|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Oct 24, 2011 7:56:34 GMT -5
So... serious question, why don't these people simply declare bankruptcy? If given the choice between doing that and prison, I think I'd go for bankruptcy every time. Because in the truest and most horribly Kafkaesque turn of reality in the USA....declaring bankruptcy costs money. While there are lawyers out there who claim they will do it at no cost, what they really mean is that they will defer the costs until after the bankruptcy, which means the first thing the newly bankrupt person will get after the slate is cleared is....a new debt. Huh. Someone should protest. I dunno... like, invade the financial district, or something like that. |
|
|
|
Post by discoberry on Oct 24, 2011 8:25:28 GMT -5
Because in the truest and most horribly Kafkaesque turn of reality in the USA....declaring bankruptcy costs money. While there are lawyers out there who claim they will do it at no cost, what they really mean is that they will defer the costs until after the bankruptcy, which means the first thing the newly bankrupt person will get after the slate is cleared is....a new debt. Huh. Someone should protest. I dunno... like, invade the financial district, or something like that. I am totally confused are these people who can't pay fines imposed on them in addition to jail sentences (for crimes), or people who got credit cards they knew that they had no money to pay of or what? |
|
|
|
Post by the sandman on Oct 24, 2011 9:00:13 GMT -5
Huh. Someone should protest. I dunno... like, invade the financial district, or something like that. I am totally confused are these people who can't pay fines imposed on them in addition to jail sentences (for crimes), or people who got credit cards they knew that they had no money to pay of or what? You can't be directly jailed for not paying a credit card bill. If you refused to pay, got sued, lost your home, became homeless, and was arrested for vagrancy, I suppose you would eventually wind up behind bars, but it wouldn't happen directly. These people are people who are having fines levied against them by the court and are unable to pay them due to homelessness or unemployment or both. When they don't pay the fines, arrest warrants are issued and they are imprisoned. |
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Oct 24, 2011 10:26:30 GMT -5
GOD DAMN IT, AMERICA! WHY MUST YOU DO EVERY SINGLE THING THAT DESTROYS YOUR REPUTATION?! I REFUSE TO SHARE A SPECIES WITH THESE PEOPLE ANYMORE!
|
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Oct 24, 2011 11:02:05 GMT -5
This from the guy that likes America, World Police
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Oct 24, 2011 11:32:05 GMT -5
GOD DAMN IT, AMERICA! WHY MUST YOU DO EVERY SINGLE THING THAT DESTROYS YOUR REPUTATION?! I REFUSE TO SHARE A SPECIES WITH THESE PEOPLE ANYMORE! Now you see. |
|
|
|
Post by booley on Oct 24, 2011 12:47:04 GMT -5
I've never understood how putting someone in prison is supposed to get them to pay off their debts. Its not like most people in debt have vast cash reserves and are holding out! Also... why isn't Donald Trump in one? This is actually very simple. F someone's life isn't turning out the way society thinks it should, then the problem is they haven't suffered enough. Solution is to hit them until they straighten out. It's why people in prisons should be made to wear pink underwear and miss out on meals. It's why we should deny condoms and sex ed to people (even adults) so they stop having sex we don't like. It's why we should cut AIDS funding, again to stop sex we don't like. It's why leaving water in the desert for people crossing the border dying of thirst is illegal. It's why the poor should sacrifice but the super rich should not. It's why unemployment insurance makes people lazy and not look for a job (even though to keep the money coming you have to look for a job and few people get enough from unemployment to cover their bills anyhow) It's why freedom means the uninsured die and that gets a 'HELL YEAH!" from the crowd. It's why the common argument against the social safety net is that there are so many unworthy of being helped. Indeed, given enough time you can find reasons why NO ONE who needs help deserves help. In short, it's state sanctioned sadism masquerading as discipline and "tough love". We do this because this country has decided that certain groups are outside the bounds of being treated like human beings. It's a way to feed the demons of our nature and still claim to be serving the angels. It's an all pervasive attitude that has corrupted almost every facet of public life now. And yes, it's getting worse. We don't get it since we still think that there are limits to how we should treat people. Even really shitty people we don't like. |
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Oct 24, 2011 16:34:33 GMT -5
What happens to a corporation if it can't or won't pay a fine? The fine gets heavily reduced: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon_Valdez_oil_spill#Economic_and_personal_impactClearly the law should be changed- in case of negligent or malicious actions (like Exxon)- the fine should be a multiple of either the company's annual income or the money made by acting negligently, or the cost of cleanup, whichever is largest. And the company should be obliged to immediately pay it back. There should be some leeway for real persons. But the opposite is the case. I also think that fines shouldn't be an exact amount, they should be a percentage of total income of an individual. At the moment, wealthy people can essentially disobey the law more than poor people, a ridiculously unjust policy. |
|
|
|
Post by davedan on Oct 24, 2011 17:46:58 GMT -5
My understanding of US Bankruptcy law is pretty thin but from what has been said declaring bankruptcy won't save you from debtors prison because State Court fines won't be part of your bankruptcy.
|
|
|
|
Post by SimSim on Oct 24, 2011 17:49:46 GMT -5
Student loans aren't forgivable either. They follow you forever and ever and ever and ever and ever!
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Oct 24, 2011 17:58:29 GMT -5
I thought the student loan thing had changed and they were forgivable after 20 years. Although, looking it up, it appears to only be applicable for if the loans were federal loans. If you got one that had no federal dollars attached, then you're probably SOL. |
|
|
|
Post by SCarpelan on Oct 24, 2011 18:30:38 GMT -5
I also think that fines shouldn't be an exact amount, they should be a percentage of total income of an individual. At the moment, wealthy people can essentially disobey the law more than poor people, a ridiculously unjust policy. Precisely. They calculate the fine based on the person's income here in Finland and also in Sweden, Mexico, Macao, Germany and Denmark. When I checked this I was surprised that only these countries have this kind of practice. |
|
|
|
Post by discoberry on Oct 25, 2011 7:24:17 GMT -5
I am totally confused are these people who can't pay fines imposed on them in addition to jail sentences (for crimes), or people who got credit cards they knew that they had no money to pay of or what? You can't be directly jailed for not paying a credit card bill. If you refused to pay, got sued, lost your home, became homeless, and was arrested for vagrancy, I suppose you would eventually wind up behind bars, but it wouldn't happen directly. These people are people who are having fines levied against them by the court and are unable to pay them due to homelessness or unemployment or both. When they don't pay the fines, arrest warrants are issued and they are imprisoned. I have a couple of buddies who had to pay their court fines by doing weekends in jail, 40 a day till their fine was paid off. But this seems kind of outrageous. Courts have access to your records they should know that you will not be able to pay the fine. |
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Oct 25, 2011 7:27:13 GMT -5
I also think that fines shouldn't be an exact amount, they should be a percentage of total income of an individual. At the moment, wealthy people can essentially disobey the law more than poor people, a ridiculously unjust policy. Precisely. They calculate the fine based on the person's income here in Finland and also in Sweden, Mexico, Macao, Germany and Denmark. When I checked this I was surprised that only these countries have this kind of practice. I have long felt fines based on income PA rather than a flat rate would be far more just. |
|
|
|
Post by Bezron on Oct 25, 2011 8:30:06 GMT -5
I thought the student loan thing had changed and they were forgivable after 20 years. Although, looking it up, it appears to only be applicable for if the loans were federal loans. If you got one that had no federal dollars attached, then you're probably SOL. The good news is that the DoE is buying up a lot of loans lately (they hold all of mine except the newest round), thus making those loans federal after the fact. |
|
