3 ms·

That's not at all how corporate or personal bankruptcies work. You exactly prove my point.

sleepybrett 6mo ago
.. but in this case: https://www.npr.org/2025/08/13/nx-s1-5501648/alex-jones-infowars-receiver https://www.npr.org/2025/08/13/nx-s1-5501648/alex-jones-info... "If Infowars' brand and property are sold, Jones could still start a new company or work for someone else. But because the bankruptcy judge ruled Jones' behavior "willful and malicious," the bankruptcy will not erase Jones' debt, meaning families can keep claiming any money he makes in the future until he pays the $1.3 billion he owes them."
- themafia 6mo ago
  Take some time to see how bankruptcy works. You cannot take all of someones property, nor can you take all of their paycheck. There are specific limits. You can also still come to an alternate settlement with your creditors. This idea that he "can't have toys" or the court is "going to take is cat" because he has debts is insanity. Let's say it's your family member. And they go bankrupt due to medical bills. Is this how you want the system to treat them? Justice isn't an opportunity to demean people you don't like. People will tolerate all kinds of bad precedent and injustice simply because of their emotions. Which might be fine, but to see it drizzle onto the front page of Hacker News, I have to agree with the OP, is annoying.
  - sleepybrett 6mo ago
    I know how bankruptcy works, i've seen it up close. The problem, for him, here is that bankruptcy does not absolve him from his debts on this particular judgement because of his own behavior and choices. That's on him, if it is 'demeaning' so be it. He could have cooperated with the original trial instead of stonewalling discovery until he was dealt a default judgement, he could have cooperated with the other trial but he didn't, he could have not tried to hide his assets in the bankruptcy process but he didn't... he could have done SO MANY THINGS. But he chose not to. fuck him.

.. but in this case: https://www.npr.org/2025/08/13/nx-s1-5501648/alex-jones-infowars-receiver https://www.npr.org/2025/08/13/nx-s1-5501648/alex-jones-info... "If Infowars' brand and property are sold, Jones could still start a new company or work for someone else. But because the bankruptcy judge ruled Jones' behavior "willful and malicious," the bankruptcy will not erase Jones' debt, meaning families can keep claiming any money he makes in the future until he pays the $1.3 billion he owes them."

themafia 6mo ago
Take some time to see how bankruptcy works. You cannot take all of someones property, nor can you take all of their paycheck. There are specific limits. You can also still come to an alternate settlement with your creditors. This idea that he "can't have toys" or the court is "going to take is cat" because he has debts is insanity. Let's say it's your family member. And they go bankrupt due to medical bills. Is this how you want the system to treat them? Justice isn't an opportunity to demean people you don't like. People will tolerate all kinds of bad precedent and injustice simply because of their emotions. Which might be fine, but to see it drizzle onto the front page of Hacker News, I have to agree with the OP, is annoying.
- sleepybrett 6mo ago
  I know how bankruptcy works, i've seen it up close. The problem, for him, here is that bankruptcy does not absolve him from his debts on this particular judgement because of his own behavior and choices. That's on him, if it is 'demeaning' so be it. He could have cooperated with the original trial instead of stonewalling discovery until he was dealt a default judgement, he could have cooperated with the other trial but he didn't, he could have not tried to hide his assets in the bankruptcy process but he didn't... he could have done SO MANY THINGS. But he chose not to. fuck him.