Bankruptcy

[vector2]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Reductio ad absurdum. It is the blinding liberalism of medical students, in apparent blindness to reality, that is remarkable. You display that. It happens so frequently, every single year, that it is the easiest prediction to make - that medical students will put on the rose colored glasses, and start spouting off on "free healthcare for all! Social justice! Social responsibility! Homeless patient? You can stay at my place! It isn't a poor person's fault that they are poor!"

Is it just coincidence that people that work harder, in general, are more prosperous than those that don't? If you disagree with that, then you are either deluded, or not as intelligent as would be expected of a med student (provided you are one; I am a doctor, which has been vetted by SDN).

It's a lot easier to keep attacking whatever wild strawman of a med student you've invented than actually address an issue. Do you not think that there must be an acceptable policy middle ground between total idealism and the 'f8ck you, got mine' attitude that pervades the right-wing?

I think it's an intuitive idea that the harder you work the more prosperous you become, but I'd like to see some numbers to confirm whether that's actually a fact or just a notion based on some cliched ideal of the American Dream (we don't even beat France anymore in social mobility, see Fig. 5.1). I also suppose you'd first have to define what exactly you mean by 'hard work' and what we actually mean by prosperous. It's also intuitive to say that poor people are poor mainly by their own doing, and that's another stereotypical example of the just world fallacy. You've invented some dreamworld where everything is fair, action X always predictably has consequence Y, and if you just play by the rules you'll be rich and famous. In this dreamworld, policy choices made at a federal and state level apparently have no effect- you're just poor because you didn't do the right steps like Donald Trump.

Now, if you actually want to return to reality you can acknowledge that hard work is only one aspect of what makes one successful, some of the others being the circumstances you were born into, number of parents you had, your personal health, the educational opportunities you were afforded, the people you were able to network with, and the list goes on and on. To drive home how much of a factor dumb luck is, consider for a moment that the majority, i.e. 62%, of personal bankruptcies were caused by medical problems. 78% of filers had insurance at the start of their illness. 60% of filers had private insurance, not medicare or medicaid. source

What's your thoughts on these irresponsible deadbeats? If the 78% who bothered to be insured end up poor, is it also their fault?

 

[Apollyon]

The farther in life I get, the less I believe in this generalization. I have had some colleagues that manage to work very little, and get paid very handsomely. Some of the most wildly successful and rich people in our society have become so by sheer luck, genetic gift, or just ruthlessness.

Likewise, there are very simple, hardworking people that put in many more hours than I, and will remain making minimum wage. I understand they could be working smarter, but I just don't always see a direct correlation between effort and compensation/reward.

Whereas, the further I get in life, the more I see it happen. The colleagues that managed to work very little - first, what kind of metric makes up "working very little"? And in which industries were these? Even for the slackers, from my anecdote, they had to put in the time somewhere - since I grew up lower middle class, I didn't know any of the old money, or the "nouveau riche", or some of the "most wildly successful or rich" people. And still, among those "some of the most wildly successful" who have "...become so by sheer luck (or) genetic gift", they are outnumbered by the hard workers (and the state of being ruthless does not fit with the somewhat randomness of "luck" or genetic gift), who indeed may extend to being ruthless. Likewise, the person working 70 hours per week and making minimum wage? How frequently does that occur, honestly? For both the "lucky", for whom success has fallen in their lap by happenstance, and the proletarian hero busting his ass for a pittance, I strongly believe that both are outliers, and not indicative of the much greater body of personnel that are extant.

And there is an old saw - "why does it seem that the people that work the hardest seem to have the best luck?" Show me an industry - any industry - where someone who is the hardest worker, starting at the bottom, without making egregrious errors, does not move up, either in responsibility and/or pay. Even if it is among illegal aliens picking fruit, the hardest working guy is not going to have the most menial job, season after season.

To be quite candid, I may be one of those "genetically gifted", as neither of my parents went to college, both were products of public schools, and my sister says "people wonder how our mother could have one kid that's a doctor and another that's a lunch lady". I never studied in my life, and the path I've taken shows this. I've gotten more places by accident than on purpose, but I'm still here, board certified in my specialty. I may be one of those that "work very little" but get paid handsomely (although not so much - like zero - right now). At the same time, in college at a military school, in med school, and in residency, I saw people left and right - literally - that knew how to study, and did so, like machines. One kid from Taiwan sat on his chair so much, he got hemorrhoids (at age 20). The med school grinders, everyone knows - they can memorize a textbook by rote, but will never write one.

But, even if I am, with my "sponge brain", still, I am not typical. If I had the drive of the woman I am going to marry, I would be a senator by now, instead of a slacker in Hawai'i, jobless and happy. Or at least president of the medical staff.

 

[Bertelman]

To be quite candid, I may be one of those "genetically gifted", as neither of my parents went to college, both were products of public schools, and my sister says "people wonder how our mother could have one kid that's a doctor and another that's a lunch lady". I never studied in my life, and the path I've taken shows this. I've gotten more places by accident than on purpose, but I'm still here, board certified in my specialty.

We seem to have had very similar upbringings. And while I am by no means claiming your old saw to be incorrect, I am stating that it does not happen that way as much as I would like, take for example the entire Kardashian clan.

I have seen enough exceptions to the rule on both sides that I no longer judge poor, underserved people to be "lazy workers", and I no longer judge those richer than me to have worked harder, or to be smarter. That's all. If that statement makes me more of a communist than a capitalist, than so be it. I can live with that. I'll even change my tagline from Maverick if you wish.

 

[Bertelman]

Let me add that the democratic intardnet forum has done more to convey concepts such as the Strawman and latin phrases like reductio ad absurdum than any text ever written. Once the debate gets hot, it is only a matter of time before those are dropped.

 

[Apollyon]

It's a lot easier to keep attacking whatever wild strawman of a med student you've invented than actually address an issue. Do you not think that there must be an acceptable policy middle ground between total idealism and the 'f8ck you, got mine' attitude that pervades the right-wing?

I think it's an intuitive idea that the harder you work the more prosperous you become, but I'd like to see some numbers to confirm whether that's actually a fact or just a notion based on some cliched ideal of the American Dream (we don't even beat France anymore in social mobility, see Fig. 5.1). I also suppose you'd first have to define what exactly you mean by 'hard work' and what we actually mean by prosperous. It's also intuitive to say that poor people are poor mainly by their own doing, and that's another stereotypical example of the just world fallacy. You've invented some dreamworld where everything is fair, action X always predictably has consequence Y, and if you just play by the rules you'll be rich and famous. In this dreamworld, policy choices made at a federal and state level apparently have no effect- you're just poor because you didn't do the right steps like Donald Trump.

Now, if you actually want to return to reality you can acknowledge that hard work is only one aspect of what makes one successful, some of the others being the circumstances you were born into, number of parents you had, your personal health, the educational opportunities you were afforded, the people you were able to network with, and the list goes on and on. To drive home how much of a factor dumb luck is, consider for a moment that the majority, i.e. 62%, of personal bankruptcies were caused by medical problems. 78% of filers had insurance at the start of their illness. 60% of filers had private insurance, not medicare or medicaid. source

What's your thoughts on these irresponsible deadbeats? If the 78% who bothered to be insured end up poor, is it also their fault?

Notwithstanding your disrespectful tone, I don't live in some "invented dreamworld", but staunchly in reality. Beyond the doctors I've know that are not intrinsically brilliant, but ass-busting hard workers, I think about my neighbors, that are working regularly, and several more than one job, to maintain their lifestyles here in Hawai'i (which has quite an expensive standard of living, if you weren't aware). My brother in law works for the highway department back home, and he never refuses a call in. He and my sister, through shrewd management, are going to pay off their house in 2018, 7 years early. Two nurses I know have made more money in rental property than in nursing.

Now, you equate filing bankruptcy with ending up poor. By the article you stated, 3/5 of the filers owned their own homes - were they put out of their homes? And I have to wonder - owning their own homes, and 48% of all bankruptcies were filed by people with private insurance (so, they had jobs that provided insurance, in most cases - this article did not differentiate between the private insurance holders and those that had private insurance in lieu of MedicAid - which the private insurers have to provide as a certain percentage of their subscribers), and there was $17K in out of pocket debts for those insured that filed bankruptcy. $17K? Really? My retired mother (not college educated, 30 years at New York Telephone and successors), and my brother in law and sister (she's insulin-dependent diabetic, as I am) could both make those payments. That draws a contrast to your depiction of "bankruptcy making people poor" - isn't the purpose of bankruptcy to obtain relief, so one doesn't end up homeless and in the poorhouse?

And, yes, you sound socialistic with your statements about "circumstances into which you were born" and "the number of parents you had" and "the educational opportunities that were afforded to you" and "with whom you networked" all sound like being a poverty apologist - giving intellectual support to the "crab pot" mentality. Why is a black man called a "sellout" if he goes to school, or leaves the inner city? "Wonder bread"? "Oreo cookie"? And a direct metric would be that income increases with education - high school, to associate's degree, to bachelor's, and so on (here, here, and here), with the last saying income is less with lower education.

So, there's more to it than "I got sick and it bankrupted me". If the general public had to guess at a number to cause that, what would they say? $50K? $100K? Or do you think they would be surprised at ~$20K when people pulled the trigger and filed?

 

[Narcotized]

Why stop at credit checks. Obesity has been directly linked to absenteeism at work

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aihw.gov.au%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D6442453464&ei=lUwCT4iFO6jq2AXYqtymAg&usg=AFQjCNH7sJn0K_uouDHHcKG52HQiYa_Afw

Excellent point you make. There is actually precedence for this strategy. Colin Farrell try to turn around a sinking company in Horrible Bosses by "trimming the fat" and attempting to get rid of Large Marge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcJu53g2lFU

 

[Apollyon]

We seem to have had very similar upbringings. And while I am by no means claiming your old saw to be incorrect, I am stating that it does not happen that way as much as I would like, take for example the entire Kardashian clan.

I have seen enough exceptions to the rule on both sides that I no longer judge poor, underserved people to be "lazy workers", and I no longer judge those richer than me to have worked harder, or to be smarter. That's all. If that statement makes me more of a communist than a capitalist, than so be it. I can live with that. I'll even change my tagline from Maverick if you wish.

I haven't said at any time that the poor are "lazy workers" (which sounds rather oxymoronic), and here in HI is the first place I've ever seen people getting welfare and still working. And, as for the Kardashians, they're anecdotal, and their money came from Robert and his legal practice (just like that scumbag John Edwards, who made something like $60million in his career). Just like Paris and Nicki Hilton (whose fortunes came from Hilton Hotels), they are inherited rich. In our nation of 300+ million, they are quite the minority.

Let me add that the democratic intardnet forum has done more to convey concepts such as the Strawman and latin phrases like reductio ad absurdum than any text ever written. Once the debate gets hot, it is only a matter of time before those are dropped.

In my defense, I have been accused by many - not a few, not some, but many - on SDN of overusing Latin in general. I've always thought that the "strawman" idea was separate from the Latin, and people invoking the strawman sounds like someone trying to obfuscate.

 

[Osteoimperfecta]

Excellent point you make. There is actually precedence for this strategy. Colin Farrell try to turn around a sinking company in Horrible Bosses by "trimming the fat" and attempting to get rid of Large Marge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcJu53g2lFU

 

[scarshapedstar]

I have been accused by many - not a few, not some, but many - on SDN of overusing Latin in general.

I believe the Latin term for this is argumentum ad latinum.

 

[Bertelman]

I haven't said at any time that the poor are "lazy workers" (which sounds rather oxymoronic), and here in HI is the first place I've ever seen people getting welfare and still working. And, as for the Kardashians, they're anecdotal, and their money came from Robert and his legal practice (just like that scumbag John Edwards, who made something like $60million in his career). Just like Paris and Nicki Hilton (whose fortunes came from Hilton Hotels), they are inherited rich. In our nation of 300+ million, they are quite the minority.

A lazy worker is no more an oxymoron than your "hard worker" is redundant.

And I fully understand that my example was anecdotal (I'm a physician, after all). That is assumed by the phrase "for example". But considering neither you nor me will be able to produce any valid statistic uniformly supporting our points, I have little else but my belief and rather limited source of latin phrases. 😉

 

[cincincyreds]

One has to look at things relatively. Being poor in this country, one would be rich in other countries if one has running water and electricity. A poor person today has more things than a rich person 150 years ago.

I think one thing we can improve in this country is the issue of medical illness causing bankrupcy. I just don't think we have enough regulated law that protects the consumer from financial ruin in the event of sickness.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Narcotized]

I am not a cliche guy so I don't know what a "Strawman" is other than a character that helped Dorothy.

 

[scarshapedstar]

I ...don't know what a "Strawman" is... and I don't care to look it up either.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=straw+man+fallacy

I figure ...I won.

[YOUTUBE]G2y8Sx4B2Sk[/YOUTUBE]

(Did anyone catch the meta-straw man of instantly refuting criticisms by recasting them as "useless cliches"?)

 

[epidural man]

Because everyone who is rich is intelligent, self-motivated, hardworking, and trustworthy. Everyone who is poor is stupid, lazy, shiftless and irresponsible.

This is the first thing anyone has ever said on this website that I agree with.

I'm so glad I'm not lazy or stupid or poor. Poor people are so dumb. They don't shower very often either. And their teeth are gross usually. How hard is it to brush your teeth and get a good set of braces, or invisiline?

I'm so mad right now at poor people.

 

[DreamLover]

This is the first thing anyone has ever said on this website that I agree with.

I'm so glad I'm not lazy or stupid or poor. Poor people are so dumb. They don't shower very often either. And their teeth are gross usually. How hard is it to brush your teeth and get a good set of braces, or invisiline?

I'm so mad right now at poor people.

In today's economy, I can understand the nerve the OP touched on with a bankruptcy claim and asking for opinions. This is a very judgmental and at times, harsh, in your face forum. I personally don't mind the opinions and I find it interesting. As a person who grew up poor and now works hard for and appreciates every dollar she earns, I too have a chip in my shoulder for people that can't seem to pull their weight and often times at my (tax dollar) expense. I am though, capable of separating the ideal with reality. The reality is there are true, valid reasons that people hit hard times. I am thankful everyday that I can make these HUGE loan payments every month instead of the government putting a lien on my life.

Just a little perspective. Yes, I have become so much more fiscally conservative as I have worked my way through the system, but I don't mind helping people that are truly trying to help themselves. The problem is that our system is broken and it is often impossible to distinguish who needs assistance between who is taking advantage of the system.

Ironically, the OP has disappeared and is probably sitting back and enjoying the post chaos aftermath.

 

[Apollyon]

Ironically, the OP has disappeared and is probably sitting back and enjoying the post chaos aftermath.

I called that in post #26, the morning of New Year's Day!

(Incidentally, it is reassuring that you are a female, as that picture of Audrey Hepburn - one of the most beautiful women I've ever seen - just doesn't suit a guy.)

 

[Apollyon]

Let me add that the democratic intardnet forum has done more to convey concepts such as the Strawman and latin phrases like reductio ad absurdum than any text ever written. Once the debate gets hot, it is only a matter of time before those are dropped.

It's like you're "physic" or something.

(In this thread.)