Does the republican crackdown on bankruptcy laws in 2005 prove they are against poor and for rich?

[mace]

Only poor person files bankruptcy. And only large banks and credit card companies (which are rich) oppose bankruptcy. Whether a person is financially responsible or financially irresponsible, the government has NO business telling citizens how to spend. This is free country. We don't want government interference in our lives. Republicans don't preach their own mantra. This bankruptcy crackdown interferes into the lives of the lowest man of the ladder. Furthermore these bankruptcy laws don't prevent people from filing bankruptcy. The bankruptcy lawyer industry is equally very large and they have all figured out numerous ways to get around tighter 2005 laws, which in effect defeated Bush efforts to make it harder. This is evident by the fact that 1.5 million filed chapter 7 last year, compared to less than a million prior to 2005 laws.

[hackett]

Nah, he's not anti poor, I'd say it's more not antiunion either-but it's more about the need to restructure the unions because as it stands, all state workers in some states, who get fired, STILL get hefty pension and health care paid benefits. Even state workers who get jailed for violations get pensions and benefits.
And teachers, police, fire dept and often city workers get a rider on their healthcare benefits that includes cosmetic surgery like boob + nose jobs, liposuction, dental veneers, hair transplants, etc.

Goldman CEO just got a record breaking, jaw dropping BONUS. Golden parachutes are alive and well. I wonder how much the US Postmaster General got in bonus + benefits seeing as how the USPS is operating in the red.

[hampton83]

The 2005 bankruptcy tight laws are a joke. My bankruptcy attorney who filed chapter 7 for me told me, "these 2005 changes in bankruptcy law mean nothing. I have been into this for over 25 years and no matter how much effort they do to make it harder to file, we will still file without any problems."

[eilis]

i am one of those libs that happens to think tightening those loopholes for bankruptcy was mostly good.

people were filing b/c of credit, and mostly credit cards at that...the only thing i disagreed w/ was that medical bill could now be added to your credit report.


as for only the poor? and one answer: lehman bros..? (the rich)

didn't lehman get bailed out?

[gustav]

It also shows that they are stupid. The 2005 amendments are just about the worst written statute ever. It has had all kinds of unintended consequences (many to the benefit of the debtor) because they were sloppy with the language. The lawyers and the bankruptcy judges mostly hate it.

[tanishia]

Your first sentence is flawed. Lehamn Brothers, full of rich employees who later lost everything, filed for bankruptcy in September 2008, in the largest bankruptcy in American history. Try again.

[jarel]

No, but even if they were, so what?

This is America. If you're poor, you deserve it. You should have studied in school, and saved your money as an adult! What happened to PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY??!?!?!??!

Also, when was the last time a poor man gave you a job?

[wilbart]

No, but even if they were, so what?

This is America. If you're poor, you deserve it. You should have studied in school, and saved your money as an adult! What happened to PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY??!?!?!??!

Also, when was the last time a poor man gave you a job?

That's just one of many many examples that their voting base of poor to middle class social reactionary supporters ignore.

[shipley]

Of course. Anything for the rich, nothing for the poor. That's the way they roll.

[drystan]

only a poor person files for it?
you have proven your mental poverty