Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The People's Bailout

howtosharpenpencils.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 323 posts

Re: The People's Bailout

#171

Post by lifeguard »

wheelerwj wrote: post #155
RollingJubilee wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi everyone. I want to assure you all that we are aware of the tax implications. We are working with a pro-bono tax lawyer and have called the IRS several times. The IRS informed us that we do not meet the requirements to file a 1099-c (we are not a bank, credit union, etc.) Our tax lawyer has written some technical langue for our website. The bottom line is that we will be purchasing debt of people who are most like…

hey, do you know if it is possible to buy up a specific person debt? or just general debt contracts?

You could buy a specific corporation's debt but I think consumer bad debt is sold in big blocks of anon accounts until you are the owner.

Re: The People's Bailout

#172

Post by lukifer »

sliverstorm wrote: post #71
loudin wrote: post #5

So, what would prevent me from going into a massive amount of debt, not repaying it, and asking everyone else to foot my bill? This seems like OWS is saying, "Well, corporations got greedy and were bailed out. Now it's the people's time to do the same thing." Why is something, when supported by a corporation, immoral when the same thing, supported by "the people", is righteous? This seems like it's just encouraging b…

Why is something, when supported by a corporation, immoral when the same thing, supported by "the people", is righteous? Because corporations are intrinsically evil, and people are by inherent nature righteous, obviously. I'm being sarcastic, but I honestly believe some of 'em essentially feel that way.

There is a case to be made that a corporation is not inherently evil, but is inherently amoral. If it can maximize profits by being socially responsible, great. But if it fails to pursue a socially harmful action that would maximize profits, the leadership can be sued by the shareholders. (Obviously, this is not relevant to privately held corps.)

Division of labor is a beautiful thing, but the division of moral culpability, not so much.

Re: The People's Bailout

#173

Post by lifeguard »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #129
RollingJubilee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes the IRS knows what we are doing. We called them up and told them. They thought it was pretty cool. w00t!

Sorry I have to ask - "we called them up and told them" rarely works with my insurance company so ... whom did you talk to at the IRS - what's their seniority and pay grade and did they reply in writing?

You guys should keep in mind occupy 'interacts' with ALL levels of law enforcement on a daily basis.

This is not our first rodeo.

Re: The People's Bailout

#174

Post by tsotha »

zanny wrote: post #159
tsotha wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Not when the majority of jobs that create a vibrant middle class in the post-industrial United States require at least a college degree. That's a self-refuting argument. If your degree was really the ticket to a "vibrant middle class" job you'd be able to pay off your student debt. The reality is not all degrees are created equal, and people should think a little bit before they go $200k into debt for a degree that'…

> 18 year olds aren't very good at this kind of reasoning, but that's what parents are for. It is a dangerous assumption to think it is the place for a parent to judge if their children should incur the equivalent of half a decades debt when they themselves may have no comprehension of the value of a degree their kid is thinking of.

I'm not sure what you mean by "half a decades debt".

At some point people have to be treated as adults. If your parents aren't up to advising you on financial matters you have to get outside help. Or you figure it out yourself.

I refuse to accept the notion we should alter agreements freely entered into by adults in an effort to protect them from themselves.

Re: The People's Bailout

#175

Post by tsotha »

bobwaycott wrote: post #97
tsotha wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Except debt can be exactly due to some random accident like getting hit by a car while crossing the street and you don't have the insurance to pay for the medical bills. That's why we have bankruptcy laws. From what I heard at the time, the big hobby horse for the OWS people was student debt, which can't be forgiven in bankruptcy. And that kind of debt is entirely optional.

While I'm not entirely disagreeing with your point, there is an element of dubious optionality wrt student debt when one systemically cannot find gainful employment without a college degree. College degrees are increasingly becoming the new high school diplomas—wherein they are, for all intents and purposes, of equal compulsory nature, without the defense of laws requiring all 18-21-year-olds to be there. Thus, for v…

I disagree. There are all kinds of things you can do that don't require a college degree, including any kind of owner-operated business, a military career, or a skilled trade.

Even today only 40% of the population gets a college degree. That other 60% is doing something to make ends meet.

Re: The People's Bailout

#176

Post by tsotha »

namank wrote: post #54
patio11 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Person A bounces a credit card payment to MegaBank, MegaBank asserts their credit card is in default and demands full payment immediately, A does nothing, MegaBank attempts to collect fruitlessly for ~4 months, A does nothing, MegaBank sells debt (principal + interest) to Agency X, Agency X attempts to collect fruitlessly for 18 months, A does nothing, Agency X sells it to Agency Y, A does nothing, Agency Y attempts…

Much appreciated! Now I'm wondering what kind of business model Agency Y and Z operate on

They actually collect on some small portion of the debt, which, along with the sale of the remaining obligations, ends up being enough to pay their expenses and produce some amount of profit.

Re: The People's Bailout

#178

Post by craig552uk »

narcissus wrote: post #28
marknutter wrote: post #19

How does OWS think this debt accumulated? Debt isn't some random accident like getting hit by a car while crossing the street. You have to get yourself into debt. It used to be taboo, but it's acceptable to get into debt these days and worse yet, walk away from it. OWS, to me, represents an entitled generation.

"Debt isn't some random accident like getting hit by a car while crossing the street." Except debt can be exactly due to some random accident like getting hit by a car while crossing the street and you don't have the insurance to pay for the medical bills. I'm not saying that this is true for all of the OWS debts: probably not even the majority. I'm just saying that it's not as easy as "it's your fault you're in debt…

Sometimes I forget how fortunate I am to have the NHS. Thank you for reminding me.

Re: The People's Bailout

#179

Post by bravoyankee »

patio11 wrote: post #25

For the benefit of folks who might not understand how debt collection works, which may include OWS: if you buy $10,000 of an individual's debt for $500 and then forgive the debt, they have just incurred income of $10,000 and are obligated to pay taxes on it exactly as if you had handed them $10,000 in cash for services rendered. If you don't inform the IRS that you forgave the debt, via a 1099-C, you're going to get…

Patrick, isn't this like saying that since steak knives are potentially dangerous, they should be illegal to use at the dinner table?

You have to admit that the upside of this is greater than the downside. Lets focus on that.

Re: The People's Bailout

#180

Post by benmmurphy »

rprasad wrote: post #88
patio11 wrote: post #25

For the benefit of folks who might not understand how debt collection works, which may include OWS: if you buy $10,000 of an individual's debt for $500 and then forgive the debt, they have just incurred income of $10,000 and are obligated to pay taxes on it exactly as if you had handed them $10,000 in cash for services rendered. If you don't inform the IRS that you forgave the debt, via a 1099-C, you're going to get…

if you buy $10,000 of an individual's debt for $500 and then forgive the debt, they have just incurred income of $10,000 and are obligated to pay taxes on it exactly as if you had handed them $10,000 in cash for services rendered. It could alternatively be characterized as a gift, in which case it is not income to the recipient (but could incur gift taxes to the "gifter"). If you don't inform the IRS that you forgave…

Forgetting the law but looking at this from the governments tax collecting point of view the bank has incurred a loss which they deduct from their taxes and this needs to be offset by income from the person who has their loan forgiven. If this doesn't happen then the government loses revenue and it also opens up the possibility of people using loan forgiveness to dodge taxes.
Post reply on HN