The Official Alex Jones Thread! - Page 38

JayUtah · 17th September 2023, 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

The situation I'm referring to is this, from Cornell Law School:https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/judgment_debt

This applies generally to small-claims and district court claims. The phrase at the beginning of your highlight, "After obtaining an order from the court...," is doing a lot of heavy lifting. The order to enforce collection comes at the end of a lot of procedure, and isn't a given.

Quote:

I imagine if Jones has $93,000 to splash about per month, it would be no problem to garnish, say, $92,000 of that per month towards his $1.5 billion black hole.

It would be, under an appropriate order (in addition to the judgment itself), and if Jones were not in bankruptcy. Filing for bankruptcy stops all collection efforts dead in their tracks.

Brainster · 18th September 2023, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

Many thanks for your explanations - cogent and lucid as always.

The situation I'm referring to is this, from Cornell Law School:https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/judgment_debt

I imagine if Jones has $93,000 to splash about per month, it would be no problem to garnish, say, $92,000 of that per month towards his $1.5 billion black hole.

Bankruptcy stops all that. Now that said, it seems ridiculous that the bankruptcy court is letting him do all that spending.

TheGoldcountry · 18th September 2023, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Bankruptcy stops all that. Now that said, it seems ridiculous that the bankruptcy court is letting him do all that spending.

Exactly. I would think they would freeze his assets and give him an allowance to live on. The dude is probably going to be dead in ten years, by the way he looks, and he's just going to spend all his money before any of his debts get paid.

JayUtah · 18th September 2023, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by Brainster

Now that said, it seems ridiculous that the bankruptcy court is letting him do all that spending.

Indeed, it's a moral outrage.

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

Exactly. I would think they would freeze his assets and give him an allowance to live on.

That's exactly what happens. The difference between Chapters 7 and 11 are how the estate assets are managed. In Chapter 7, all* the debtor assets are liquidated and thrown into a big pile. Creditors submit arguments to the court explaining why they should get a bigger dip out of the pile than others. The court makes an equitable judgment in which some creditors may be fully paid off, others may be partly paid off, and some creditors just go fish.

Morally this works because the debtor admits he has thrown in the towel and has to start over from basically nothing—but can do so debt-free. Creditors go for it because it changes the footing from creditor vs. debtor (can't squeeze blood from a turnip) to creditor vs. creditor. The money is there (whereas before a creditor couldn't, say, force a debtor to sell his house or do any other specific thing). All you have to do is out-lawyer your competitors and you get more pennies on your dollar.

Chapter 11 is a reorganization of assets and debts. It differs fundamentally in that the assets remain in place initially. A court-appointed trustee oversees assets and expenditures. The debtor is responsible for making a plan to restructure debts and assets, which may involve voluntary liquidation of some assets (while retaining others) and a request that the court erase or lower some debts (while retaining others), modifying the terms of repayment, or specifying a negotiation between debtors and creditors to seek amicable settlement of debt.

The debtor is also responsible for convincing the trustee of ongoing expenditures necessary to maintain the debtor entity as an ongoing concern with a plausible prospect of regaining solvency. The goals are (1) to keep the entity operating insofar as possible during the process, and (2) do the best for the creditors with the least harm to the debtor.

While the court must ultimately approve the reorganization plan, this footing still gives quite a lot of power to the debtor over Chapter 7. And the trusteeship plan is generally agreed to early so that the debtor entity can achieve stability in order to spend more time on the reorganization plan. Hence its terms are not always favorable to a broader theory of morality or equity. The trustee can even incur more debt if they believe it will result in an overall better reorganization outcome and keep the entity afloat while it restructures. And Jones can certainly hire lawyers and accountants to justify that an ongoing personal expenditure of $93,000 for his household is in everyone's best interests. And yes, punitive judgments are more dischargeable under Chapter 11.

Ya know, if Jones can't maintain his signature lifestyle, how is he going to keep public interest in him enough to make money as a public figure? (shudder!)

There is also Chapter 13 bankruptcy (limited to individuals), but I'm not smart enough to talk about it.

But yes, it's all rich-person law and economincs. The morality underneath Chapter 11 is the presumption that the debtor who can afford to go broke this way is honorable and conscientious, and that there is a greater social benefit in letting large, complex financial structures (even if it's just one person) repent of their errors with as little blood drawn as possible. It's a moral outrage that someone like Jones should be able to draw on this.

Quote:

...he's just going to spend all his money before any of his debts get paid.

That's often the plan.

* With austere exceptions for very basic living necessities: some place to live, some car, etc. If you file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, they will liquidate your Rolls Royce, but perhaps let you keep some of the proceeds to buy a used Subaru.

The Great Zaganza · 18th September 2023, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

Exactly. I would think they would freeze his assets and give him an allowance to live on. The dude is probably going to be dead in ten years, by the way he looks, and he's just going to spend all his money before any of his debts get paid.

he's about to go on his third family trip to Hawaii in as many months.

JayUtah · 18th September 2023, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

he's about to go on his third family trip to Hawaii in as many months.

I think you mean "business" trip.

18th September 2023, 09:48 AM	#1482
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 20,104	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander Many thanks for your explanations - cogent and lucid as always. The situation I'm referring to is this, from Cornell Law School:https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/judgment_debt I imagine if Jones has $93,000 to splash about per month, it would be no problem to garnish, say, $92,000 of that per month towards his $1.5 billion black hole. Bankruptcy stops all that. Now that said, it seems ridiculous that the bankruptcy court is letting him do all that spending.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

18th September 2023, 10:10 AM	#1483
TheGoldcountry Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 7,903	Originally Posted by Brainster Bankruptcy stops all that. Now that said, it seems ridiculous that the bankruptcy court is letting him do all that spending. Exactly. I would think they would freeze his assets and give him an allowance to live on. The dude is probably going to be dead in ten years, by the way he looks, and he's just going to spend all his money before any of his debts get paid.
	__________________ I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten I sometimes think the Bible was inspired by Satan to make God look bad. And then it backfired on Him when He underestimated the stupidity of religious ideologues. -MontagK505

18th September 2023, 11:32 AM	#1485
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Photo Contest Winner Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 20,687	Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry Exactly. I would think they would freeze his assets and give him an allowance to live on. The dude is probably going to be dead in ten years, by the way he looks, and he's just going to spend all his money before any of his debts get paid. he's about to go on his third family trip to Hawaii in as many months.
	__________________ “Don’t blame me. I voted for Kodos.”

17th September 2023, 08:12 PM	#1481
JayUtah Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: The great American West Posts: 23,279	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander The situation I'm referring to is this, from Cornell Law School:https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/judgment_debt This applies generally to small-claims and district court claims. The phrase at the beginning of your highlight, "After obtaining an order from the court...," is doing a lot of heavy lifting. The order to enforce collection comes at the end of a lot of procedure, and isn't a given. Quote: I imagine if Jones has $93,000 to splash about per month, it would be no problem to garnish, say, $92,000 of that per month towards his $1.5 billion black hole. It would be, under an appropriate order (in addition to the judgment itself), and if Jones were not in bankruptcy. Filing for bankruptcy stops all collection efforts dead in their tracks.

18th September 2023, 11:31 AM	#1484
JayUtah Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: The great American West Posts: 23,279	Originally Posted by Brainster Now that said, it seems ridiculous that the bankruptcy court is letting him do all that spending. Indeed, it's a moral outrage. Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry Exactly. I would think they would freeze his assets and give him an allowance to live on. That's exactly what happens. The difference between Chapters 7 and 11 are how the estate assets are managed. In Chapter 7, all* the debtor assets are liquidated and thrown into a big pile. Creditors submit arguments to the court explaining why they should get a bigger dip out of the pile than others. The court makes an equitable judgment in which some creditors may be fully paid off, others may be partly paid off, and some creditors just go fish. Morally this works because the debtor admits he has thrown in the towel and has to start over from basically nothing—but can do so debt-free. Creditors go for it because it changes the footing from creditor vs. debtor (can't squeeze blood from a turnip) to creditor vs. creditor. The money is there (whereas before a creditor couldn't, say, force a debtor to sell his house or do any other specific thing). All you have to do is out-lawyer your competitors and you get more pennies on your dollar. Chapter 11 is a reorganization of assets and debts. It differs fundamentally in that the assets remain in place initially. A court-appointed trustee oversees assets and expenditures. The debtor is responsible for making a plan to restructure debts and assets, which may involve voluntary liquidation of some assets (while retaining others) and a request that the court erase or lower some debts (while retaining others), modifying the terms of repayment, or specifying a negotiation between debtors and creditors to seek amicable settlement of debt. The debtor is also responsible for convincing the trustee of ongoing expenditures necessary to maintain the debtor entity as an ongoing concern with a plausible prospect of regaining solvency. The goals are (1) to keep the entity operating insofar as possible during the process, and (2) do the best for the creditors with the least harm to the debtor. While the court must ultimately approve the reorganization plan, this footing still gives quite a lot of power to the debtor over Chapter 7. And the trusteeship plan is generally agreed to early so that the debtor entity can achieve stability in order to spend more time on the reorganization plan. Hence its terms are not always favorable to a broader theory of morality or equity. The trustee can even incur more debt if they believe it will result in an overall better reorganization outcome and keep the entity afloat while it restructures. And Jones can certainly hire lawyers and accountants to justify that an ongoing personal expenditure of $93,000 for his household is in everyone's best interests. And yes, punitive judgments are more dischargeable under Chapter 11. Ya know, if Jones can't maintain his signature lifestyle, how is he going to keep public interest in him enough to make money as a public figure? (shudder!) There is also Chapter 13 bankruptcy (limited to individuals), but I'm not smart enough to talk about it. But yes, it's all rich-person law and economincs. The morality underneath Chapter 11 is the presumption that the debtor who can afford to go broke this way is honorable and conscientious, and that there is a greater social benefit in letting large, complex financial structures (even if it's just one person) repent of their errors with as little blood drawn as possible. It's a moral outrage that someone like Jones should be able to draw on this. Quote: ...he's just going to spend all his money before any of his debts get paid. That's often the plan. * With austere exceptions for very basic living necessities: some place to live, some car, etc. If you file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, they will liquidate your Rolls Royce, but perhaps let you keep some of the proceeds to buy a used Subaru.

18th September 2023, 11:52 AM	#1486
JayUtah Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: The great American West Posts: 23,279	Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza he's about to go on his third family trip to Hawaii in as many months. I think you mean "business" trip.