PDA

View Full Version : A radical proposal re: debt



BrianY
06-08-2016, 09:21 PM
John Oliver's TV show bought $13 million dollars worth of debt for $60,000. Then they forgave that $13 million of debt thereby potentially freeing up all of that money for the debtors to use for housing, food, education, consumer goods, etc.

$60,000 for $13 million dollars of potential economic stimulus, not to mention the good will and relief that the debtors will feel...sounds like a good investment in the public good to me.

there's been a lot of talk about the amount of debt that college grads have and what to do about it. It's pretty obvious that for most jobs in this economy, some sort of a college degree is required. It is also pretty obvious that the debt recent (and not so recent) college grads have is a drag on the economy and a real burden for huge numbers of people.

why don't we (the US government) purchase this debt and modify the terms or forgive it all together? It seems like an easy and relatively low cost way to have a significant positive impact on the economy and it would be easier than trying to increase government loans and grants.

The same approach could be used to help people with medical expenses. Instead complicated insurance and reimbursement schemes, keep the system as it is, let people get in debt, purchase that debt and forgive it. The cost/benefit of purchasing debt and forgiving it may be better than the cost/benefit of implementing complicated regulations, policies, subsidies, etc.

elf
06-08-2016, 09:27 PM
Because if people get in debt that's their own tough luck.

Look, the nation has been cultivating a mean and stingy look for almost 40 years now. You don't really think it's going to change in the face of a catch 22, do you?

Too Little Time
06-08-2016, 09:31 PM
You need to understand that debt.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/john-oliver-buys-forgives-15-million-debt-39647743

The individual debts range from $50 to more than $250,000, he said. All are outside the statute of limitations, meaning the people who owe the money cannot be sued.

The debts were no longer owed.

Hugh Conway
06-08-2016, 09:31 PM
the debt's so cheap because there's very little chance of recovery. As soon as moneybags appear the value would sky rocket because somebody's going to pay it off.

The debit is still owed, but can't be sued for, so the chance of recovery is very little. Hence it's cheap. But there are plenty of debts that can be sued for that will be settled for very little. Anyone in business knows this.

Dan McCosh
06-09-2016, 07:27 AM
The debt that Oliver bought was normally used by companies threatening the debtors with telephone scams.

Jim Mahan
06-09-2016, 07:56 AM
It's pretty obvious that for most jobs in this economy, some sort of a college degree is required.

It's obvious only if you think that the millions of jobs that don't require a degree are not worthy of consideration.

Norman Bernstein
06-09-2016, 08:12 AM
The debts were no longer owed.

The fact that they are being marketed is an obvious indication that those who buy debts like these are counting on the ignorance of the debtor.... essentially, it's a legal scam. The marketing of debts past the statute of limitations certainly SHOULD be illegal, because it presumes that those who buy such debts are intentionally trying to profit from misrepresentation.

Too Little Time
06-09-2016, 09:09 AM
The fact that they are being marketed is an obvious indication that those who buy debts like these are counting on the ignorance of the debtor.... essentially, it's a legal scam. The marketing of debts past the statute of limitations certainly SHOULD be illegal, because it presumes that those who buy such debts are intentionally trying to profit from misrepresentation.
http://blog.credit.com/2015/04/7-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-statutes-of-limitation-for-debt-114442/


In some states, however, trying to collect a time-barred debt is illegal and a creditor who attempts to do so is breaking the law.
That internet thingy is really useful. :)

Norman Bernstein
06-09-2016, 09:15 AM
2. Can a debt collector try to collect after the SOL has expired?

In many cases, yes. However if you tell the debt collector not to contact you again, they must stop. It’s a good idea to put your request in writing. Once they’ve received it, they can contact you only to confirm that they have received your request or to notify you of legal action they are taking to collect. In some states, however, trying to collect a time-barred debt is illegal and a creditor who attempts to do so is breaking the law.

I was referring to states in which is IS legal to try to collect a debt past the statute of limitations. There should be a national law prohibiting it, because in those states where it is legal, it amounts to a state-sanctioned scam.

peb
06-09-2016, 09:40 AM
John Oliver's TV show bought $13 million dollars worth of debt for $60,000. Then they forgave that $13 million of debt thereby potentially freeing up all of that money for the debtors to use for housing, food, education, consumer goods, etc.

$60,000 for $13 million dollars of potential economic stimulus, not to mention the good will and relief that the debtors will feel...sounds like a good investment in the public good to me.

there's been a lot of talk about the amount of debt that college grads have and what to do about it. It's pretty obvious that for most jobs in this economy, some sort of a college degree is required. It is also pretty obvious that the debt recent (and not so recent) college grads have is a drag on the economy and a real burden for huge numbers of people.

why don't we (the US government) purchase this debt and modify the terms or forgive it all together? It seems like an easy and relatively low cost way to have a significant positive impact on the economy and it would be easier than trying to increase government loans and grants.

The same approach could be used to help people with medical expenses. Instead complicated insurance and reimbursement schemes, keep the system as it is, let people get in debt, purchase that debt and forgive it. The cost/benefit of purchasing debt and forgiving it may be better than the cost/benefit of implementing complicated regulations, policies, subsidies, etc.


Seriously? Many times the problems with LWWs is not their ideas, rather it is their utter ignorance of reality. It leads to ideas that are simply crazy.

slug
06-09-2016, 09:45 AM
The average student debt is 25k.

pay the money back...no excuses.

Norman Bernstein
06-09-2016, 09:45 AM
Seriously? Many times the problems with LWWs is not their ideas, rather it is their utter ignorance of reality. It leads to ideas that are simply crazy.

John Oliver's purchase of 'expired' debt, and subsequent forgiveness of it, was merely a clever stunt, meant to illustrate two points.

The first point: debt collection needs far stronger regulation.

The PRIMARY point, which was NOT addressed by Oliver's piece: the way in which we pay for medical expenses.

I don't think that anyone with half a brain thinks that purchasing expired debt, and forgiving it, is a solution to anything.

Too Little Time
06-09-2016, 09:47 AM
I was referring to states in which is IS legal to try to collect a debt past the statute of limitations. There should be a national law prohibiting it, because in those states where it is legal, it amounts to a state-sanctioned scam.

And some states agree with you.

Gerarddm
06-09-2016, 09:52 AM
I know somebody who was in a bad marriage that led to heavy debt, bankruptcy and divorce. A number of years later he received a dunning notice from some bottom feeder company for the discharged debt, which had ballooned with supposed interest. His divorce attorney told him to tell the company to go shove it, which he did. He never heard a peep again.

As Sy Syms used to say in his ads, ' an educated consumer is our best customer'.

Hugh Conway
06-09-2016, 10:28 AM
You need to understand that debt.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/john-oliver-buys-forgives-15-million-debt-39647743


The debts were no longer owed.


http://blog.credit.com/2015/04/7-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-statutes-of-limitation-for-debt-114442/


That internet thingy is really useful. :)

Good thing to know the law stops debt collectors doing illegal things!

peb
06-09-2016, 10:32 AM
John Oliver's purchase of 'expired' debt, and subsequent forgiveness of it, was merely a clever stunt, meant to illustrate two points.

The first point: debt collection needs far stronger regulation.

The PRIMARY point, which was NOT addressed by Oliver's piece: the way in which we pay for medical expenses.

I don't think that anyone with half a brain thinks that purchasing expired debt, and forgiving it, is a solution to anything.

Norman, some of us actually take the time to read posts by those who we disagree with. The OP, whose moniker is Left Wing Extremist, was suggesting exactly that solution as a means of medical expense funding:


The same approach could be used to help people with medical expenses. Instead complicated insurance and reimbursement schemes, keep the system as it is, let people get in debt, purchase that debt and forgive it. The cost/benefit of purchasing debt and forgiving it may be better than the cost/benefit of implementing complicated regulations, policies, subsidies, etc

Norman Bernstein
06-09-2016, 10:44 AM
Norman, some of us actually take the time to read posts by those who we disagree with. The OP, whose moniker is Left Wing Extremist, was suggesting exactly that solution as a means of medical expense funding:

I did read it... and was disagreeing with the idea. What's the problem here? Am I somehow required to agree with someone who describes themselves as a left wing extremist? Sometimes I might... other times, I won't.

BrianY
06-09-2016, 12:15 PM
Okay kids...turn down the aggression a little please. I was just just thinking out loud, throwing a vaguely formed idea out there to see what folks thought rather than making a serious proposal. Obviously the idea has no merit, so I'll happily give it up.

God Almighty, the crap I get for trying to think outside the box a little...:o



Since this idea won't work, how about we tax the hell outta people and businesses - maybe 45% - 65% on all income over $250,000 to pay for education and healthcare ?





(in case it's not obvious, I'm not serious about that so there's no need to jump down my electronic throat about it)

peb
06-09-2016, 12:38 PM
I did read it... and was disagreeing with the idea. What's the problem here? Am I somehow required to agree with someone who describes themselves as a left wing extremist? Sometimes I might... other times, I won't.



Well, I was assuming you were not saying BrianY had half a brain.

peb
06-09-2016, 12:42 PM
Okay kids...turn down the aggression a little please. I was just just thinking out loud, throwing a vaguely formed idea out there to see what folks thought rather than making a serious proposal. Obviously the idea has no merit, so I'll happily give it up.

God Almighty, the crap I get for trying to think outside the box a little...:o



Since this idea won't work, how about we tax the hell outta people and businesses - maybe 45% - 65% on all income over $250,000 to pay for education and healthcare ?





(in case it's not obvious, I'm not serious about that so there's no need to jump down my electronic throat about it)



Fair enough. As to your serious proposal, most money earned above 250000 is already taxed at the 45-65 percent range. The exception being the super-rich, but that would not be enough to accomplish you goal.

Daniel Noyes
06-09-2016, 12:46 PM
http://blog.credit.com/2015/04/7-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-statutes-of-limitation-for-debt-114442/


That internet thingy is really useful. :)

what's the deal with a time limit on Debt? I I lend someone 100 dolars and they promise to pay me back in a year with 10 dollars interest, and they refuse, make excuses, don't answer my phone calls or live up to their end of the deal for 5 years then shouldn't they owe me 150 dollars... not owe me nothing?

How is this a legal scam? did the people borrow the money and not pay it back? if Yes, then they owe the money.... pretty simple

Captain Intrepid
06-09-2016, 12:49 PM
It's obvious only if you think that the millions of jobs that don't require a degree are not worthy of consideration.

You must be retired. A bachelor's degree is the new equivalent of high school graduation.

Norman Bernstein
06-09-2016, 01:02 PM
what's the deal with a time limit on Debt? I I lend someone 100 dolars and they promise to pay me back in a year with 10 dollars interest, and they refuse, make excuses, don't answer my phone calls or live up to their end of the deal for 5 years then shouldn't they owe me 150 dollars... not owe me nothing?

If you're a creditor, and you are trying to collect from a debtor, you have numerous legal ways to do so, including bringing suit in court. Naturally, the risk you took, in being a creditor, was the possibility that you might NOT be repaid, so the responsibility for collecting is up to you as the creditor... and sometimes, you will be unable to do so. If your debtor is Donald Trump, he might declare bankruptcy, and you'll be screwed.

However, if all your efforts to collect are for naught, then after a long period of time, the debt should become legally noncollectable (as it is, in many states). The statute of limitations is for the sake of people trying to work their way out of a bad financial situation, and not have debts hanging over their head, after MANY years... this is not Victorian England, and we don't have Dickensian legal standards.


How is this a legal scam? did the people borrow the money and not pay it back? if Yes, then they owe the money.... pretty simple

It IS a scam, because its success DEPENDS on people not knowing their legal rights. If people were aware of their legal rights, non-collectible debts would have NO market value whatsoever.... so, anyone who buys a debt past the statute of limitations, and tries to collect, is, by definition, scamming someone by taking advantage of their ignorance.

It's very much analogous to selling real estate entrepreneurship courses to people by encouraging them to max out their credit cards and withdraw their retirement money, for a course that they THINK has some involvement with Donald Trump... other than just his name. A scam, to put it bluntly.

BrianY
06-09-2016, 03:20 PM
Fair enough. As to your serious proposal, most money earned above 250000 is already taxed at the 45-65 percent range. The exception being the super-rich, but that would not be enough to accomplish you goal.

peb - please read what I wrote.


(in case it's not obvious, I'm not serious about that (referring to the tax the hell out of them proposal) so there's no need to jump down my electronic throat about it)

IOW - it's not a "serious proposal"



OK, since you've told me that taxing at 45-65% won't do it, how about we tax at 80%-90% - flat tax across the board, no exemptions ?





(and in case it's still not clear, no I'm NOT suggesting that as a serious proposal)


btw - I call my self a "left wing extremist" because that's the name you conservatives on this forum seem to give to people whose political positions are even slightly left of Rick Santorum or Ted Cruz.

Too Little Time
06-09-2016, 05:06 PM
what's the deal with a time limit on Debt? I I lend someone 100 dolars and they promise to pay me back in a year with 10 dollars interest, and they refuse, make excuses, don't answer my phone calls or live up to their end of the deal for 5 years then shouldn't they owe me 150 dollars... not owe me nothing?

How is this a legal scam? did the people borrow the money and not pay it back? if Yes, then they owe the money.... pretty simple

The time limit is there to make it reasonable for the borrower to defend himself. Consider if you had a loan, paid it off, and then 20 years later the lender claimed you did not repay the loan. You might not have all the paperwork necessary to defend yourself.

(the IRS has a statute of limitations on collections also.)

It is not a scam. You have the right to pay debts that you have no legal obligation to pay. And, of course, you have the right to not pay such obligations.