Comment

And why, again, doesn’t medical debt get dissolved through insolvency… genius?

Because not all debt gets dissolved through insolvency in probate. You don’t even know the words. Because I know have experience on the subject in general, it’s rather trivial to see what the circumstances are in the US. Which are that because of FILIAL RESPONSIBLITY LAWS, not all debt gets dissolved through insolvency.

I feel like I’m kinda repeating myself here.

Comedian story isn’t plausible because child support debt doesn’t fall under filial responsibility laws. The end.

Source: your sweaty (and probably overweight) ass.

So now you’re on the “nuh-uh, my ‘nuh-uh’ is way more credible of a source than Wikipedia and Investopedia” rhetoric? Ugh. Remember how I called your rhetoric childish before? Yeah I take that back. In comparison, the earlier wasn’t this childish.

source

Sort:hotnew top

deranger@sh.itjust.works ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Child support debt isn’t medical debt and wouldn’t fall under filial responsibility laws. Source: the ones you’ve provided. Child support isn’t medical debt.

6’3” (1.9m) and 200lbs (90kg), not fat, but I am a bit sweaty at the moment, it’s summertime and to be expected at the end of the day.

source
- Dasus@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  It’s not a comprehensive list of all the filial laws nor does it state that child-support debt isn’t covered.
  
  A bit touchy about your size, are you? It’s not your height or weight which decree how fat you are. It’s your fat percentage. But even if I was wrong in assuming you’re part of the majority population of the US, which is slightly obese, that won’t change the facts of the matter.
  
  You are bizarrely aggressive at defending a random comedian discussing laws that do not pertain to you whatsoever.
  
  Just using Lemmy, my man, I feel absolutely no aggression whatsoever, but you saying that you perceive some let’s me know that I’ve got to you. Cheers. ;)
  
  Not all debt is dissolved through insolvency and that’s because of the filial responsibility laws which you said had “NOTHING to do” with this. But you’re not incapable of admitting when you’re wrong? :D
  
  source
  - deranger@sh.itjust.works ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    If you can find any kind of source that says child support falls under medical debt, which is the only reason filial responsibility exists, then I’ll admit that I’m wrong. I searched and I don’t see anything in any state laws that would indicate that you’re correct.
    
    It’s just weird that you’re resorting to personal attacks, after implying I’d be the one starting that. Usually people resort to the personal attacks when they have nothing else to fall back on. I haven’t really met many Finns before, is this just how you guys are over there?
    
    source
    Dasus@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    
    medical debt, which is the only reason filial responsibility
    
    ONLY REASON
    
    You just can’t help yourself from being wrong, gawddamnit. Like genuinely you’ve proven yourself wrong several times in this thread. In hilariously simple ways, like when saying “oh if that’s how filial responsibility laws work in Finland” when the article literally begins “… are laws in the United States.”.
    
    Let’s have another look at that link, shall we?
    
    en.m.wikipedia.org/…/Filial_responsibility_laws
    
    #Support required
    
    #Typically, these laws obligate adult children (or depending on the state, other family members) to pay for their indigent parents’/relatives’ food, clothing, shelter and medical needs.
    
    Weird how there’s a bunch of words before “medical needs”, innit, buddy?
    
    Like I said earlier, you really should just say “okay, I was wrong, TIL, thanks sir”, and bugger away. “Gracefully” isn’t an option anymore.
    
    Like I said, you’d try to make this personal. Me being personal doesn’t have anything to do with it. You’re just desperate to make it personal, because you’re not qualified to talk on the subject and you know it.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments