let them eat cake
There is a major psychological difference in the way the two predominant western societies view bankruptcy. In the US it is seen as a natural component of the business cycle and part and parcel of The American Dream. Their traditional right wing free market society views the risking of capital as the ultimate embodiment of an individual’s opportunity and as such should be encouraged at all costs and, upon pain of death, be curtailed. I’d like to think that ‘sub-prime’ couldn’t possibly have been invented anywhere else in the world other than the States. God bless ‘em.
Over in dear old blighty I believe we’ve taken a slightly more jaundiced and cynical view of the whole bankruptcy issue. Looking beyond the direct individual and the worth of his capital, it’s my impression that as a society we’ve historically taken a broader perspective that takes into account those both directly and indirectly affected by the actions of the entrepreneur…or spendthrift. Employees, direct suppliers, creditors, the government and its coffers, shareholders and indirect suppliers further down the supply chain are all usually affected in some manner by the actions of the bankrupt, or profligate organisation. At the risk of shouting for the return of debtors’ prisons and the workhouse, I definitely place myself in this latter camp.
In the course of my business life, I have had the misfortune of experiencing several organisations going into liquidation, usually to the tune of several tens of thousands of pounds apiece. The ones that jump to mind include Dolphin Telecoms, Basaar, 1Z1 and Big Blue Steel Tiger. Surprisingly, I don’t actually feel any great personal malice to any of the directors involved in these organisations as I believe/hope they were being sincere in their actions to successfully and profitably grow an organisation for all the right reasons. Sadly, they were found wanting in their ability to do so and both they and those of us involved paid the consequences. More fool me for not recognising that fact and pragmatically, perhaps, I take the view that you have to be in it to win it. And win we didn’t on these occasions.
One organisation that does however stick in my throat in terms of their approach to business and their actions leading up to their liquidation, is Hunter Kane. Without going into too much ranting detail my dealings (in business, in court and in mediation) with the organisation personally cost me upwards of £50,000 and I, by a country mile, was not the biggest loser. In my honest opinion (and only my opinion your honour) they represent the most conniving and devious group of individuals I have ever had the misfortune to come across and, were I able to turn back the clock, I would steer clear, by as wide a berth as possible. And remember, if a criminal gets off on a technicality it does not make them innocent, it makes them fortunate.
An individual’s view on personal bankruptcy (and to an extent an organisation’s liquidation/receivership with directors protected by limited liability) will no doubt continue to rage following the introduction in the UK of rules which state that bankrupt individuals must hand over all their ‘disposable income’ to their creditors for three years and can no longer keep any of it for themselves. Previously, many will have paid just half to the people they owed, and often for only one year at that. This new get-tough approach will certainly meet with approval by many of those of us affected by the actions of the bankrupt. From now on individuals whose recklessness has left them unable to pay their bills won’t be able to enjoy spa days out, expensive gym membership or dwinkies in the golf club as they will be strictly limited to pocket money of only £10 a month.
Unless that is, if your name happens to be Kerry Katona. Poor Kerry was declared bankrupt two years ago when she was unable to settle a long outstanding £82,000 tax bill, a debt she is yet to be discharged from. So, the fact that she has recently moved into a £3m Surrey mansion replete with indoor pool, spa, gym and cinema seems a tad incongruous to the new rules. In modern Britain there would still appear to be one rule for the majority of us where we pay our tax, settle our debts, risk our pensions and save for our own future, and one for the Kerry Katonas of this world. As the modern day Marie Antoinette would probably say ‘let them eat frozen prawn rings’.
Eceiomnos are in dire straits, but I can count on this!
claudia ahi les mando una informacion sobre la mision y la vision de nosotros como cede central. atte, jose yfrailin perez. nucleo de asodifimo en duverge