The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars • Hacker News Board

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#131

Post by restalis » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:46 PM UTC

rconti wrote: post #83

dgreensp wrote: post #59

> I was just unlucky I guess that it happened to me. People like this who have no sense of personal responsibility are an evil in the world. He spends millions of dollars of other people's money, declares bankruptcy (presumably), and when his actions are deemed dishonest and immoral, though not technically illegal, he acts like that's just name-calling and gets right back up on his high horse. Remind you of any Presi…

You know, I'm not saying he's a great guy, but that quoted comment seems very out of line from the rest of the article. "I was just unlucky" seems taken out of context somehow. For example, he said he wouldn't have done it again because of how it destroyed his life and wasn't worth it. So I suspect the "luck" was about some narrow specific component and not the fact that he got arrested. Obviously he knows why he got…

He might got an idea after the fact, but that arrest should have never happened. Like someone around here mentioned, the bank wanting the money back is a civil matter and the bank should have tried to approach him amiably. Everything about it could have gone without the arrest and jail time.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#132

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:47 PM UTC

stemc43 wrote: post #98

mkj wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'd be my thought. Bankruptcy might slow down becoming a lawyer? Not sure.

it's an unsecured debt. Pretty sure he doesn't have to pay it back if he declares bankruptcy.

No, he means that in many locales, bar associations have criteria of 'moral character', that 'declaring bankruptcy' may, or may not infringe upon.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#133

Post by imgabe » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:48 PM UTC

DevX101 wrote: post #128

imgabe wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does say he "mistakenly" had this line of credit. At least in the US if $2 million "mistakenly" shows up in your bank account, and you know it's not yours and you spend it anyway, that's a crime. Now, that's not the same as having a line of credit mistakenly opened, but there's some logic to it being a crime.

If $2 million suddenly appeared in your account tomorrow, and you spend it, that's fraud. If you ask the bank for $2 million, they say "Sure!", and you spend it, that's not fraud.

Clearly, he was acquitted, so the law must have worked out as you say. I'm just pointing out that it's not completely out of left field for there to have been an investigation and trial to determine if he was guilty of a crime.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#134

Post by mdpopescu » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:49 PM UTC

bluejekyll wrote: post #79

Pigo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been my reason for being against the death penalty for many years. It's hard to justify when the OJ's of the world get a pass due to wealth or celebrity. I never thought of AI being used in this capacity. Seems like we'd live in The Day The Earth Stood Still world, giving the automatons the jurisdiction to meat out justice.

Hmm. This is actually an interesting application for AI. Is anyone working on this? There is a huge amount of case law that could be entered into the corpus.

IBM's Watson is reading a ton of case law, as far as I know. Clio [1] also has some articles about AI and laws, if I recall correctly.

[1] https://www.clio.com/

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#135

Post by snowpanda » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:50 PM UTC

nulagrithom wrote: post #121

dgreensp wrote: post #59

> I was just unlucky I guess that it happened to me. People like this who have no sense of personal responsibility are an evil in the world. He spends millions of dollars of other people's money, declares bankruptcy (presumably), and when his actions are deemed dishonest and immoral, though not technically illegal, he acts like that's just name-calling and gets right back up on his high horse. Remind you of any Presi…

> Remind you of any Presidents-elect? Is that really necessary? I'm getting a little sick of Trump replacing Hitler in Godwin's law. We had a detox week for a reason. ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13108404 )

Some people can't help themselves.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#136

Post by nickpsecurity » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:52 PM UTC

scotty79 wrote: post #104

pktgen wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He did nothing to defraud the bank or mislead it. He simply had access to a large line of credit, and used it. If the bank wants it's money back, that's a civil matter, not a criminal one. It's their responsibility to ask for it back. He was drawing on this line of credit, which he knew he was legally obligated to pay back, without ever intending to pay it back. That sure seems like fraud to me. There is a differen…

> without ever intending to pay it back How can you know that? He himself writes that he was waiting for the bank to ask for some money back and intended to deal with it when it comes. Lack of detailed planning for something isn't the same as lack of intention to do something when it happens. Lots of people take loans without precisely knowing where they'll find money to pay them back.

Are you kidding? What job skills did this guy have that would let him pay back $50,000 he was wasting on expensive cars? And then over a million on that, strippers, and cocaine? The guy had no plan, no responsibility in amount borrowed, wasn't seeking jobs, and ran it up to around what many make in a lifetime.

It's definitely fraud by any reasonable definition. Fortunately for him, the definition was unreasonably good to him. However, I'd understand the court giving him a lower sentence on grounds of him appearing (to me at least) to have a mental breakdown of sorts after his accident plus the bank showing incredible negligence in their lending practices. The bank just handing him that much money was so stupid they should probably be fined for it on top of his punishment. If it was straight-up their money, then making sure they loose it for good might be good punishment.

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#137

Post by mempko » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:54 PM UTC

dgreensp wrote: post #59

> I was just unlucky I guess that it happened to me. People like this who have no sense of personal responsibility are an evil in the world. He spends millions of dollars of other people's money, declares bankruptcy (presumably), and when his actions are deemed dishonest and immoral, though not technically illegal, he acts like that's just name-calling and gets right back up on his high horse. Remind you of any Presi…

> He spends millions of dollars of other people's money

This is simply not true. The bank created credit money out of thin air. They didn't have to take money from anywhere to give it to him. On their books, his loan looked like an asset.

This is a common misunderstanding of how banks work. He didn't steal anyone else's money, he got new money. Read this introduction of how money and banking work from the Bank of England http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/quarte...

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#138

Post by mempko » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:56 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #77

dgreensp wrote: post #59

> I was just unlucky I guess that it happened to me. People like this who have no sense of personal responsibility are an evil in the world. He spends millions of dollars of other people's money, declares bankruptcy (presumably), and when his actions are deemed dishonest and immoral, though not technically illegal, he acts like that's just name-calling and gets right back up on his high horse. Remind you of any Presi…

Institutions like this that have no sense of financial responsibility are an evil in the world. They lend out millions of dollars of other people's money, declare the debts in default (presumably), and when their actions are deemed imprudent and unprofitable, though not technically illegal, they acts like that's just name-calling and get right back up on his high horse. Remind you of any Wall Street bank?

> They lend out millions of dollars of other people's money

Banks don't lend other people's money. They create money when they lend. Read this from the Bank of England. http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/quarte...

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#139

Post by chongli » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:57 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #126

restalis wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"why would I view the standard that way?" That is closer to the core human nature for a lot of people. Many people want to live and enjoy life (more than enjoying the good perks of being honest). Playing by the rules is just a mean to an end not a purpose in itself.

So what? It's human nature to bash in the head of a stranger so you can take their food, but I wouldn't accept someone calling it "unlucky" that they happened across a defenseless stranger all alone with some good food.

It's definitely unlucky for the stranger with the good food!

Re: The bank lent me $2m so I spent it on strippers and cars

#140

Post by pktgen » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:58 PM UTC

raesene6 wrote: post #127

scotty79 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without ever intending to pay it back How can you know that? He himself writes that he was waiting for the bank to ask for some money back and intended to deal with it when it comes. Lack of detailed planning for something isn't the same as lack of intention to do something when it happens. Lots of people take loans without precisely knowing where they'll find money to pay them back.

That's easy, he had no money to pay it back, ergo it's fair to conclude he had no intention of paying it back. It's one thing to go a couple of thousand overdrawn, quite another to spend $2 million when you have no source of income.

That's my thinking as well. He would have known that there wasn't a chance in hell he could ever pay that back, nor could he reasonably have believed this situation might change in the future. I would expect this, combined with the amount, extravagance, and opportunistic nature of this whole thing, to show intent to defraud. (But I don't know much about Australia's legal system.)