However it was designed, it shouldn’t be allowed to be abused by rich fucks not giving up their millionaire lifestyle while continuing to rack up additional debt/judgements. You know these assholes are proponents of limiting what people can use welfare for (no steak or other “luxury” food styled arguments). Perhaps he should be limited to what a person on welfare is able to afford? You want to continue to pull in an income for “speeches” or whatever bullshit these grifters do for money? All but the bare minimum get frozen by the court until judgements are settled.
You’ll have to specify yuu don’t support it when describing it in a way that can be confused as a defense for it if you really want to avoid it. Saying, “nah it doesn’t work like that.” is very, very easy to take as an adversarial statement.
It doesn’t imply defense, but it can come across as a defensive posture. Poe’s Law kinda’ sucks to deal with. It’s one of many reasons good speech writers are kept around. It’s not just about having correct English or making logically correct statements.
Exactly. You shouldn’t come out of bankruptcy homeless, but you should absolutely be stripped of all but your smallest house and all trusts in your name.
However it was designed, it shouldn’t be allowed to be abused by rich fucks not giving up their millionaire lifestyle while continuing to rack up additional debt/judgements. You know these assholes are proponents of limiting what people can use welfare for (no steak or other “luxury” food styled arguments). Perhaps he should be limited to what a person on welfare is able to afford? You want to continue to pull in an income for “speeches” or whatever bullshit these grifters do for money? All but the bare minimum get frozen by the court until judgements are settled.
I don’t disagree with you.
Just describing the existing system.
This is becoming a running thing for me on Kbin. Describing the system and facing people who are angry about the system.
I don’t endorse it. I think it is bullshit. But it is what it is until we figure out how to make them fix it.
You’ll have to specify yuu don’t support it when describing it in a way that can be confused as a defense for it if you really want to avoid it. Saying, “nah it doesn’t work like that.” is very, very easy to take as an adversarial statement.
It doesn’t imply defense, but it can come across as a defensive posture. Poe’s Law kinda’ sucks to deal with. It’s one of many reasons good speech writers are kept around. It’s not just about having correct English or making logically correct statements.
shoots the messenger
Exactly. You shouldn’t come out of bankruptcy homeless, but you should absolutely be stripped of all but your smallest house and all trusts in your name.
Your smallest house? How about sell everything and start renting an apartment like every working person?