I'm not too conversant on the Class Systems in other nations, but here
in the good old U S of A, there are only two Classes, the Have's, and
the Have Nots.
It's easy to tell which Class you're in. First, if there's lots of
you hanging around, that's the Have Nots. If folks are hanging on
your every word, waiting hand and foot on you, setting your table and
taking away the dirty dishes, you might be in the Have's Class. But
maybe not, either. Some of the Have's Lackeys are well treated and
give the appearance on first glance that they are Have's. Even they
will be fooled. But if you wait around long enough you can tell. If
they are suddenly tossed on their royal ear, or sentenced to prison,
they were just Lackeys. Remember Ponzi? Or the name of the guy with
Enron. They believed they were part of the Have's. Surprise!
Most of us, however, realize we are among the Have Nots. Some of us
fare better than others, but any of us can have it all snatched away
at a moments notice.
Once we get our heads on straight and understand that even if some of
us have accumulated more than others, it is never really ours, we will
be better able to set aside our petty differences and build a better
mouse trap.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/9/15, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dayen writes: "Donald Trump took advantage of the nation's bankruptcy laws
four times in the last 24 years, and if ordinary Americans in this country
were allowed to do the same, the country would be in markedly better shape
economically, with a far stronger post-recession recovery."
Donald Trump. (photo: Brendan McDermid/Reuters)
Going Bankrupt Like Trump Did Is for High Rollers, Not Homeowners
By David Dayen, The Intercept
08 August 15
Donald Trump took advantage of the nation's bankruptcy laws four times in
the last 24 years, and if ordinary Americans in this country were allowed
to
do the same, the country would be in markedly better shape economically,
with a far stronger post-recession recovery.
Asked during Thursday night's Republican presidential debate whether his
four corporate bankruptcies were a black mark on his economic stewardship,
Trump sounded a bit defensive. "I have never gone bankrupt," he said,
making
a distinction between a personal and a corporate bankruptcy, and anyway it
was only four times among "thousands" of deals.
But he said flatly: "I have used the laws of this country just like the
greatest people that you read about every day in business have used the
laws
of this country, the chapter laws, to do a great job for my company, for
myself, for my employees, for my family, et cetera."
Trump is absolutely correct. Every lending contract in America has the
potential for bankruptcy lurking in the background. Lenders - who as Trump
said "aren't babies" but "total killers" - are sophisticated enough to know
about this option when they lend people money. In fact, they not only
assume
the risk of bankruptcy, but price it into the deal when they lend Donald
Trump or anyone else money.
Morals do not enter into the equation. No lender thinks less of Donald
Trump
for the using the bankruptcy process. They simply take their losses and
move
on.
In fact, only one group gets hit with this stigma. Only one group of people
in America are denied this fully legal, fully rational, fully American
opportunity to wipe the slate clean, and decried as deadbeats for even
thinking about it: The homeowner of a primary residence, who by law cannot
get mortgage debt discharged in bankruptcy.
During the foreclosure crisis, banks and their allies savaged homeowners
who
"walked away" from mortgage debt. They equated defaulting on payments with
failing the duties of citizenship. They warned of "strategic defaults" by
conniving homeowners who would deliberately stiff lenders to get a loan
modification.
In reality, the highest-profile strategic default of the foreclosure crisis
came from the leaders of the Mortgage Bankers Association, a trade group
for
the lending industry, who walked away from their 10-story headquarters in
Washington. Just a few months earlier, their spokesperson argued that
borrowers had to keep paying. "What about the message they will send to
their family and their kids and their friends" if they defaulted, the
spokesman asked. Indeed.
The Tea Party, the very movement whose energy Trump has tapped into so
successfully, was founded on the principle of not having to "subsidize the
loser's mortgages."
Businesspeople defaulting on each other never raised this kind of ire: only
if ordinary people wanted to allocate losses in the greatest crisis since
the Depression onto the banks who caused it did the rage emerge.
When Congress made an effort to change the bankruptcy laws, these same
banks
howled in protest. Members of the Obama administration, despite expressing
support for the idea of allowing judges to modify primary mortgages during
the 2008 campaign, decided to sit on their hands and let senators drowning
in bank cash kill the idea, leading Sen. Dick Durbin to pronounce about
Congress that the banks "frankly own the place."
In fact, everyone would have benefited from relieving primary mortgage
debt,
the absence of which led to at least 6 million foreclosures. Economists
Amir
Sufi and Atif Mian have shown how the post-recession recovery was markedly
slower because of the failure to discharge debt, which depressed consumer
spending. This huge policy mistake created an unnecessary drag on the
economy and made miserable the lives of millions, all so banks didn't have
to bear some of the pain of the post-housing bubble fallout.
Millions of lives were ruined by that asymmetry. When politicians rigged
the
bankruptcy game against ordinary people and refused to change it, many
Americans felt cheated and used. Many turned against politicians who sell
hope and lead them only to misery. Many get lured into thinking a
non-politician armed with bumper stickers and snake oil, like Donald Trump,
offers a refreshing change of pace.
If politicians didn't make one set of rules for real estate tycoons and
another for people who were fraudulently sold homes they couldn't afford,
maybe the public would trust them more. Maybe they wouldn't look anywhere
and everywhere else for leadership.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
Donald Trump. (photo: Brendan McDermid/Reuters)
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/08/07/going-bankrupt-like-donald-tru
mp-high-rollers-homeowners/https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/08/07/goi
ng-bankrupt-like-donald-trump-high-rollers-homeowners/
Going Bankrupt Like Trump Did Is for High Rollers, Not Homeowners
By David Dayen, The Intercept
08 August 15
onald Trump took advantage of the nation's bankruptcy laws four times in
the last 24 years, and if ordinary Americans in this country were allowed
to
do the same, the country would be in markedly better shape economically,
with a far stronger post-recession recovery.
Asked during Thursday night's Republican presidential debate whether his
four corporate bankruptcies were a black mark on his economic stewardship,
Trump sounded a bit defensive. "I have never gone bankrupt," he said,
making
a distinction between a personal and a corporate bankruptcy, and anyway it
was only four times among "thousands" of deals.
But he said flatly: "I have used the laws of this country just like the
greatest people that you read about every day in business have used the
laws
of this country, the chapter laws, to do a great job for my company, for
myself, for my employees, for my family, et cetera."
Trump is absolutely correct. Every lending contract in America has the
potential for bankruptcy lurking in the background. Lenders - who as Trump
said "aren't babies" but "total killers" - are sophisticated enough to know
about this option when they lend people money. In fact, they not only
assume
the risk of bankruptcy, but price it into the deal when they lend Donald
Trump or anyone else money.
Morals do not enter into the equation. No lender thinks less of Donald
Trump
for the using the bankruptcy process. They simply take their losses and
move
on.
In fact, only one group gets hit with this stigma. Only one group of people
in America are denied this fully legal, fully rational, fully American
opportunity to wipe the slate clean, and decried as deadbeats for even
thinking about it: The homeowner of a primary residence, who by law cannot
get mortgage debt discharged in bankruptcy.
During the foreclosure crisis, banks and their allies savaged homeowners
who
"walked away" from mortgage debt. They equated defaulting on payments with
failing the duties of citizenship. They warned of "strategic defaults" by
conniving homeowners who would deliberately stiff lenders to get a loan
modification.
In reality, the highest-profile strategic default of the foreclosure crisis
came from the leaders of the Mortgage Bankers Association, a trade group
for
the lending industry, who walked away from their 10-story headquarters in
Washington. Just a few months earlier, their spokesperson argued that
borrowers had to keep paying. "What about the message they will send to
their family and their kids and their friends" if they defaulted, the
spokesman asked. Indeed.
The Tea Party, the very movement whose energy Trump has tapped into so
successfully, was founded on the principle of not having to "subsidize the
loser's mortgages."
Businesspeople defaulting on each other never raised this kind of ire: only
if ordinary people wanted to allocate losses in the greatest crisis since
the Depression onto the banks who caused it did the rage emerge.
When Congress made an effort to change the bankruptcy laws, these same
banks
howled in protest. Members of the Obama administration, despite expressing
support for the idea of allowing judges to modify primary mortgages during
the 2008 campaign, decided to sit on their hands and let senators drowning
in bank cash kill the idea, leading Sen. Dick Durbin to pronounce about
Congress that the banks "frankly own the place."
In fact, everyone would have benefited from relieving primary mortgage
debt,
the absence of which led to at least 6 million foreclosures. Economists
Amir
Sufi and Atif Mian have shown how the post-recession recovery was markedly
slower because of the failure to discharge debt, which depressed consumer
spending. This huge policy mistake created an unnecessary drag on the
economy and made miserable the lives of millions, all so banks didn't have
to bear some of the pain of the post-housing bubble fallout.
Millions of lives were ruined by that asymmetry. When politicians rigged
the
bankruptcy game against ordinary people and refused to change it, many
Americans felt cheated and used. Many turned against politicians who sell
hope and lead them only to misery. Many get lured into thinking a
non-politician armed with bumper stickers and snake oil, like Donald Trump,
offers a refreshing change of pace.
If politicians didn't make one set of rules for real estate tycoons and
another for people who were fraudulently sold homes they couldn't afford,
maybe the public would trust them more. Maybe they wouldn't look anywhere
and everywhere else for leadership.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
