Chapter 11 announced - Part 3 - BSA's Toggle Plan

[jr56]

Quote

 

 

[CynicalScouter]

4 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

This is not about us against them, as a couple here keep suggesting,

Yep. As others have said, they firmly believe that because they volunteer for BSA, that means BSA should NEVER, EVER have to pay for its negligence if such a payment would raise fees on scouts 1 penny.

It is us "scouts and scouters" vs. those sexual abuse victims, and us "scouts and scouters" are not going to do a darn thing.

HINT: It isn't. It is scouts and scouters AND sexual abuse victims vs. a BSA that allowed this to happen in the first place.

Sorry, letting BSA walk away from civil liability for abusing kids because...it works with kids.. is insane.

Edited May 4, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[jr56]

You keep forgetting, nobody has ever called the victims vultures, the lawyers who are reaping millions in funds that should be going to the victims yes,

[CynicalScouter]

Just now, jr56 said:

You keep forgetting, nobody has ever called the victims vultures, the lawyers who are reaping millions in funds that should be going to the victims yes,

Oh I see, so victims are OK, but they are not suppose to hire a lawyer to represent them.

Victims aren't vultures, they are just wrong to hire lawyers, because lawyers are vultures.

Got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

[jr56]

If the lawyers care that much, let's see them kick back some of their fees to the victims.   Before you start another tirade, it makes as much sense as asking the present and future scouts to pay for the deeds of others.

[CynicalScouter]

3 minutes ago, jr56 said:

If the lawyers care that much, let's see them kick back some of their fees to the victims.   Before you start another tirade, it makes as much sense as asking the present and future scouts to pay for the deeds of others.

TCC has stated, in writing, 10% of all their fees will go to victims. They also issued a challenge to BSA's lawyers to do the same.

BSA never responded.

Edited May 4, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[Owls_are_cool]

13 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

So you believe that BSA the corporate entity should not have to pay one thin dime? You keep dodging the question, but I'll keep asking it.

I'll keep pointing out the impacts on scouters and scouts not responsible for the abuse, but yet will pay the brunt of the bankruptcy. You can't get money out of dead people, so scouters and scouts are now being targeted, because we are the BSA today. 

[CynicalScouter]

8 minutes ago, Owls_are_cool said:

I'll keep pointing out the impacts on scouters and scouts not responsible for the abuse, but yet will pay the brunt of the bankruptcy

Fine. Then what is your alternative that will compensate the sexual abuse victims.

What is the "win-win" here?

Provide the list of everyone who should PERSONALLY pay. Here, I'll start

1) Abusers, if still alive. A given.

2) "the people directly responsible for the abuse and cover-up to pay". First most if not all are dead. Second, the way a corporation works is that an employee or officers PERSONAL assets are not subject to being seized except in extremely rare cases ("piercing the corporate veil")

3) No one else

So, according to the @Owls_are_coolsexual abuse compensation plan, the 84,000 sexual abuse victims get

1) $0-a pittance

2) $0

3) $0

So, effectively nothing. The sexual abuse victims get nothing.

Edited May 4, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[Owls_are_cool]

25 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Then what is your alternative that will compensate the sexual abuse victims.

How much to you expect me and my scouts to pay into a victim fund? A thief steals my car from a driveway, so I sue my neighbors for allowing it to happen. I would be wrong to go after the neighbors instead of the actual thief.

Even worse, I wait 30-40 years where all of the neighbors have died or moved away and I sue the existing neighbors. 

Edited May 4, 2021 by Owls_are_cool

[CynicalScouter]

16 minutes ago, Owls_are_cool said:

How much to you expect me and my scouts to pay into a victim fund?

A number greater than $0, set by either the bankruptcy court and/or the claims settlement trustee.

BSA is going to pay. If you don't want your personal money to go into such a fund, leave.

It is that simple.

This is like what the Catholic Church tried to do with its sexual abuse scandal. Oh no, can't take our money, it was donated.

Yeah, that's not how corporate liability works.

Pay, or leave. There is no plan C here.

No one is MAKING you stay in scouting. If you leave scouting, you will not pay a dime.

You are not a "member" of scouting. You are a) a donor b) a volunteer or c) both.

As such, if you do not want to pay into the victims fund? Fine! Leave! No one is going to come after your personal assets or hunt you down or what not.

Just a) stop donating and b) stop volunteering.

Edited May 4, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[Eagledad]

30 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

 

Sorry, letting BSA walk away from civil liability for abusing kids because...it works with kids.. is insane.

And giving them full blame to the point of non existence is just as insane. Ironically, you want to make every scout today, and the future, victims.

 

23 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Fine. Then what is your alternative that will compensate the sexual abuse victims.

 

And there it is, deep pockets. I have no trouble with the truth that the BSA is the target because they are the only capable source of compensation for sexual victims. At least that would be honest. I don't believe that fair, and that is the intellectual conversation that you are scared to have. But, it is the elephant in the room.

Barry

[CynicalScouter]

14 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

And giving them full blame to the point of non existence is just as insane. Ironically, you want to make every scout today, and the future, victims.

I don't want BSA eliminated. I've got kids in the program. We love the program.

Don't mistake me for the Kosnoff "burn it to the ground and sift through the ashes" type.

14 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

I have no trouble with the truth that the BSA is the target because they are the only capable source of compensation for sexual victims. At least that would be honest.

Not exactly. BSA is the target because it acting with negligence regarding the sexual abuse AND has money.

AND the statute of limitations were rolled back.

Remember: this is NOT a situation where anyone can just file a claim and get money. The claims will be reviewed.

Those in scouting who absolutely, positively do NOT want to have their money go to pay for BSA's debts are free to leave.

Edited May 4, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[TAHAWK]

Then we can discusss compensation for the descendents of millions of thise held in chattel slavery by citizens of the U.S., Russia, UK, Netherlands, Spain, Brazil, France, Portugal, and the rest.    All the slaveholders are dead but the nations and their cirizens remain. 

Then there are the the descendnets and victims of racism. . Most of the racists, like Robert Byrd Woodrow Wilson, and Strom Thurmond,to name a very few,  are dead, but some are alive, the  property of dead racists was often passed down tpo today's citizens, racists or not.

Henry Ford overtly supported National Socialism and, pointly, it's anti-Semitism.  The corporation exists.  The Ford oundation funded by Henry Ford esusts.

Then we can discuss reparations for American Indians.

It is simply not simple and stratght forward.

In one sense, there is not enough money in the World to "fully compensate"child  victims of sexual abuse, chattel slavery, and attempted genocide.

If  Scouting, as distinct from BSA, would be destroyed for the actual and alleged acts and omissions of, largely, the dead, is that OK?  Just asking.

I have been a member of three class actions that resulted in payment of hundreds of millions of dollars by corporations.  I recieved less than $.02 of the dollar on my modest claims.  The lawyers did consoiderably better.  But nothing would have been paid without those lawyers.  Vultures have a social value.

[MattR]

59 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

This is not a fair conversation. Nobody here wishes you ill will, in fact just the opposite. This is not about us against them, as a couple here keep suggesting, it's about question of fairness over the future of a century old youth organization.. But, every time the discussion veers toward that question, the mod steps in and reformates (deletes) that part of the discussion and then says stick to the subject. Then, the thread starts out away from the question of fairness, but eventually works it's way back, AGAIN. I believe many of the members here want to express a frustration. But, not the moderator. 

Barry

Sorry, I don't buy that. The moderators keep trying to keep this thread as just news about the court case. We have split off other threads, including what's fair, and nobody seems to be interested in keeping those threads going. Everyone just piles more into this thread, which by the way, is some hundreds of pages long if you include the previous ones we capped. When we try and tamp some of the anger down it's because the original intent (information about the court case) gets pushed to the side by everyone's opinions about what is right/wrong about everyone else's opinions.

Personally, I think a discussion about what's fair would be good as it brings up a lot of ethical issues. But as long as the discussion is stuck on winners and losers, it's a dead end.

Best of luck.

[CynicalScouter]

We are going round and round, in the end some facts need to be faced. If you are/were a Catholic in one of the dioceses that went through bankruptcy over sexual abuse, you'll recognize what I am about to say.

1. (Some) of your money will be paid to victims of sexual abuse. That's a given. You can scream and wail that it was not YOUR fault, and that you wanted YOUR donations to go to the Church. But...
2. That's not how corporations work. Incorporated entities get certain benefits in terms of being able to keep and maintain assets. It also means that the incorporated entity has to pay the corporation's debts. In a for-profit, that means shareholders or bondholders get stuck paying off bad debts due to corporate negligence (e.g. when Ford releases a defect car, it isn't John or Jane CEO who pays, the corporation pays). In a not-for-profit, that means donors, such as people who donated camps to councils, or money to National, or whatever. And thanks to civil statutes of limitations being extended, the corporate entity/entities involved will be paying lots for a long, long time.
3. YOU are not personally liable for the money (unless you are an abuser). That's the nice part about #2 above. You can walk away anytime. Because the corporate entity, not you the donor, are liable. If you don't want your donations to go to the victims, leave. That's it! Your past donations are, as part of the assets of the corporation known as Boy Scouts of America, subject to the civil judgements and claims, but you are free to walk away and not have to pay a single more dime.

That's it. At the end of the day, decide whether the cost of scouting is worth it anymore. If you absolutely insist none of your (future) money goes to the abuse fund, leave. Come back in a few years when the dust settles. Or don't.