4 ms·

It's important, I just mean that the law isn't obvious here, so we shouldn't jump from "Lambda made a false statement about the California law" to "Lambda is ma

by lacker 5y ago

It's important, I just mean that the law isn't obvious here, so we shouldn't jump from "Lambda made a false statement about the California law" to "Lambda is maliciously trying to mislead students".

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tw04 5y ago
How is the law not obvious? There are a handful of things that are exempt from bankruptcy, "income sharing" isn't one of those things. Going through the list of exempted items, I can't find a single one where I go "oh, yes that sort of applies". http://www.californiabankruptcy.info/exemptions.html http://www.californiabankruptcy.info/exemptions.html
- pseudalopex 5y ago
  That lists property someone can keep. Did you mean this page?[1] [1] http://www.californiabankruptcy.info/nondischarge.html http://www.californiabankruptcy.info/nondischarge.html
- bpodgursky 5y ago
  Well, student loans _are_ one of those things. ISAs seem a lot closer to "student loans" than, like, a new boat. I don't think this is totally unreasonable.
  - skellera 5y ago
    That’s giving way too much credit. I’m sure if you asked 100 people if ISAs from a bootcamp were the same as government backed student loans, you’d get pretty close to 100 “no.”
    - bpodgursky 5y ago
      Private student loans are exempt too...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
amznthrwaway 5y ago
It is reasonable to assume bad faith, given that all available evidence is that Austen is a pathologically dishonest sociopath who PG has personally coached to ignore valid criticism unless the critics are white billionaires. Lambda is bad. Austen is one of the worst motherfuckers on the planet. Captures far more value than his piece of shit “school” creates by tricking desperate people. Fuck Austen, and fuck Paul graham for personally encouraging his dishonest sociopathy. Worthless pieces of shit, both of them.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> I just mean that the law isn't obvious here Are you seriously arguing that it is plausible that Lambda School has a good faith mistaken belief that they were qualified to participate in federal Title IV financial aid, but somehow made no mention or use of that qualification other than falsely claiming debts to the school were “qualified education loans” with limited dischargeability in bankruptcy? Or are you claiming that it is not obvious that Title IV financial aid eligibility is a requirement for loans for a school to be qualified education loans? That...strains credulity. > "Lambda made a false statement about the California law" Actually they broke California law by making a false statement of federal law. (“qualified education loan” is a federal-law category that determines both if the loan qualifies for the student loan interest deduction and if it has the “undue-hardship-only” discharge rule im bankruptcy.)

by lacker 5y ago

It's important, I just mean that the law isn't obvious here, so we shouldn't jump from "Lambda made a false statement about the California law" to "Lambda is maliciously trying to mislead students".

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

tw04 5y ago

How is the law not obvious? There are a handful of things that are exempt from bankruptcy, "income sharing" isn't one of those things. Going through the list of exempted items, I can't find a single one where I go "oh, yes that sort of applies". http://www.californiabankruptcy.info/exemptions.html http://www.californiabankruptcy.info/exemptions.html

pseudalopex 5y ago
That lists property someone can keep. Did you mean this page?[1] [1] http://www.californiabankruptcy.info/nondischarge.html http://www.californiabankruptcy.info/nondischarge.html
bpodgursky 5y ago
Well, student loans _are_ one of those things. ISAs seem a lot closer to "student loans" than, like, a new boat. I don't think this is totally unreasonable.
- skellera 5y ago
  That’s giving way too much credit. I’m sure if you asked 100 people if ISAs from a bootcamp were the same as government backed student loans, you’d get pretty close to 100 “no.”
  - bpodgursky 5y ago
    Private student loans are exempt too...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

amznthrwaway 5y ago

It is reasonable to assume bad faith, given that all available evidence is that Austen is a pathologically dishonest sociopath who PG has personally coached to ignore valid criticism unless the critics are white billionaires. Lambda is bad. Austen is one of the worst motherfuckers on the planet. Captures far more value than his piece of shit “school” creates by tricking desperate people. Fuck Austen, and fuck Paul graham for personally encouraging his dishonest sociopathy. Worthless pieces of shit, both of them.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> I just mean that the law isn't obvious here Are you seriously arguing that it is plausible that Lambda School has a good faith mistaken belief that they were qualified to participate in federal Title IV financial aid, but somehow made no mention or use of that qualification other than falsely claiming debts to the school were “qualified education loans” with limited dischargeability in bankruptcy? Or are you claiming that it is not obvious that Title IV financial aid eligibility is a requirement for loans for a school to be qualified education loans? That...strains credulity. > "Lambda made a false statement about the California law" Actually they broke California law by making a false statement of federal law. (“qualified education loan” is a federal-law category that determines both if the loan qualifies for the student loan interest deduction and if it has the “undue-hardship-only” discharge rule im bankruptcy.)