The Glade 4.0

Rynar:

A definitely about 3000 years older than yours it seems. Equity is not an asset. Leveraged capital is not an asset. Leveraged property is not an asset. Leveraged anything is NOT an asset.

_________________

I assume you mean it isn't an asset only after it is leveraged?

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

I think people are taking the financial game as reality as it applies to what a person "owns". While the asset may be in your possession, another person/entity owns it.

If you are making payments on a car, until you've made the last payment and that title is in your hand- the bank owns it.

If you are making payments on a house, until you make that last payment and the deed is in your hand- the bank owns it.

Not to be snarky but do people even read the agreements they sign? You are giving up a lot of your percieved rights in order to use their money to buy what you want. Even if you only owe one dollar. Sorry thats the price of using another persons money.

Sure you can borrow against your equity, but thats just feeding the cycle pushing you further away from owning whatever it is you are borrowing against.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

This is wrong. You're talking about insolvency. If you are able to meet your contractual obligations, you are not bankrupt. If your liabilities exceed your assets, and your contracts with your creditors allow for them to call debt due under these circumstances, then the obligations just changed, and you could be declared bankrupt. Bankrupt is a condition where your creditors review your assets and basically divide up what they can. It is not the same thing as being insolvent.

That is only half the story. The item in question still has a market value. That market value usually exceeds that of the value of the loan. While it is true you do not own it, the delta should not be ignored when reviewing your finances.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Again, bankrupt is a state of being, where your assets are divided amongst your creditors. From a legal, USED definition, merely having your liabilities exceed your assets is not bankruptcy. If you are declared insolvent for the other reason (can't meet obligations) then yes that must necessarily follow with bankruptcy.

It gets back to reality. Under the proposed usage, any student with loans is bankrupt (assuming they have no assets). Most don't get in the black for years. This is a useless way of looking at it. It's not used this way in the financial world.

Use whichever definition suits you; if you want to ignore the fact that insolvency is a form of bankruptcy as defined, feel free.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

/shrug

If there's no practical use to something whatsoever, I do tend to ignore it. Everyone else does, in this case, as well.

Obviously, the evidence presented, both factual and opinion, doesn't support that assertion.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Sure it does. Nobody is considered bankrupt in the real world if they can meet their financial obligations.

No, based on what has been presented here, "everyone" does not hold the same opinion as you do.

Many times an entity undergoes bankruptcy in order to repay their debts (Chapter 13), so if someone files for bankruptcy yet pays off their debts they're not bankrupt according to your definition. It just doesn't work that way. There are cases upon cases of bankruptcy being adjudicated yet the debts are repaid - in a timely manner and in full. In the real world, even.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Then why does the word mean something else?

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

If you owe for a credit card and no money in your bank account, you are not bankrupt, because you have time to get the money to pay back the creditors (such as waiting until Friday for the paycheck). Basically, Rynar is completely wrong.

It doesn't.



It's a state of having your property divided to cover debts or an insolvent debtor. Note that this alternate definition clarifies insolvent debtor with "unable to satisfy any just claims".

Bankruptcy is about not being able to meet obligations, not about owing more than you possess.

So you are discounting the definition provided by Vindi for what reason?

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

For the reasons stated. But I'll recap for you.

1) It's a definition that is not used for anything in the real world.
2) There are contradictory/clarified/more specific definitions that match real-world uses.
3) It doesn't make any sense (examples provided of why this would not make any sense in the real world).

That is only half the story. The item in question still has a market value. That market value usually exceeds that of the value of the loan. While it is true you do not own it, the delta should not be ignored when reviewing your finances.[/quote]

I'm not trying to be combative but that delta shouldn't be factored into the person who is making the payment. It should be considered an asset of the bank, credit card company, retailer who is financing, etc- unless a prior agreement is made between the owner and the person wishing to buy it.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Can creditors call in extended debt?

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Khross means that before the fall of the dollar buy a wheelbarrow so you can cart around enough $100,000 bills to buy your daily bread.

Equity is an imaginary asset that assumes someone will be willing to buy your house and give you the pretend money it is supposed to be worth. Since he expects a major decline n property values before too long, he doesn't believe equity is going to be worth anything, except maybe a few wheelbarrows full of paper.

Since the collapse is going to be pretty much worldwide, investing in other currency is going to be problematic as well.

Raising livestock and other foodstuffs may get you raided and left with a few handfuls of government scrip.

Stocks will be worth nothing and Bonds will have be worth the full faith and credit of whichever place issued them.

Disappear up into the empty lands, take your guns, ammunition, and terrorist recipe book. Bringing a reloader is a good idea too.

I'll miss you guys and gals.

I live on because I have medicine. When the collapse comes, I may have a few months before the body fails.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

Correct. Right up until that bill comes due you are a-ok.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

I specifically addressed this. Can you read my posts please?

Heh ...

Arathain's arguing with the dictionary based on an appeal to popularity, an appeal to tradition, and hasty generalization.

This should be fun.

_________________

Heh. No, I'm not. Not at all. You'd know that if you read my posts.



So eloquently stated, that it just bears repeating.

Here, let me help you out, cuz I'm a nice guy.



Acceptance of the definition as written - no argument. Clarification on where I'm coming from and why.



Clarifications on how I'm applying the definition, what basis I'm using, and no argument with the definition as provided.



Further clarification of my position, and why, and submission of a definition from an alternate source that makes the same clarification I am. No argument with the original definition as provided.



Further clarification of where I am coming from and why. Contrast between "the real world" and the definition as originally provided. Discussion as to why I am discounting the definition as provided, and for what reason. No argument with the original definition, other than to say it's not used in the real world.

So, to sum up - I'm not arguing with the definition at all. I'm providing discussion on how things actually work. Things don't work the way they were defined in that particular dictionary (again, found a different definition elsewhere). As I stated, it wouldn't even make sense to do so.

So, I'll ask you to please read my posts before trolling.

Chapter 13

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko