# Dear beowulff: re your remarks in the Life Insurance thread in GQ **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 30, 2010, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643 "2010-09-30T19:01:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/121 "2010-10-05T02:28:31Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > > [@Contrapuntal](#): > > > > So after emphatically stating in the other thread that it is not a legal issue, now you say it is? Do you have the slightest idea what the fuck you are talking about? > > Clearly, it’s handled differently in each state. > I have no idea what state the OP is posting from. If it’s not a legal matter in that state, so be it. However, it’s (IMHO) a moral obligation in every state. > > Would you have an issue with the the CC company attempting to repossess items purchased on credit? This particular widow is now a single mother who has very little and only a very small life insurance policy and SHE has a moral obligation to look out for the interests of the credit card company? Widows and orphans dude, you are taking the credit card company’s side against widows and orphans. You probably didn’t mean to but that’s where you ended up. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/122 "2010-10-05T02:31:22Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > > [@llcoolbj77](#): > > > > beowulff - > > You argued in the original thread that she had a “moral” if not legal obligation to pay. Because your state is a community property state, do you use that guidance as a way of forming your moralistic beliefs about debt dispersal in this type of instance? > > Actually, no. > > I’m just SO sick of the fucking “lottery mentality” of this country. I hate that some any people try to get rich by gaming the system. It’s what got us into the huge financial hole we’re in now. People (and that includes couples if they are married) should make an all-out effort to pay their damn bills, and not over-extend themselves. I hate how so many people think that it’s OK to walk away from obligations, leaving the rest of us to pay for their largess. > > Also, I think that it’s complete bullshit to claim that it was the Husband’s debt alone - most households act as a single monetary unit. Even if they were responsible for separate bills, the household as a whole benefited from their separate payments. I hear you but this guy DIED. Most people don’t include dying in any definition of gaming the system. Money may be fungible but that credit card company extended credit on the dead husband’s ability to repay, they didn’t ask the wife to cosign, they didn’t rely on her ability to repay at all, they are getting what they expected. Now here she is, a widow raising a 6 year old and we already know she’s poor; and you think she should try to repay her dead husband’s debts? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/123 "2010-10-05T02:51:55Z")
> [@Dante](#): > > > [@beowulff](#): > > > > Well, I’d certainly hope that an individual would have better morals than a company… > > Why? Perhaps he doesn’t think companies are run by homosapiens, they are run by homo economici. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/124 "2010-10-05T02:58:31Z")
nvm, its useless. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/125 "2010-10-05T03:04:28Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > > [@otternell](#): > > > > But that’s the LEGAL issue. You already told us to drop the legal issue and to focus on the MORAL issue. Community property states have fuck-all to do with morality/ethics. > > Well, I don’t think that’s true, if you believe that we live in a society whose laws are guided by morality. OK then what does the fact that the other 40 states disagree with you tell you? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/126 "2010-10-05T03:05:35Z")
> [@bup](#): > > Wow - are people really angry that **beowulff** holds that view? Not just that they disagree, but they are really angry about it? > > I’m no legal expert, but if my wife bought a bunch of stuff on credit and then up and died, I’d feel a moral obligation to pay her debt back if I could. Am I a troll? Are you a poor single mother with a 6 year old child? If you were would you feel the same way? Is it right for the credit card company to lie to the widow to get her to give them the money instead of spending it on her daughter the orphan? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/127 "2010-10-05T03:08:23Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > > [@LavenderBlue](#): > > > > You keep ignoring the fact that credit companies already factor in the cost of situations like the OP into their rates. Why should they have it both ways? Why should they be able to lend out money, charge for risk and then not assume risk? > > > > FYI, I’ve gotten three calls this month from Bank of America about my BIL’s debts. Anyone who lends him money is a sheer moron. I am not obligated to help them not be idiots. > > I’m not ignoring this. > I just think it’s irrelevant. > > What you are saying is that it’s perfectly moral to throw a brick through someone’s window because they have insurance. > > What I am saying is: If everyone made their best effort to pay off their debts (and I am including debt incurred as a family unit), then the world would be a much better, less expensive place. Frankly, I could see how it would be immoral for a single mother to give money to a credit card company and then end up on welfare with a 6 year old child. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/128 "2010-10-05T03:12:51Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > > [@LavenderBlue](#): > > > > Your analogy makes no sense at all. > > > > Why is it irrelevant that the credit card companies charged this man extra to help cover this situation? > > > > The credit card companies did not lend this woman’s husband out of the goodness of their hearts. They did so with the intent of earning a profit. In order to do so they took a risk. > > > > Essentially they gambled and lost. Why should they be allowed to gamble without the possibility of incurring loss? Especially as part of the price of the gamble is built into the debt. > > > > Members of my immediate family make stupid financial decisions all the time. I feel no obligation (nor should I) to reimburse any company dumb enough to lend money under those circumstances. If Bank of America ever calls me again over my idiot BIL’s debts I swear I’ll either get an apology in writing or move all my money from my B of A account. > > OK, I don’t know how many different ways I can say this. > I don’t give a damn about what the law says. > I maintain that the Husband used his credit card in support of the family, and therefore that wife has a moral obligation to pay the debt. I don’t care what is in the contract - this is about doing the right thing. > > I don’t like this “every man for himself” attitude - that somehow the people who **don’t** default on their loans are the chumps. I was taught that if you borrow money, you pay it back. Period. In THIS case you may be dead wrong. We are talking about a fucking WIDOW dude. You are barking up the wrong tree. If this were a case of some lawyer who decides that decides he is going to strategically default on his mortgage and force the mortgagee into a short sale and get away from his debt with nothing more than a black mark on his credit report then I’d be more sympathetic to your position. If this was some guy who blew his credit cards on hookers and booze and then reneged on his obligations then I’m right there with you. But when a recently widowed single mother of a six year old gets lied to about her obligations by a credit card company that tells her she owes them money that she could use to help raise her child instead of going on welfare, then you lost me. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/129 "2010-10-05T03:18:02Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Ah, another poster getting wrapped around their axle because other people won’t do something the poster feels they have a moral obligation to do. Maybe one day people will realize that all this “moral obligation” talk is completely meaningless, but it looks like it’ll be a good long wait until then. Your moral obligation is entirely different than the one being presented here. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/130 "2010-10-05T03:42:51Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > > [@bup](#): > > > > (emphasis added) > > > > I think that’s a fair question that I haven’t seen an answer to. Any **beowulff** haters want to take it? > > If a relative or friend died while owing me money, leaving an impoverished widow and child, I would not only not attempt to dun the widow but would refuse any attempt at repayment. It’s part of my whole “Don’t be a jackass” thing. > > eta: I also do not hate **beowulff**. I don’t hate Beowulf either but what you described sounds a lot more like “the right thing to do” than what Beowulf describes. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/131 "2010-10-05T16:17:28Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Should I be able to get my money back from the CC company if the item purchased on credit is defective? No? Then why is it in play if my debt is bad? Bad analogy – in that situation, you have legitimate recourse against **somebody** (usually the people who sold the item, maybe somebody else if it was damaged by circumstances beyond the seller’s control). The notion that the credit card company should be entitled to collect money outside the circumstances spelled out in the contract and the laws under which the contract was made is closer to “Should I be able to get my money back from the CC company if I purchase green drapes on credit and then decide I like blue better?” ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/132 "2010-10-05T16:28:32Z")
> [@bup](#): > > Wow - are people really angry that **beowulff** holds that view? Not just that they disagree, but they are really angry about it? Actually, it seems to be more a point-and-laugh thing. > [@](#): > > I’m no legal expert, but if my wife bought a bunch of stuff on credit and then up and died, I’d feel a moral obligation to pay her debt back if I could. Am I a troll? One might decide to do so out of generosity, but it makes no sense to assert that anyone has a “moral obligation” to reimburse the credit card company for a risk they willingly assumed and for which they have already been compensated via higher interest rates and fees than the market would bear if the debts had been secured. Given that the credit card company in the OP of the earlier thread had apparently attempted to mislead the surviving spouse, I certainly wouldn’t consider her “morally obligated” to reward them by making their fraud attempt a success. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/133 "2010-10-05T16:33:02Z")
> [@DCnDC](#): > > And the asymmetry is irrelevant here. Marriage and the partnership that goes with it ends with death. Not according to inheritance law. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/134 "2010-10-05T16:46:29Z")
> [@beowulff](#): > > What I am saying is: If everyone made their best effort to pay off their debts (and I am including debt incurred as a family unit), then the world would be a much better, less expensive place. Actually, if everyone made their best effort to shove a shit sandwich down the throat of anyone who made fraudulent assertions in an attempt to collect nonexistent debts, then the world would be a much better, less expensive place. So, clearly the operative “moral obligation” here is to punish the CC scammers to the greatest possible extent. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/135 "2010-10-05T18:39:04Z")
I don’t want to sound like a pinko commie here, but this kind of thinking–that a man’s legal relationship with a corporation should be based on the moral standards that a man has to other individuals, but that a corporation shouldn’t be held to those same standards–is exactly how the running dog capitalists keep the working class down. It’s this kind of thinking that has retail wage workers working off the clock because overtime “isn’t allowed” but “the store needs them” or leads people to turn down good jobs because they “couldn’t be replaced” and would be “abandoning their responsibilities” and then later are surprised and hurt when that same company lays them off. It’s blue collar masochism. There are two types of relationships–business and personal. Personal relationships are governed by complex codes of behavior that are somewhat culture dependent but tend to include salt-of-the-earth values like “always pay your debts” and “always take responsibility”. Business relationships are governed by business law. We had to codify that law because corporations don’t have any person to have personal relationships with. It’s usually a very bad idea to do business with someone when you have a personal relationship, because then it isn’t clear which set of rules you are following. In this case, the dead man and the CC company had a business relationship. They absolutely have the right to settle his debt from his estate. They do not have the right to go after money that is not in the estate (such as this insurance payout). They are pretending to have a personal relationship with the widow to get money from here, but it really isn’t: if they could just seize the money, they certainly would. It’s ridiculous to say that she is obligated to follow the personal relationship code of behavior while they are allowed to follow the professional relationship code of conduct. That’d be like a footrace with one person wearing lead shoes. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/136 "2010-10-05T18:41:22Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > I don’t want to sound like a pinko commie here, but this kind of thinking–that a man’s legal relationship with a corporation should be based on the moral standards that a man has to other individuals, but that a corporation shouldn’t be held to those same standards–is exactly how the running dog capitalists keep the working class down. It’s this kind of thinking that has retail wage workers working off the clock because overtime “isn’t allowed” but “the store needs them” or leads people to turn down good jobs because they “couldn’t be replaced” and would be “abandoning their responsibilities” and then later are surprised and hurt when that same company lays them off. It’s blue collar masochism. > > There are two types of relationships–business and personal. Personal relationships are governed by complex codes of behavior that are somewhat culture dependent but tend to include salt-of-the-earth values like “always pay your debts” and “always take responsibility”. Business relationships are governed by business law. We had to codify that law because corporations don’t have any person to have personal relationships with. It’s usually a very bad idea to do business with someone when you have a personal relationship, because then it isn’t clear which set of rules you are following. > > In this case, the dead man and the CC company had a business relationship. They absolutely have the right to settle his debt from his estate. They do not have the right to go after money that is not in the estate (such as this insurance payout). They are pretending to have a personal relationship with the widow to get money from here, but it really isn’t: if they could just seize the money, they certainly would. > > It’s ridiculous to say that she is obligated to follow the personal relationship code of behavior while they are allowed to follow the professional relationship code of conduct. That’d be like a footrace with one person wearing lead shoes. You, signora, have expressed yourself intelligently and eloquently here. Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![purplehorseshoe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/purplehorseshoe/32/2996_2.png) [@purplehorseshoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/purplehorseshoe)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/137 "2010-10-05T19:56:17Z")
Damn intelligent eloquent pinko commies. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2010, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643/138 "2010-10-05T21:10:30Z")
OK, **Manda’s** post makes sense to me. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-beowulff-re-your-remarks-in-the-life-insurance-thread-in-gq/555643.md?page=6)