankruptcies meeting at least one of the following criteria: illness, injury or medical bills listed as specific reason for filing OR uncovered medical bills >$5000 or >10% of annual family income OR, lost >=2 weeks of work-related income due to illness/injury, OR depleted home equity to pay medical bills.
                          Last edited by WhatMoney; 02-06-2010, 06:22 PM.
                          “When fascism comes to America, it’ll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross” — Sinclair Lewis

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by momisery View Post
                            DMC, you are correct. I still believe that if we could shut the talk radio voices up, and resort back to real news where the news is told honestly, not someone tell you what to think we would all be better off. Growing up I was raised on politics and voices did raise from time to time over issues. But people never made things up back then, they told it like it was. Honestly, the last 10-15 yars have grown more and more stressful with all the news hype.
                            Well the conservatives won't like being told to shut up, but I understand what you mean. At one time there was the FCC Fairness Doctrine for radio and television:
                            The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was (in the Commission's view) honest, equitable and balanced.

                            The Fairness Doctrine should not be confused with the Equal Time rule. The Fairness Doctrine deals with discussion of controversial issues, while the Equal Time rule deals only with political candidates.
                            But in 1989 Bush got rid of FD entirely, and now we have national talk radio networks owned by ultra right wingers who provide a steady diet of right wing talk (often hate) radio nearly 24/7. There is no opposition, no counterpoints in these angry diatribes of lies and distortions every day. It's no wonder why their typical audience, white angry working class men, are so riled up all the time. Or why the country is so polarized. Just look at this topic and you see that in spades.

                            Before right wing radio was allowed to exist in it's present form, and before the internet, we had this interesting media know as newsprint. A moderate newspaper serving the community had editorial pages. On one side would be one side of an argument, and right next to it the opposing view. Readers could see both sides of an argument. Outright lies were edited out by the publisher. The public had a news source that provided balanced and truthful information. Democracy worked much better back then.

                            Now it is one sided news and the ability for each to self select only what they want to hear, the reinforcement of biases with no real understanding of an issue. These same single sided folks are now electing politicians, so we get more extremists ending up in Congress. In fact the Republican party has no center anymore. A party of officials elected by tea-baggers and Limbaugh/Coulter/Beck/Savage/Levin listeners results in what we have today. No bipartisanship, no cooperation, only stubborn extremist positions by politicians who must obey their one-sided information source voters.

                            It's a sad situation for the country when honest balanced information is no longer required for the electorate. Self selection does not work - it only drives one further to the right or left. Some have said a democracy cannot exist without a balanced and informed public. We are seeing that now.

                            PS - The conservatives are violently opposed to bringing back the Fairness Doctrine. Why do you suppose that is?
                            .
                            Last edited by WhatMoney; 02-06-2010, 06:17 PM.
                            “When fascism comes to America, it’ll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross” — Sinclair Lewis

                            Comment


                            • BTW, it was Reagan's FCC who dumped the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, not 1989.
                              “When fascism comes to America, it’ll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross” — Sinclair Lewis

                              Comment


                              • OF,

                                Thanks for the ongoing and civil discussion.

                                There may be a matter that has been confused.

                                I am NOT referring to the older study from 2001. I concede there may have been words or phrases, or interpretations that were lax or even distorted.

                                I AM referring to this new study from 2009. Presumably these researchers, since they are studying the same field, would have made corrections based on earlier errors.

                                If this new study is correct, and the numbers are 60%, we are in dire need of changes in BK law, medical insurance, or both.

                                I know personal experiences do not matter in the scope of statistical research, but I can say I personally do know a dozen people who have filed BK. Among them, the 60% number is fairly accurate.

                                Truly, I am not trying to antagonize you or anyone. I would ask that, if you have it, you would post or share with me references that are recent and refute this idea that medical debts are a major factor in bk.

                                I have not yet made up my mind on the issue, but you can see I am leaning. I would hate to lean the wrong way only to find out later that I am mistaken.

                                I am sure you would agree, as would any reasonable person. I would like to know the truth. Since it appears insurance reform is dead, we should all come to the next election armed with the best knowledge.

                                Best to you,

                                -dmc

                                Originally posted by OhioFiler View Post
                                Well if we believe the 2005 report that the original "study" only showed 17% were medical related if would take a hugely significant change in health care insurance, medical issues or medical costs to justify a increase from 17% to 60% of bankruptcies caused by medical expenses. I find it implausible.

                                I disagree on your analysis of my logic. You have to exist as an adult citizen of the USA to be considered part of the data. As such, there is really only one event that led you to bankruptcy. I would still however consider your situation as a medical cause for filing for purposes of this discussion. My point of using your assault as an example was to indicate how unique your situation is and should not really be considered in the data when discussing medical related bankruptcies.
                                11-20-09-- Filed Chapter 7
                                12-23-09-- 341 Meeting-Early Christmas Gift?
                                3-9-10--Discharged

                                Comment

                                Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X