Recent content by David born 1950

duplicate by error

OK, one by one Kate: No, I did not 'argue' with you about asset disclosure. I merely stated (politely) that if I had owned a small home (like most do), would that be outwardly, infamously revealing to the trolls out there? I do think not, but you are certainly free to disagree. No argument from...

Yes, but did you know that most such seizures are from people who are innocent? Getting your money back can cost more than was seized. It is naked theft. IT IS dying intestate if the Will does not find its way to the probate court. - David

Deleted by David

I really do not understand. If a bank cannot find the depositor, the money must be sent to the state. That is sensible and is 'escheat'. I am talking about naked theft by police (verbiage dressed up as protecting America from drug dealers). Theft, not escheat. - David

NOPE. "in rem" (in the thing, in Latin) civil asset forfeiture. Escheat is when money is OWED. Forfeiture is when money is simply taken. The theory for "In Rem" is that the THING (money) is the guilty party, not the person carrying it. In fact, it is so bad that Canada advised its people not to...

I think that, perhaps, you should investigate the purpose and reason for the Institute for Justice in Arlington, VA. Website: IJ.ORG. The need is there. Countless innocent people have been robbed in the middle of the country with nothing left in their pockets. It is real, but embarrassingly...

In fact, I honestly do not blame you for deeming my posts to be futile: the pattern is evident. But, let us be forthright: You did not grow up in my shoes. On 9 OCT I was looking up my father's obituary from 2013 in Connecticut, where I was raised. Suddenly, my brother's obituary came up, from 6...

You know, I think that I do have a moral obligation with the rather decent amount that I have saved (and through inheritance). I feel that I must at least attempt to give back. - David

Somehow, I believe that you have TWO eyes, OneEyedDiva. Why? You have defined me better than others have been able to do. Yes, the security blanket is the ONLY BEST FRIEND I have ever known, my bank account. You know, I am thinking seriously of committing LEGAL suicide (Canada, Switzerland) if...

I left. I could not get a post in without the moderators editing it. (The civil asset forfeiture part was edited out.) Maybe they said that I went traveling because they could not face their own rules with a straight face. So be it. I do not know what pressures they are under. Today, even...

It would be a shame for my rather small money NOT to go towards alleviating less fortunate people's suffering. That is how I think of it. I certainly am not unselfish (I will not need the money after I die) but it is still good what I am doing. - David

Sorry, but, again, most financial institutions do NOT take charities as beneficiaries. A few do, but most deny such beneficiaries. - David

Please note: Even if I find a bank which accepts charities (I have one already) the necessity to chase interests rates today, nullifies that advantage. I must go where I get the highest rate, up to 5% today. - David

HoneyNut: MOST banks do NOT ALLOW CHARITIES TO BE BENEFICIARIES. Yes this would solve the problem. Partially, because even if they DID accept beneficiaries, when you die, the money stays in the bank until someone with authority and death certificate comes to the bank. But MOST BANKS do NOT ALLOW...