FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION

No argument from me regardin' the profligacy of Congress, c. i. - thats a real sore point here, too. Pork, mismanagement, runaway entitlements, and waste are the biggest problems our government faces, and nobody seems inclined to really step up, take responsibility, and do somethin' corrective. I get real upset about that.

Now, I just don't agree that a formulized, standardized, wholly objective methodology for determinin' ability to pay is subjective. Havin' read the legislation itself, and havin' followed the debates in both Houses, as opposed to what the punditocracy of either camp says about it, I note as well there are numerous safeguards, checks, and controls. I see the law as closin' long-abused loopholes, and believe it will be of overall beneficial impact upon the National Solvency. I believe as well that in certain respects, it doesn't go far enough; what was weakened to placate the Democrats bothers me, but for now, I can live with it. There's always the hope the results of the '06 and '08 elections will serve further to lessen the Democrats' ability to hinder needed reforms.

Have you talked to any New Yorkers yet?

Problems with the new bankruptcy law.

I suspect this is as well an excellent description of the process behind the fall of the Dollar relative to the Euro. We are a large net importer, and a natuiral consequence of this is the relative fall in our currency, particularly in relation to regions which enjoy a large favorable trade balance with us. Canada and Europe afe both large net exporters in their trade with the U.S.

Certainly our budget deficit contributes to this as well. However, it is worth noting that U.S. public debt as a % of GDP is not particularly high relative to European standards. I believe the Bush administration calculated (rightly or wrongly, as you wish) that they didn't have the political leverage to get both tax reductions and spending cuts during the first term (they risked getting neither and losing the election), and, instead, opted for tax cuts to stimulate growth, leaving the spending cuts for the second term. This appears to be what is happening now and I think it is a reasonable strategy.

Another contributing factor is the very sluggish performance of European economies.

Yeah, I read Rao's whine some time ago - entirely unsurprisin' that bankruptcy attorney types are upset their golden goose is on the grill. Unsurprisin' as well that bankruptcy attorneys are advertisin' and advisin' all over the place for folks to file now, before the law kicks in. Them types are real disturbed at the prospect of havin' to find another way to make a gougin' - excuse me, a livin'. Damn - they might even haftta do some real work for a change insteada just chargin' for filin' routine forms and puttin' in perfunctory appearances at procedural hearin's. How terrible.


Here's a link to that whole article - What's wrong with S. 256, Let Us Count The Ways (Download note: 14 page .pdf file)

This hasn't much to do with the EU though - I think it prolly would be best to split this off into a new topic of its own if its to be pursued.

Yeah, isn't that a shame?

Just to clarify my take on this, before movin' on, a 2002 Harvard Law School study, "Financial Collapse and Class Status - Who Goes Bankrupt (Download Note: approx. 30 page .pdf file) reveals some interestin' facts. The top 3 reasons for personal bankruptcy, comprisin' over 90% of total filin's, are, in order, Job Loss, Medical Crisis, and Divorce. Fair enough, no real surprise there. However, the study found the average - average, not median - individual filin' for personal bankruptcy has after-tax earnin's of $20K or less. Given that, the average filer will not qualify for repayment under the new law, or, in fact, be subject to any change whatsoever compared to pre-legislation-change conditions, period. The people who legitimately merit protection under the law remain protected as before. Those who previously had been able to avail themselves of loopholes to shield themselves from the law, thereby abusin' the law, now will find a free ride much, much harder to grab. All thats changed is that bankruptcy practice has lost some of its career appeal in the legal trade, and skippin' on debt has become a little tougher. All in all, the big losers here are bankrupty attorneys and financially capable, but irresponsible, deadbeats. Interestin', but wholly unsurprisin', to note the folks The Democrats figure need protection.

timber, I ain't no democrat, so quit labeling me as one. Your opinion is your opinion. I have mine. What I posted to explain the problems with the new bankruptcy law was written by an attorney. I have no background in bankruptcy law nor care to comment on it. You can argue with the author all you like; your opinion doesn't mean crap to me.

Then why did you paste the rather long piece in the bankrupcy law? If you didn't want comment or opinion, why did you post it? It certainly appeared to me that you were inviting comment and opinion.

Now, I could be wrong, but I don't believe I applied any label, identifier, or other qualificative, negative or positive, to you the person. I don't see that I did - I note I characterized an assertion you made as "poppycock" - which I think it was. No background in bankruptcy law - or any other sort of law - is required to have and express an opinion relative to the matter - helpful perhaps, but neither necessary, nor claimed by either of us.

Regardless what the author of the piece you quoted at length (without attribution), by way of direct rebutttal to an earlier point of mine, does for a living, what he wrote was his opinion, just his opinion, nothin' more, nothin' less - just as you and I offer opinions. You apparently endorse Rao's opinion. I don't agree with Rao's opinion; in fact I think he's dead wrong. As mentioned, I have read Rao's entire article - and I provided a link to the original opinion piece.

I offered my own opinion, in answer to you, and cited statistics from a peer-reviewed-and-accepted, published Harvard Law School study in support of my position. If Rao were here, I'd prolly argue the point with him. He isn't, and he isn't pressing his argument, you are. Its of little importance what you may think of my opinion, or I of yours, beyond that we are entitled to hold and express opinions as we wish, subject, of course, to the constraints of civility. Thats pretty much what mature, rational discussion is about, IMO. I happen to enjoy civil discussions, whether or not I agree wth the person or persons at the other end of the discussion. Its not about "who", its about "what".

I have no problem continuin' the bankrupty law debate elsewhere, if you - or anyone else - wish, BTW - but for the sake of this thread and its participants, lets drop this digression of ours right here, OK?

I'm trying to find a source on what the revised "Stability and Growth Pact" says, specifically which exceptions are made for the 3% deficit and 60% national debt rules. Can any of you give me one? I'd appreciate it, because I seem out of luck on sources about the actual facts. All I can find is lots of opinion about the revision.

I did a bit of searching and found only commentary on the violations of the former terms, etc. I have the impression that the whole thing has drifted into the grey area of unenforced rules, institutionalized disagreement, and a collective waiting for a better moment. Such devices are often a reasonable approach to difficult issues, and the EU has done this before.

Well, unfortunately the complete morning - until now - only the French version of the «CONSEIL EUROPÉEN DE BRUXELLES - 22 et 23 MARS 2005 - CONCLUSIONS DE LA PRÉSIDENCE» is online (although the main website offers one of it as 'English' :wink: ) http://ue.eu.int/cms3_fo/showPage.ASP?lang=en

georgeob, Fair question. I posted it because it does disagree with many points of the new bankruptcy laws. I don't know how it will actually affect consumers, but that seems to be the primary issue for those interested in this subject. I've also read a piece in our local newspaper some months ago about the unintended repercussions to responsible consumers as a result of this new law. I'm not in a position to argue the pros and cons of every article I post; I usually try to present the opposing view for whatever it's worth.

Thank you, Walter! Your link lead me to a document, which referenced a document, which I Googled for, (...); anyway, after some tenacious searching, here it is:

"Improving the Implemtentation of the Stability and Growth Pact" (PDF).

I haven't read the document yet; but on the first glance, it appears that George is right: the EU council wrote a document that carefully avoided anything that might remotely look like a candid account of what it was doing, then hid it in some obscure corner in the basement of their webserver, behind a door saying "Caution -- bloodthirsty leopard". (Apologies to Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.)

I am so thrilled to find this thread. But do I have to read the 124 pages before I can jump into the discussion?

Bram, that's up to you. Sometimes, I go back and follow a member's interaction through to the present day. I find that some members have a way with words; a their writing "speaks" to me.

How about the rest of you? Any opinions?

Bram, First of all, Welcome to A2K. It's really not necessary to read all of the previous posts on any thread if you wish to participate. However, be prepared to defend yourself if you post anything that has been challenged by another poster. Go ahead and put your foot in the water; that's the only way you'll know where you stand. If you feel comfortable, you can jump in.

Read the last page or so, you'll be fine.

Oh, thanks, guys (and gals? ) and thanks for the welcome, Cicerone. I did take a quick look at some pages, and boy, did the subjects change along the way!

As I am pretty new at this EU thing - and Walter can attest to that - I am going to read a few pages more to get acquainted with the "flow" of the discussions that had been going on. There is that other link that is posted on page 1 that I would like to scan too.

Now, where can I find the time to read all the nice threads in this forum???

By the way, are those pictures of yourselves? (not the little kitty, of course). That's cool!!