Friday, 4/29/11, Public Square


Advertisements

12 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

12 responses to “Friday, 4/29/11, Public Square

  1. indypendent

    I keep hearing Republicans yell they want a balanced budget.

    Okay, I’ll go along with that.

    So let’s see, which past presidents had a balanced budget and the first one we come to is Bill Clinton. Well, God knows any self-respecting Republican will never follow Bill Clinton’s advice.

    So, the next guy on the balanced budget list is Dwight Eisenhower. Okay, let’s follow his footsteps and put some of those ideas into work to help balance our budget.

    But, but…..this is not what the current Republicans are pointing to as the guiding light to follow – these folks are pointing to Ronald Reagan as the savior of us all.

    Oh, oh…..we’re in trouble. I wonder if these Republicans know that Reagan never had a balanced budget?

    Aw, what’s the use of trying to use facts with a bunch of people who prefer to use gossip and innuendos to smear their opponents on an issue as basic as having a valid birth certificate.

  2. indypendent

    Does anyone know what is the difference between a ‘friendly foreclosure’ and a regular foreclosure? (maybe 6176 can help here).

    I just heard that a company was foreclosed on, then the owner of that company gets loans for his new company from the same bank that just foreclosed on him. So now that the original company is no longer in business, they are not liable for the warranties on the products they sold.

    I saw this same sort of thing happening in the nursing home industry – only the deal then was how to get around the federal and state inspectors.

    It was a well known tactic in the corporate-owned nursing homes that the fastest way to make money was in buying up these old nursing homes, directing all the Medicare, Medicaid and private pay (if there were any) to the corporate headquarters – where they would redistribute the wealth back to the nursing home to pay their bills and labor costs to keep the facility running (of which was minimal, at best).

    Whenever inspectors would come in and write up things like plumbing needs to be fixed, wiring needs to be fixed and any other deficiencies requiring money to fix – these corporate-owners would keep the building for a year tops (until the federal and state began threatening closure of the facility) and then they would promptly sell that nursing home, usually to a person within the same corporation, but the new corporation would have a different owner on paper – so the entire scenario would play out again.

    It seems those inspections that found deficiencies were tied to the owner in place at the time. So if the owner sells the home – BINGO – no more deficiencies on that facility.

    It is back to Square One with the inspectors having to write up deficiencies.

    Now I am not saying anything was done illegally – and that’s the sad part.

    When did this world go upside down and now behaving badly is a good thing?

    They may not be legally liable – but IMHO, they are morally liable. I just could not look myself in the mirror knowing what I had done to some elderly patients and their families.

    • Indy, I’ll try to answer this as best I can. Hopefully, I can do this without being too pedantic and without lapsing into what fnord refers to as my “native language”.

      Generally, a “friendly foreclosure” involves real estate. It arises when the owner of real estate mortgaged to secure a loan gives a “deed in lieu of foreclosure” to the holder of the mortgage, usually as part of an agreement whereby the holder of the mortgage takes title to the property in full satisfaction of the amount still due on the mortgage loan. The mortgage holder then sells the real estate to realize as much as it can on the loan, with any loss deducted for income tax purposes.

      A “regular foreclosure” or, more properly, a judicial foreclosure, is a court action which results in the Plaintiff (mortgage holder) gaining title to the real estate through execution on a judgment against the Defendant owner. It is then sold at Sheriff’s sale, with the defendant-owner liable for any deficiency. A deficiency judgment, as it is called, is made up of the difference between the balance owed and the sales price on the property, plus the costs incurred in the foreclosure which, depending upon the jurisdiction, include attorney fees, cost of title evidence, selling costs, accruing interest on the judgment, court costs, as examples. Again, depending upon the jurisdiction and classification of the real estate, there may be a redemption period, a time when the defendant may get the property back upon payment of the above-described costs and deficiency judgment, during which the plaintiff may not sell the real estate, as it cannot provide “clear title” to the purchaser. This, in Kansas, may be a period of up to 12 months if the real estate was the residence of the defendant and at least 1/3 of the principal balance of the loan secured by the mortgage had been paid prior to suit being filed. This is a time-consuming and expensive process, thus (in some cases, at least) the willingness of the mortgage holder to take a “deed in lieu”.

      Then, there are the situations involving depreciable commercial real estate where the whole thing is structured as a “deferred like-kind exchange” under Section 1031, IRC. There are other variations on the theme, but the above illustrate the general idea.

      The personal property example indy used would work more or less the same way, with obvious differences of the UCC applying rather than real property law. While “foreclosure” (in this case, of a security interest) is the correct common law term, these are popularly called “repossessions”, with the “friendly” variety called a “voluntary repossession”.

      Whew. Hope that answers the question.

      • indypendent

        It does answer the legal definition of what happened.

        But that really does not help those people who bought products from the original company and now their warranties are not worth the paper they were written on.

        And that is my problem with this entire scenario. Although everything is legal – somehow I suspect those people with worthless warranties are not exactly saying ‘hooray’.

      • You’re right, but as the law now exists, that is the unfortunate result that occurs. Given the Anglo-American legal concept of privity of contract (and a written warranty is a type of contract), and the existence of the corporate (I presume) entity that was one party to the contract, not the individual, the corporate veil would need to be pierced for the individual to be held liable. If he was that dumb (to take actions that would allow the piercing of the veil), the lender is even dumber to make the new loans.

        Hate to phrase it this way, but all a written warranty gives the beneficiary thereof is a right to sue for performance (or damages). Anyone who isn’t aware of this hasn’t been paying attention, IMHO.

        BTW, another way to “dump” warranty exposure would be through Bankruptcy. Just a FYI.

  3. David B

    SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE…
    Democrats gear up to match GOP fundraising effort
    After taking a beating from outside Republican groups during the 2010 midterm election cycle, Democrats are now gearing up to match the effort in 2012, with one of the most prominent teams officially launching its drive Friday.

    Bill Burton and Sean Sweeney, two recently departed officials from the Obama White House, are forming Priorities USA, an organization that will seek to raise as much as $100 million in the 2012 cycle. The group will consist of two branches: a 501(c)(4) nonprofit and a 527 political action committee. The structure will allow the organization to keep some of its donors secret, a practice that Democrats previously deplored when it was used by Republicans

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democrats-gear-up-to-match-gop-fundraising-effort/2011/04/29/AFB5BfCF_story.html?hpid=z11

  4. freedomwriter

    I was pulling out onto Maize road just behind the McDonald’s at 21st and Maize when I noticed someone had slapped a sticker on the Electrical box. The sticker read, “GOD is NOT A REPUBLICAN!” It brought a quick smile to my face knowing that someone else out there doesn’t think religion should be a part of our politics.

    I’d like to see a grassroots effort of little stickers and buttons popping up all over this state. Obama’s campaign has an “I’m In” slogan that I hope catches on and there is a website selling stickers of a brite blue dot in the middle of a square of red, which say, “I am a brite blue dot in the middle of a very red state”. These are creative ways to let other liberals know they are not alone, and to let the right-wing know we still have a voice and a vote!

    • I like hearing this!

      I know how encouraging it is to get together with others who share many of my values and concerns. It’s one of the reasons I smile when I know I can find you all here.

      Share more details when you know them, please. I would love to see this spread! đŸ˜‰

      • indypendent

        I think there are more liberals (or as I label myself – social liberal and fiscal conservative) than there are Social Conservative Religious Right Republicans.

        I’ve said this before – Reagan let the RR’s into the Grand Old Party and this is the current group that is running all the moderate Republicans out of their own party. It’s taken them 30 years – but the more power they get, the more brazen they have become. How many good people who happen to be Republicans have been called RINO by these RR folks? I think the RR’s have overstayed their welcome at the Grand Old Party.

        I suspect the pendelum is about to swing back far to the left side of the political spectrum for a little while. But I think the pendelum does not stay too far from the center for any length of time.

        But the future for the Democrats lies heavily on how the economy does and how badly these RR Republicans keep pushing their social issues instead of focusing on creating those jobs they promised.

        Now if Democrats, aka Liberals, are smart – they will pick up on the fact that we do need to curb our spending and get the most bang for our bucks.

        People realize that government needs money in order to keep the programs these folks like – Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc.

        But people also are very tired of seeing their tax dollars being given to the likes of people who are nothing more than takers. There has to be a happy medium somewhere.

    • I have a button maker.

      • indypendent

        I used to have one of those things. Somewhere along the numerous corporate transfer moves, I misplaced it or it got sold in a yard sale.

        Those worked great.

  5. Found this interesting. My anecdotal evidence is that the writer’s identified “beliefs” set out in the article are true of most management types, and shareholders of publicly traded corporations, and darned few of either are terribly interested in the parenthetical appearing next to each.

    For your consideration: http://opensource.com/business/11/2/capitalism-dead-long-live-capitalism