Containment What will happen when Barb dies?

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Philosophy Phil said:
I normally don't get upset at users here for being exceptional, it is to be expected. This is how I view Chris as well, I don't get upset, it is to be expected. You however are being obstinate in your belief, which has been on multiple times been called incorrect, on an assertion you believe to be certain. This is either sheer exceptionalism, or you have a personal interest in seeing that your assertion holds true; in which we will perform this dissection of your motives live before the whole of the Farms. This is not because "I am a bully" but rather, "You have acted so exceptional, that you are essentially asking to be dissected."

But before that, let's rip the teeth out of your argument by addressing the strawman you've proposed. Child Support=Passing of a Family Member.

First off, there are federal statutes regarding Child Support, meaning that most states have some form of Generally Accepted Practice when it comes to this. This is because Child Support is an idea of "Maintaining Life." However, Child Support claims are specified directly within the state of the occurrence. Meaning that if you knock someone up, stay in the state long enough to be brought to court, (whether this be via free will or court ordered[bounty hunter]) then you pay child support according to that state's statutes. However, if you leave the state before doing this, then you can get away with it a bit. However, if the woman who is knocked up pursues the case, the attorneys of the state of conception will talk with the attorneys of the state of paternal reception, and then the case happens. However, this is only true BECAUSE each state has its own Generally Accepted Child Support methodology, and the process takes a long while; but this is okay because the child has plenty of years to grow and live. It's not like a rotting body.

So, let's simplify that down a little bit for your exceptional chimp like mind to understand. Child support cases are different because why? Because there is a generally accepted statute in each state and the period in which the main person of interest is concerned (the child) is 18 years. If Cole and Barb had an incest son under the age of 18, he could, and would be obligated to pay child support if the case was approached.

Now, when it comes to the Passing of Relatives, there is not a generally accepted statute across the 50 states, this falls more under the "Taxable Personal Property" example I had brought up to you before. This is because it is to be assumed (On a general population basis) that the immediate PROXIMITY of the deceased is to take care of arrangements, and not the immediate BLOODLINE of the deceased. The reason the case can't be opened as per funeral arrangements because the person of interest (the deceased) only has a week until something HAS to be done; whether this is by the local government (Cheapo Funeral on Tax payer's dime), the individual's PROXIMITY (Chandler family/friends in Virginia)[Due to Virginia statutes, as you quoted before, this means ALL FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE RESIDENTS OF VIRGINIA HAVE SOME RESPONSIBILITY IF THE DIRECT CHAIN OF PROMIXITY IS UNABLE TO FULFILL THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES.] [Examples of Failure to Fulfill; Severe Mental Illness [As in needing to be held inpatient on a regular basis], Incarceration, Military Deployment, etc; any of which Chris cannot claim, [laziness and stress are not legal excusues]] by third party benefactor (Kiwifarms takes the body from the Morgue and jettisons it out of a cargo plane; their Church helps pay a part of the funeral.)

Let's simplify this for you though, because I don't believe your mind is able to process these concepts. Let's put it into a simple word problem for you.
"Null has a son named a semi autistic, but functioning son Bluespike whom he hasn't talked to in over 30 years and the two live in seperate states; and lives with his other son, Marvin who is very autistic but passes the bar for "fit for active member of society" for the past 15 years. Null passes away, who is to arrange his funeral? The Son who he hasn't talked to in over 30 years, or The Son who he has lived with for the past 15? The answer, is The Son who he has lived with for the past 15, because there is a timeline of a week for arrangements to be completed, or else the local government, Kiwifarms, will feed his rotting corpse to the pig pen at the personal cost expense of the users."

Now we can go into "But muh Virginia statutes say..." which is fine and dandy; if the person of interest did not have a deadline of a week. When it comes to things such as "Finances and debt of the deceased" this is a matter completely different all together, however this is usually done via an attorney of the family, or a state assigned one. That is where things can get a bit tricky, HOWEVER; to pursue the matter in civil court would end up in more debt for the plaintiff than the defendant will be obligated to help pay, and a ruling is NOT guarenteed, especially the relationship status of the defendent and the deceased. Most debt (unless it is substaintual ) [500,000K+] is usually written off by collectors, and the proximity usually never goes out of state, or beyond siblings/children/parents.

To put this into perspective:
A: Chris and his immediate Proximity circle HAS to financially be responsible to Barb's funeral/burial costs, or its left up to the local Government.
B: Chris CAN seek to pursue Cole if Barb's debts ARE pushed unto him, citing the statute you posted.
C: Chris WOULD pay personal attorney's cost to address the matter, which would not be resolved for at least a year (meaning that the attorney's cost [unless pro bono] will exceed the debts that COULD exist
D: A ruling COULD say, "Okay Cole, you are obligated to pay a certain percentage of the deceased debts because you are genetic blood" however, this would not be a full as Chris is the genetic blood of the deceased.
E: A Ruling COULD say "Wow, it sounds like she didn't care about you whatsoever, you are not obligated to pay any of her debts, as you are not a resident of the state of the deceased." Which means Chris still HAS to pay the deceased debt, his NEW attorney debt, AND the court costs.

Why B-E won't happen: The debt COULD be written off, and if it isn't then that takes actual work, and ALOT of money; something of which Chris would not do. He'll make angry Facebook posts and ask for money. Chris is going to have to "Adult it" and face reality. Cole has no ties [other than genetic] to Barb, which would mean that he'd be on the proximity IF he lived in Virginia, due to the statute.

Now that the teeth are out the your argument, let's dissect you, Yop Yop, member since Janurary 19th, from Mexico, not even a week old to Kiwifarms.

Why, [if you are really from Mexico] do you think you understand how the Republic of the United States functions? You wouldn't understand it, unless you are from the United States, and work specifically in a legal fashion. I do not know of Mexican statutes so I don't voice opinion on them if I had them. So, your argument when it comes to speaker relevance has no basis.

Secondly, why are you adamant on defending Chris' position in this situation? Either: You are a White Knight [in which you deserve to be ridiculed] or You don't like people disagreeing with your headcanon [in which you deserve to be ridiculed]. Since you are a new member as of Friday, however seem relatively knowledgable about Chris' situation, it would appear to me that you are a secondary/tetiarary account of a previous user, aka "A sockpuppet" in which you deserve to be ridiculed. On a personal character basis, your argument has no basis. If you are a sincere new user who has just been lurking, then I will offer you the same advice as I was when I first started posting "Look, don't speak, and learn the culture before offering up an opinion, or be ridiculed for having one"; if you fight back or get upset about this, you will be publicly ridiculed for it. If you do it to the VERY wrong people, you WILL be doxxed. This is not a place where you can take your personal ego and flaunt it off like its all that. We do not care what your opinion is or how strongly you believe in it. If forum users are telling you "You are wrong, that is incorrect" then you best better accept that your opinion is wrong and incorrect, if you try to defend yourself against this, this only fuels our fire, makes us mark your posts as "Autistic, Dumb, or A-Log."

If you are not a sincerely new poster, then please kindly fuck off right where you came from. Your argument has been publicly disassembled, if you defend it at this point, you are either an extreme fool who deserves to be ridiculed, or there's something deeper about your dedication to Chris' position, in which you deserve to be ridiculed.

Tl;Dr edition.
"You are wrong, there's the door. Either shut up or get out."
Click to expand...
Point taken.
 
Yop Yop said:
"First, unlike child support laws, where federal law re- quires enforcement in all fifty states,15 it is unclear whether an adult child living outside of Virginia would be liable—state courts conflict on whether other state filial responsibility laws apply to their citizens.16
Click to expand...

You're talking theory in a thread about facts. Quite simply, Cole has no current connection to the state of Virginia that would confer personal jurisdiction over him of any kind. Nor does he have any property in Virginia. Even if there's a will or he theoretically has a share of Barb's estate under some kind of intestate succession, that would be purely in rem jurisdiction that might, in theory, allow the state to seize that, but that's purely hypothetical. Anyone with a secured interest, like the holder of any mortgage that exists, would be far ahead in priority to any judgment creditor.

(Having looked into this a wee bit, yes, there are some pretty weird outlying cases with laws like this. Here's an interesting article on the subject. Also there are a fair number of gloom and doom sagas about how creative debt collectors are about to make an industry out of this but it hasn't happened. Yet. And I'm pretty sure state legislatures would scramble to mothball these laws immediately if it did.)

So while this might be an amusing subject for a law journal, it is shit that just isn't going to happen. As in ever. At least not to Cole.

(I'm revoking my Dumb ratings though because you actually had a point.)

(Having looked into it even further, I just have to say you were right, I was wrong. Sorry. These laws exist, they have been enforced, while they probably won't be against Cole, wow. These laws are dumb, but they do exist.)
 
Last edited:
Regardless of whether or not Chris will inherit debt; he will end up drowning in it once barb dies and he can't use his mother to sponge up the debt of living
 
Harambe said:
Regardless of whether or not Chris will inherit debt; he will end up drowning in it once barb dies and he can't use his mother to sponge up the debt of living
Click to expand...
Barb's the one who's seriously bad with money. Chris is merely redneck tier.

Her credit card debt is like 3-4x Chris'. She's been sued a few times. Chris was sued once and promptly made some sort of payment plan, and we haven't heard anything about that since.

Like, the big difference is that Chris is easy to scare. Lawsuits and scary legal words are enough to get him to quake in his boots. Barb is more confident and tries to be some sort of slick huckster, but she's not good at it and gets caught.

Though Barb's been borrowing against Chris' life insurance and there's probably a few things he's cosigned with her for.
 
AnOminous said:
You're talking theory in a thread about facts. Quite simply, Cole has no current connection to the state of Virginia that would confer personal jurisdiction over him of any kind. Nor does he have any property in Virginia. Even if there's a will or he theoretically has a share of Barb's estate under some kind of intestate succession, that would be purely in rem jurisdiction that might, in theory, allow the state to seize that, but that's purely hypothetical. Anyone with a secured interest, like the holder of any mortgage that exists, would be far ahead in priority to any judgment creditor.

(Having looked into this a wee bit, yes, there are some pretty weird outlying cases with laws like this. Here's an interesting article on the subject. Also there are a fair number of gloom and doom sagas about how creative debt collectors are about to make an industry out of this but it hasn't happened. Yet. And I'm pretty sure state legislatures would scramble to mothball these laws immediately if it did.)

So while this might be an amusing subject for a law journal, it is shit that just isn't going to happen. As in ever. At least not to Cole.

(I'm revoking my Dumb ratings though because you actually had a point.)

(Having looked into it even further, I just have to say you were right, I was wrong. Sorry. These laws exist, they have been enforced, while they probably won't be against Cole, wow. These laws are dumb, but they do exist.)
Click to expand...
Well, thanks. I really don't know how this turned into the shit show that it did. But it's the Internet. I was really trying to make a point without powerleveling, because as I've said I have experienced this and seen some of it first hand just recently. And as Marvin said above about Chris cosigning on barbs cards, yea, he will inherit that debt. I did my best to fact-check myself before I made any statements.

Anyway, I'm still new and therefore have no leeway to argue with the farms, and I don't have any desire to sperg out. I'll let it go at that.
 
Marvin said:
Barb's the one who's seriously bad with money. Chris is merely redneck tier.

Her credit card debt is like 3-4x Chris'. She's been sued a few times. Chris was sued once and promptly made some sort of payment plan, and we haven't heard anything about that since.

Like, the big difference is that Chris is easy to scare. Lawsuits and scary legal words are enough to get him to quake in his boots. Barb is more confident and tries to be some sort of slick huckster, but she's not good at it and gets caught.

Though Barb's been borrowing against Chris' life insurance and there's probably a few things he's cosigned with her for.
Click to expand...

Money burns a hole in Barb's pocket, eh? Not surprised, honestly. The horde that they lived in not only shows bad hygiene and mental problems; but that Snorlax likely spent money on useless fuckin' shit that had never seen much use by the two.
 
Yop Yop said:
Well, thanks. I really don't know how this turned into the shit show that it did. But it's the Internet. I was really trying to make a point without powerleveling, because as I've said I have experienced this and seen some of it first hand just recently. And as Marvin said above about Chris cosigning on barbs cards, yea, he will inherit that debt. I did my best to fact-check myself before I made any statements.

Anyway, I'm still new and therefore have no leeway to argue with the farms, and I don't have any desire to sperg out. I'll let it go at that.
Click to expand...

Thank you for at least your admission at being new; however, you just posted something extremely passive aggressive which you will be beaten with a cane (again) for doing.

It turned into a shitshow because you stubbornly forced a point, that isn't just limited to the Internet; that's real life. Don't try to blame the situation on the environment, look at your own self and say "Hmm...maybe I was in the wrong here." Fighting against this, calling others exceptional when counter arguing is exceptionalism at its finest. It's like saying "Nuh uh, you're a doo doo head." That's not okay to do in real life, and its going to be called out when you do it here.

It's understandable to make an opinion based off an experience, but its wise to say "In my experience...in my opinion, etc." Then you won't have your shitshow, as because most normal people know experience/opinion does not equal fact. People won't call it power-leveling if you say that, unless you go into ridiculous amounts of detail.

The two things about your post that really get under my skin, is 1. You threw a "See, I was right all along because I have this slightly relevant evidence to corroborate it." This means you haven't given up on the viewpoint, despite it being disassembled. Its a very passive aggressive thing to do. 2. The ending of "I'll let it go at that." reinforces the passive aggressive "Haha I was right." You were wrong, you did it wrong, and as such you got beaten with a cane for it. If you want to "Let it go" then let it go, don't keep talking and trying to pull out some sembelence of a self perceived victory for yourself." You dun goofed, accept it and move on. Don't be a beta dick like in your post.

As per the follow up from Anomious, I'll agree with him; there are strange and weird laws all across America that are enforcable. An example of this is in Waynesboro Virginia where "It is illegal for a female motorist to drive her car along Main Street unless her husband is walking in front of the vehicle waving a red flag in his hands." This is still enforceable, however this does not make it a regular concrete thing that is to be assumed in all cases, but rather in specific cases. Assuming specifics does not equate law of the land.

Now as per contract law is concerned, "If Chris Chandler has co-signed on debt with Barbara Chandler; then that debt is equally shared between the both of them. If one party fails to pay, the other must; if they both don't, then they both suffer credit penalities. That is contract law, and has nothing to do with inheritance of debt. You sign for something, you pay for it. Now if Barb's individual debt (signed individually) exceeds a total of 500,000$, Creditors in Virginia (citing the Debt Inheritance) can go after immediate proximity of Barbara's survivors. (Chris, Siblings, etc.) However; this is highly situational. There is precedent for collections means, but this does not equate to anything absolute, it comes down to the collectors themselves to decide if it is worth pursuing, if the cost exceeds the means, its usually not taken. Now collectors are vultures if they decide that you are worth the hunt, and will hunt you down until you eventually die and given what Marvin said this is sad because it sounds like Chris would easily be steamrolled by collectors. Regardless, neither prove your argument that you tried to passively still cling to.

Cole is not fiduciary responsible whatsoever (like you claimed before) ; Chris MAY be responsible for Barb's individual debt (citing your research)[however does not equate to an absolute as you claimed before], Chris WILL be responsible for their shared debt. (Which is due to contract law, rather than your cited one)

Now, let this be done and over with for good; and let's go back to watching Chris being Chris.
 
Plasmid Salamander said:
Barb is abusive and she feels threatened by Chris' independence because she needs him, I read somewhere in this thread that Barb has borrowed against his life insurance and used his credit cards to pay off hers (I might be misquoting that user though) she isn't responsible with money and therefore she uses Chris as her personal ATM.
She's manipulated him and made Chris dependent on her so she can continue looking out for her self-serving interests.

I'm not 100% sure on this but I don't think Chris is there by choice. Barb keeps him there by guilt tripping Chris and threatening suicide so she can kick him around some more and stick her hand in his pocket.
Click to expand...

Seriously??? No, hate to say this but Chris is taking 14BC by choice. Whenever anyone, even his so called "theoretical ex's" ask him if he wants to move out or has plans to move out,the answer is always a no. Whether it be because his autism, or because he would miss spooning with his geriatric mother, he has stated that he doesn't want to leave because he's not ready for it yet, he's comfortable, and he would miss Barb. Even when asked if he had a girlfriend, he has stated that she would be allowed to move into the horde. On top of everything, even if Chris did move out, he would have to pay rent, and as we all know, Chris fails at saving money, so instead of paying rent, said money would go to Legos, makeup, whips, chains, dildos, etc. We know from Marvin that Chris does know how to budget, however I don't think he's on the same level as we are.
 
nvrwastetree said:
Seriously??? No, hate to say this but Chris is taking 14BC by choice. Whenever anyone, even his so called "theoretical ex's" ask him if he wants to move out or has plans to move out,the answer is always a no. Whether it be because his autism, or because he would miss spooning with his geriatric mother, he has stated that he doesn't want to leave because he's not ready for it yet, he's comfortable, and he would miss Barb. Even when asked if he had a girlfriend, he has stated that she would be allowed to move into the horde. On top of everything, even if Chris did move out, he would have to pay rent, and as we all know, Chris fails at saving money, so instead of paying rent, said money would go to Legos, makeup, whips, chains, dildos, etc. We know from Marvin that Chris does know how to budget, however I don't think he's on the same level as we are.
Click to expand...

I think it's both of them. Barb doesn't want Chris to leave, Chris actually does want to leave but at the same time he also knows if he does leave he's going to actually have to maintain some responsibilities that he doesn't want to maintain.

I think this explains the "love quest" a whole lot. The reason Chris has been so hell bent on finding a partner for a large portion of his adult life isn't just because he wants companionship, but because he also wants somebody to take care of him. He doesn't want to live with his parents (or parent in the present), but he also doesn't want to deal with the responsibilities that living with his parent(s) allow him to avoid. So he seeks a companion that will allow him to leave and deal with the responsibilities that Chris doesn't want to maintain.
 
nvrwastetree said:
Seriously??? No, hate to say this but Chris is taking 14BC by choice. Whenever anyone, even his so called "theoretical ex's" ask him if he wants to move out or has plans to move out,the answer is always a no. Whether it be because his autism, or because he would miss spooning with his geriatric mother, he has stated that he doesn't want to leave because he's not ready for it yet, he's comfortable, and he would miss Barb. Even when asked if he had a girlfriend, he has stated that she would be allowed to move into the horde. On top of everything, even if Chris did move out, he would have to pay rent, and as we all know, Chris fails at saving money, so instead of paying rent, said money would go to Legos, makeup, whips, chains, dildos, etc. We know from Marvin that Chris does know how to budget, however I don't think he's on the same level as we are.
Click to expand...
Agreed, during the Sega proposal Chris insisted on being able to work from home at 14BC despite his fancy office and billionaire status. Chris is only leaving that house in handcuffs or a wooden box.

 
nvrwastetree said:
Whenever anyone, even his so called "theoretical ex's" ask him if he wants to move out or has plans to move out,the answer is always a no. Whether it be because his autism, or because he would miss spooning with his geriatric mother, he has stated that he doesn't want to leave because he's not ready for it yet, he's comfortable, and he would miss Barb. Even when asked if he had a girlfriend, he has stated that she would be allowed to move into the horde.
Click to expand...
Barb is the anchor holding him to 14BC. When he talks about a Barbless future, he's considering any and all possibilities. 14BC is not fun nor exciting to Chris.

An empty 14BC isn't something he's autistically comforted by, like some people theorize. It's something that reminds him of how alone he is out in Ruckersville.

Without Barb, Chris has wanderlust.
nvrwastetree said:
On top of everything, even if Chris did move out, he would have to pay rent, and as we all know, Chris fails at saving money, so instead of paying rent, said money would go to Legos, makeup, whips, chains, dildos, etc. We know from Marvin that Chris does know how to budget, however I don't think he's on the same level as we are.
Click to expand...
Actually, when we see Chris spending money on Legos and stupid shit, you're seeing what Chris has budgeted specifically for that.

That is, after he's paid his phone bill and internet bill and his part of the rent, and food and blah blah blah, Chris has a shitload of money left over for legos. Chris lives pretty cheaply in quite a few ways, purely so he can optimize for lego spending. His cheapness reminds me of old man cheapness at times.
Shiversblood said:
Its time for you to accept the Truth Marvin, Chris does not want to leave 14Branchland.
Click to expand...
You've missed a lot since the PVCC days. If you want to catch up in Discord sometime, PM me.
 
Marvin said:
That is, after he's paid his phone bill and internet bill and his part of the rent, and food and blah blah blah, Chris has a shitload of money left over for legos. Chris lives pretty cheaply in quite a few ways, purely so he can optimize for lego spending. His cheapness reminds me of old man cheapness at times.
Click to expand...
Then would it actually be possible for him to skim by off of welfare alone and never work even after Barb's passing? Also, if Chris continues to stay in 14BC afterwards then wouldn't he also have to deal with the mortgages and debts among other things? Even if he was frugal every step of the way would his tugboat alone be enough for all of that plus standard living?
 
Colloid said:
Then would it actually be possible for him to skim by off of welfare alone and never work even after Barb's passing? Also, if Chris continues to stay in 14BC afterwards then wouldn't he also have to deal with the mortgages and debts among other things? Even if he was frugal every step of the way would his tugboat alone be enough for all of that plus standard living?
Click to expand...
It would be incredibly difficult for Chris to keep 14BC after Barb dies, for the reasons you mentioned. There might be a way to pull it off, but it's probably best if he just jettisons it and let the creditors take it.

With his tugboat alone (no patreon), he could rent a room in Charlottesville, look into some government programs like food stamps and whatnot, and he could survive on that alone.

It wouldn't be a comfortable existence though. He'd need to bolster his income somehow if he wanted to more like he's used to now. The patreon could suffice for awhile, but he might need to stock shelves or flip burgers or some shit when the Patreon dwindles.
 
Marvin said:
It would be incredibly difficult for Chris to keep 14BC after Barb dies, for the reasons you mentioned. There might be a way to pull it off, but it's probably best if he just jettisons it and let the creditors take it.

With his tugboat alone (no patreon), he could rent a room in Charlottesville, look into some government programs like food stamps and whatnot, and he could survive on that alone.

It wouldn't be a comfortable existence though. He'd need to bolster his income somehow if he wanted to more like he's used to now. The patreon could suffice for awhile, but he might need to stock shelves or flip burgers or some shit when the Patreon dwindles.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think the outcome Chris "expects" is that he will have a sweetheart/fuckmommy by then and Barb will be irrelevant. He probably feels he's owed or destined that. But we all know that won't happen. Chris doesn't seem to have any contingency plan for if that doesn't happen.. which is stupid, but it's Chris.

The way I see it is there is no plan for Chris after Barb dies, cuz Barb literally doesn't care. If there was a formal plan Chris would probably know about it. But see that's where things get interesting. It's also possible that Barb has made plans for Chris after her departure... but she hasn't told him about them, because she knows it's a solution Chris won't like (i.e. group home, moving in with a distant family member and having to sell 14 blc). In that case we wouldn't know any better than Chris does about his post-Barb future.

That said I would hedge my odds at 90% Barb has no plan for Chris and expects him to fend for himself, and like 10% Barb has a secret plan for Chris she's hiding from him, because he won't like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom