Saturday, November 23, 2013

Occupy had another scam

This article thinks it's wonderful that Occupy Wall street scammed a lot of people out of money by "buying" the debt and then telling those who owed it they are off the hook.

The project is run by Strike Debt, an offshoot of Occupy Wall Street, which believes that people shouldn't go into debt for necessities like education, healthcare, and housing. Through the Rolling Jubilee project, its goal isn't just to help out individuals but to highlight the fact that it's legal to "trade in people’s misfortune."
In other words, if you play by the rules, you are stupid.

If you buy a modest home you can afford, you are a fool: why not get a huge mortgage you can't afford and then cry when they try to kick you out.

And if you decide to get a nursing degree at the local community college instead of studying feminist studies at an ivy league college, because you don't want to go 100 thousand in debt for a degree that won't get you a job, ditto.

More fool you: working hard studying biochemistry and pharmacology when you could be floating with easy classes for four years.

Note that stuff about medical debt?

What happens is that you end up with docs quitting, like I did, because they couldn't make those huge malpractice insurance payments required to stay in practice (in my last year of private practice, my insurance bill was equal to my salary, and my unpaid bills was twice that amount)

or maybe increasing their prices so that they make enough profit off of those who pay to keep the practice afloat.

Yes, some people are poor, and need help (I usually wrote off these patients). But what about the one who "borrowed" a thousand dollars for new furniture even though she owed me only a couple hundred for her last baby?

Yes, one of the problem is that now docs are hired by big medicine businesses, but that just means they will increase the price of an office visit to cover the deadbeats (and to make up for the Medicare payments that just went down to get money for Obamacare: something that I haven't seen written about in the press).

No comments: