FACT of the Day

Filed in National by on November 9, 2008

You can’t file for Bankruptcy if you are the victim of a flood! Woohooo, thanks Joe Biden!

About the Author ()

hiding in the open

Comments (22)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. anon says:
    November 9, 2008 at 10:41 am

    If Republicans manage to come back and get 50 seats in the Senate next term, the worst thing would be – Joe Biden might once again have the opportunity to vote on a banking bill.

  2. anon says:
    November 9, 2008 at 10:44 am

    what am I saying – as long as we have Carper they would only need 49 Republicans to force a tie on a banking bill.

  3. h. says:
    November 9, 2008 at 11:37 am

    Why would you need to file for bankruptcy ?You should have flood insurance.

  4. Dominique says:
    November 9, 2008 at 1:01 pm

    Excellent point, h. The answer is simple. According to the left,

    – everyone is a victim
    – no one should prepare for the worst
    – government’s main purpose is to fix the problems of its citizens

    Except for rare circumstances, people who demonstrate fiscal responsibility should not be faced with bankruptcy if they’re victims of a flood. The only exception to that would be a Katrina-type situation where an entire city/town and its businesses/industries are irreparably damaged. In those situations, bankruptcy rules are typically relaxed:

    http://www.totalbankruptcy.com/bankruptcy-articles-filing-bankruptcy-breaks-for-Midwest-flood-victims.htm

    Far be it from Dondramaqueen to actually research an issue in order to give a balanced POV. It’s so much easier (and way more fun) to demonize those with whom we don’t agree than it is to take a minute to see if the other side might have some valid points.

    I’m of the belief that, other than an unforeseen medical crisis, there are very few legitimate reasons for filing bankruptcy and that most bankruptcies stem from bad choices and poor self-control.

    What all of you bleeding hearts fail to realize is that the frivolous bankruptcies that were curtailed by the bankruptcy legislation were impacting all of us in the form of higher interest rates.

    Can someone please explain to me how running up credit card debt because you have to have everything (NOW, Daddy!) then simply erasing it all by filing bankruptcy is not the same thing as stealing?

  5. Donhusseinsquishviti says:
    November 9, 2008 at 1:37 pm

    right because all the victims of a flood have flood insurance….

  6. cassandra_m says:
    November 9, 2008 at 1:46 pm

    And because all victims of floods knew they were in flood plains.

    Hint: flood plain maps are changing faster than the mapmakers can keep up with them.

  7. nemski says:
    November 9, 2008 at 1:49 pm

    How Dominique ever support Hillary is beyond my puny comprehension. 😉

  8. anonone says:
    November 9, 2008 at 2:06 pm

    I see Palin “valuable vagina”-lover Duminique is back to to regale us all with her idiocy. Let us all remember her brilliant political insight when she wrote about the 2008 election:

    “The only thing that’s really going to change is the name of the president.”

    Yeah, how is that working out for repubs like you, Duminque? Can you explain how repub cutting taxes for the wealthy and increasing spending and causing huge deficits and financial crises and then bailing them out with tax dollars “is not the same thing as stealing?”

  9. anonone says:
    November 9, 2008 at 2:11 pm

    Nemski:

    Duminique appears to prefer politicians with (her words) “valuable vaginas”.

    I hope that helps.

  10. nemski says:
    November 9, 2008 at 2:23 pm

    anonone, um all vaginas are valuable. 😉

  11. JohnnyX says:
    November 9, 2008 at 2:40 pm

    “anonone, um all vaginas are valuable”

    Nemski, I think we should make a song out of that – tying it in with “Every sperm is sacred” from Monty Pyton’s Meaning of Life.

    Every sperm is sacred,
    every sperm is grand
    Every vagina is valuable,
    Especially when it’s in your hand…

    Ok I’ll stop now before I get carried away.

  12. Mike Matthews says:
    November 9, 2008 at 2:42 pm

    In my hand? More like in my…oh nevermind.

  13. anonone says:
    November 9, 2008 at 2:52 pm

    By the way, Duminique, did you know that half of personal bankruptcies are caused by illness and medical bills? Like, maybe spending and borrowing everything you can to save your kid from dying of cancer?

    Dr. David Himmelstein, the lead author of the study and an Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard commented: “Unless you’re Bill Gates you’re just one serious illness away from bankruptcy. Most of the medically bankrupt were average Americans who happened to get sick.”

    Of course, repubs like you always put the almighty dollar above human welfare. I ‘d rather have a “bleeding heart” of compassion any day than a cold dead heart like yours.

  14. h. says:
    November 9, 2008 at 3:49 pm

    If you live in a flood plain and don’t have flood insurance, you’re just stupid. End of story.

    If I can see the river, ocean, stream, etc. from my kitchen window, I know I should have flood insurance. Common sense.

    I once lived in a 100 year flood zone. My mortgage co. required me to carry flood insurance eventhough the chances of me being flooded were pretty slim. In 1999 I recieved my bill. It was 40% higher than the prevoius year. Why? Because there are fucking morons that live in flood zones that flood year after year and they keep going back. They deserve to go bankrupt.

  15. Dana says:
    November 9, 2008 at 5:57 pm

    In 1991, I bought a house in Hampton, Virginia, that was within 1,000 feet of tidal water. Because of that, I was required to carry flood insurance.

    Now, you should have seen this tidal water. It was a small creek far behind the houses on the other side of the street, deep enough into the lot that one lot had been subdivided and had a second house in the back. (That one was on stilts.)

    In the worst flood I saw there, following Hurricane Floyd, water backed up Beach Road to a point several blocks from my house, but it didn’t really come close to my property. Had it actually reached my house, it would still have had to have risen another 2½ feet to reach the finished floor.

    If insurance is available, and someone doesn’t choose to buy it, why should the government bail him out, or make it easier to welsh on his bills, if he suffers a loss?

  16. The Limerick Avenger says:
    November 9, 2008 at 5:59 pm

    I should have insurance for flood,
    But I didn’t ’cause I’m a real dud.
    But that’s still OK,
    The Del Libs all say,
    That the feds should save me from the mud.

  17. The Limerick Avenger says:
    November 9, 2008 at 6:02 pm

    The Del Libs say society’s ills
    Should negate all of my bills
    No need to pay
    My bills of today
    Though I’m in debt up to my gills!

  18. Dominique says:
    November 9, 2008 at 7:17 pm

    Anonone –

    I’m sorry, but not at all surprised, that you can’t read. If you didn’t have such difficulty with reading and/or comprehension, you might have noticed the part where I said I consider ‘an unforeseen medical crisis’ to be a legitimate reason for bankruptcy.

    I’d love to see the data to back up your claim that half of personal bankruptcies are caused by illness and medical bills. This study shows that only 33% reported that illness or injury was the cause of their bankruptcy:

    http://www.rebuild.org/news-article/reasons-for-bankruptcy-are-varied/

    Dana & h. – You’re absolutely right. The mortgage company requires any homeowner in a flood zone to carry flood insurance. Anyone who owns a home outright (no mortgage) in a flood zone and chooses not to carry flood insurance deserves to lose everything. The government shouldn’t have to bail them out.

  19. Donhusseinsquishviti says:
    November 9, 2008 at 7:36 pm

    h,

    If you live in a flood plain and don’t have flood insurance, you’re just stupid. End of story.

    dude? are you serious! YOU CAN’T LIVE IN A FLOOD PLAIN AND NOT HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE. End of story, government law hellloooooo

  20. anonone says:
    November 9, 2008 at 8:24 pm

    Duminique,

    Your beloved but heartless bankruptcy bill does not distinguish between bankruptcy for over extended credit cards and trying to save your kid from cancer, regardless of what you “think”. The immoral law you love so much doesn’t care what you “consider to be a legitimate reason for bankruptcy.”

    Whether it is 30% or 50% is immaterial, but here is the reference to the Harvard study that was taken during the time the bankruptcy bill was being passed:

    http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html

    Repub credit card company shills like you who value money over human health and welfare are a disgrace. Children are put out of their homes and lose their lives because you think that you can save a few pennies of interest. Disgusting.

  21. anon says:
    November 9, 2008 at 8:57 pm

    If you want to declare the old, free-wheeling, anything goes, just-walk-away-from-it bankruptcy, it still exists: Just be a corporation.

  22. h. says:
    November 10, 2008 at 8:59 am

    Don, If you go bankrupt while living in flood zone and have flood insurance, don’t blame the flood for your bankruptcy.

«
»