Wattzzup
Well-Known Member
Ok buddy
Joe steals Nancy's purse
- Thread starter ActionianJacksonian
- Start date
doublejj
Well-Known Member
Make student loans eligible for bankruptcy again and see how fast the cost of tuition goes down. Right now loan companies will loan you money knowing that you cannot file bankruptcy on the loan. It wasn't like that in the 50's. The cost of college went up in the late 70's when the laws were changed & loan companies could make loans for almost any amount because they had bankruptcy immunity.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
And for what reason were they immune from bankruptcy?
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I'm guessing its Asperger's
You didn't read the transcripts of the court case, you just believed what you were told and vomited your words out in a post to me. Read the transcript. The judge mocked the lawyer because he had no case. NARA specifically empowers archivists acting under it's powers discretion. The judge very clearly said so and also said he doesn't have authority to overrule them. Then he threw the case out due to lack of standing.
The case was laughed out of court. Figuratively speaking, that is. The judge had the wisdom to laugh after he left the court room
I've pointed this out to you several times, yet you cling to the notion that your belief is greater than fact.
The Constitution is a framework, it gives latitude to future generations who are willing to work within that framework to govern as it sees fit. That is democracy. If you don't like the laws, change them. Instead your MAGA GOP, which can no longer muster the votes to enable them direct change, your MAGA GOP is working hard to overthrow the Constitution.
OK, so go ahead and bleat out another fact free appeal to emotion. I have no expectation that you can surmount your mental illness.
doublejj
Well-Known Member
bump..1978 - Bankruptcy Reform Act
Congress overhauled the Bankruptcy Code and added Section 523(a)(. Under that section, education loans owed to a governmental unit or a nonprofit institution of higher education were nondischargeable for 5 years from the date the loan entered repayment unless the debtor was experiencing undue hardship.
1979 - Act on August 14th
The 1979 Act did two things. First, it made it so that a student loan made by the government or made under a government-funded program or a nonprofit institution was nondischargeable. This change made sure that a loan made under the Federal Perkins Loan program received discharge protection.
A Perkins Loan is a federal student loan made by a school to a student. The funds for the loan program come from a pool contributed to by both the government and the school.
Before the 1979 Act, it was arguable that a bankruptcy court could decide the section didn't apply to a loan made under the Perkins loan program. This change closed that loophole.
Second, the Act also changed the Bankruptcy Code by extending the 5-year period when the student loan borrower took a deferment or forbearance.
This change made it more difficult to tell when 5 years had passed. No longer could you look at when the last loan entered repayment and add 5 years.
You had to pull the actual payment history for the student debt to see if there were any deferments or forbearances.
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
It is important to remember that the Constitution was written to accommodate slavers. It was a condition for getting it past the legislators.
It is a reason why I think of strict constructionists as a slaver legacy.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Liberalism in the US sense was ginned up by wealthy white people as an alternative to the New Deal. When it failed, wealthy white people rallied to Reagan's style of disinformation that cast the New Deal as an attack on family, religion, freedom and gave favor to the undeserving "poor" (a dog whistle for black and brown people). 60 years of GOP disinformation have morphed into the GOP MAGA, which I agree is unsettlingly similar to the post Reconstruction South, which was an outgrowth of the Antebellum slave plantation economy in the South. The point being, yes, strict constructionist legacy comes from the Constitution of the slave plantation society. To them the 13th amendment and others after it don't exist. But also, it is funded and supported by wealthy white people who are willing to accept any ideology as long as the can continue to enrich themselves over and above all others. So MAGA GOP is an unholy alliance between would be slavers and agnostic billionaires.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
But the judge in the case was a woman. I can even tell you her name and her conclusions if you like. They are as I stated. I'm not sure why you are larping like you actually read it but it's really funny watching you pretend.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
lulz
This is typical of Asperger sufferers. They can't exclude unimportant minutia so that they can focus on what is important.
PJ Diaz
Well-Known Member
Who the fuck said I was ok with it? I voted against bush and participated in multiple anti-war marches back when he was in office. Not sure how you somehow came up with that assessment of me.
It takes a lot more than just throwing money at the problem. It takes hard work, but hard work takes money.
How Much Would It Cost To End Homelessness In America?
Learn more about the homeless crisis and how you can help people who are unhoused.
www.globalgiving.org
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Why can't you highlight the obvious answer to what I asked, it's in your quote? I'm just asking to see if you can draw the line yourself:
"1978 - Bankruptcy Reform Act
Congress overhauled the Bankruptcy Code and added Section 523(a)(
. Under that section, education loans owed to a governmental unit or a nonprofit institution of higher education were nondischargeable for 5 years from the date the loan entered repayment unless the debtor was experiencing undue hardship.1979 - Act on August 14th
The 1979 Act did two things. First, it made it so that a student loan made by the government or made under a government-funded program or a nonprofit institution was nondischargeable. This change made sure that a loan made under the Federal Perkins Loan program received discharge protection.
A Perkins Loan is a federal student loan made by a school to a student. The funds for the loan program come from a pool contributed to by both the government and the school.
Before the 1979 Act, it was arguable that a bankruptcy court could decide the section didn't apply to a loan made under the Perkins loan program. This change closed that loophole.
Second, the Act also changed the Bankruptcy Code by extending the 5-year period when the student loan borrower took a deferment or forbearance.
This change made it more difficult to tell when 5 years had passed. No longer could you look at when the last loan entered repayment and add 5 years.
You had to pull the actual payment history for the student debt to see if there were any deferments or forbearances."
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Good point. I stepped in that one.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
So did that Jackass, @ActionianJacksonian .
Last edited:
PJ Diaz
Well-Known Member
I've been anti-war all of my life. I've never voted for a republican in a major election. In the past decade however it seems that the war mongering role has somehow shifted, with Democrats being the party to more support war. I was a democrat until the past decade, when I pulled my card, and am now registered with no party affiliation.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Yet you failed to highlight any important bit to back up any of your assertions. You read the whole saga but failed to note the main character the rendered the decision is a female that is a liberal Obama appointee?
Noone believes that.
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Nat'l Archives & Records Admin., 845 F. Supp. 2d 288 | Casetext Search + Citator
Read Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Nat'l Archives & Records Admin., 845 F. Supp. 2d 288, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database
casetext.com
"JUDICIAL WATCH, INC., Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
Michael Bekesha, Paul J. Orfanedes, Judicial Watch, Inc., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. Daniel Schwei, Elizabeth J. Shapiro, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant.
AMY BERMAN JACKSON"
"Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President's term and in his sole discretion, see44 U.S.C. § 2203(b), so the Deputy Archivist could not and did not make a classification decision that can be challenged here."
"Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records."
"Because the audiotapes are not physically in the government's possession, defendant submits that it would be required to seize them directly from President Clinton in order to assume custody and control over them. Def.'s Mem. in Support of Mot. to Dismiss at 1, 15–18. Defendant considers this to be an “extraordinary request” that is “unfounded, contrary to the PRA's express terms, and contrary to traditional principles of administrative law.” Id. at 1. The Court agrees."
The DOJ was the Defendant. See header.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
That all fogdog read of the case was that it was dismissed, and simply assumes that makes his argument when in fact it serves to the opposite.
Original point was that it takes PRA off the table, idk why the dog brought it up here, must be drunk.