Debt Reduction- Advice On Credit Card Debt Reduction, Debt Reduction Services, And Debt Reduction Plans

heather N asked:


1: Mary spelled 17 words correctly out of 20. What percent were correct? What is her mark on this test?
80%
83%
85%
87%

2: A school decided to raise 500 dollars for an athletic fund. When they had collected 325 dollars, what percent of the goal was reached?
57%
65%
60%
74%

3: A suit marked $24.00 was reduced $6.00. Find the percent reduction.
25%
20%
30%
35%

4: A man owed $750. In one year he paid $45 interest. What percent was the interest of the debt?
4%
6%
8%
11%

5: A savings account contained $240. The bank paid $4.80 interest at the end of the year. What percent of interest did the bank pay?
5%
12%
1/2%
2%

6: A pint is what percent of a gallon?
50%
12.5%
15%
24%

7: A square foot is what percent of a square yard?
12 1/2%
13 1/4 %
11 1/9%
10%

8: 18 is what percent of 48?
33 1/3%
30%
45%
37 1/2%

Quintin Bray

LOA asked:


Please read and let me know how you would analyze this article:The Water Crisis: Analysis and Proposals

By Celine Tan

Water and sanitation is the first of five priority action areas under the
WEHAB plan for the post-WSSD implementation of sustainable development.
The challenge of providing safe and clean water and sanitary conditions for
an increasing world population, in the face of rising inequities, is
phenomenal.

Forty percent of the world’s population, in 80 countries, currently suffer
from serious water shortages. A billion people worldwide lack access to
safe drinking water and 2.4 billion people lack access to adequate
sanitation (Global Economic Outlook 2002).

Yet, the biggest threat to universal access to clean water and adequate
sanitation is not mother nature but corporate globalisation. Privatisation
of water is aggressively exported to the developing world under the rubric
of poverty reduction and debt relief strategies, free trade and economic
development. By turning a scarce resource into an economic commodity, the
world’s economic leaders and policy planners claim that existing water
resources can be managed and consumed efficiently in accordance with
competitive market principles. These claims are not only misguided, they
are deceitful. There are two myths being projected: first, that placing a
price on water will encourage conservation and wise water consumption.
Secondly, that market competition will lead to more consumer choice and
better services. In reality, the water sector is monopolistic when placed
in the hands of the market. It is thus alarming that the commodification of
water resources is now heralded as the answer to the world’s water woes.

Monopoly and subsidies for corporations

Water is a US$400 billion global business, controlled by a handful of
European transnational companies and consortiums, namely French
multinationals Vivendi and Suez Lyonnaise, SAUR and British water companies
Thames Water, Anglia Water and United Utilities. The global drive towards
privatisation of water services is thus pursued not by a collective of
democratically elected governments acting in the interest of the world’s
population, but by a cartel of corporations motivated by profit and market
conquest.

To make matters worse, these companies are subsidised by their governments
(and invariably their taxpayers) through support from domestic export
credit agencies, and by multilateral development banks, such as the World
Bank and the African Development Bank. They are also subsidised by
developing countries who raise credit from international financial
institutions to upgrade their water systems prior to private takeover. This
corporate subsidy comes at the expense of consumers, most of them in
developing countries, who are made to pay for what is a necessity of life.
For the poor this means no access to water.

Additional loans to facilitate the privatisation process are raised by
developing country governments from multilateral and bilateral sources.
Often, these loans are also used to finance the creation of an ‘enabling
environment’ for foreign water and wastewater investors. This includes the
drafting of local investor protection legislation to guard against
re-nationalisation of the water industry and to provide for hefty
compensation for any attempt to renege (for good reasons) against the
privatisation contracts.

In many cases, corporate access to a developing country’s water system is
paved by a loan or debt relief conditionality requiring the poor or
indebted country to privatise its water and sanitation services. For
example, the IMF insisted that Tanzania privatise its Dar es Salaam Water
and Sewerage Authority (DAWSA) as a condition of its debt relief package
under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative.

Fallacy of privatisation

Experience shows that the privatisation of water services cannot ensure
universal delivery of safe water and efficient sanitation. Privatisation
imposes additional financial obligations on governments. They may have to
bail out failed privatisation project, and also shoulder the costly legal
risks of rescinding a privatisation contract with a wealthy transnational,
even if the company’s performance is unsatisfactory. Argentina, Hungary and
Bolivia have found that the legal claims for compensation by private water
companies in Tucuman, Szeged and Cochabamba respectively, have made
terminating contracts prohibitively expensive.

The dominance of foreign water companies and the liberalised investment
climate – mostly facilitated by structural adjustment, and now under trade
agreements including those under the WTO Ð in developing countries will
also ensure that a large portion of profits from water privatisation will
not accrue to the countries themselves but are repatriated abroad instead.

The imposition of full-cost water pricing as a result of privatisation will
only deprive more and more people of access to clean and safe water by
forcing poor communities to seek alternative sources of water for
consumption, such as untreated well water and water from sewage-ridden
urban rivers.

Forced upon rich and poor, consumers and industrial producers, similar
rates for water use will also result in greater income disparity and deeper
social cleavages, leading to higher risks of civil unrest. In 2000, martial
law was declared in the Bolivian city of Cochabamba as a result of
city-wide riots precipitated by high water prices. A private consortium led
by International Water doubled the water prices to city residents. Water
bills went up by 35% and some, twice that. The World Bank supported
full-cost water pricing and prohibited any use of its structural adjustment
loans to subsidise water services for the poor.

Future fears and WSSD outcomes

There is no agreement on the text in the WSSD Draft Plan of Implementation
that commits governments to supporting the UN Millennium Development Goal
of halving, by 2015, the proportion of people unable to reach, or afford,
safe drinking water and access improved sanitation (paragraphs 7 and 7[alt]).

However, the most pressing concerns over universal coverage of water and
sanitation services are not expressed in these bracketed paragraphs.
Rather, they are reflected in the general lack of political will
demonstrated by developed countries to address the systemic issues leading
to a crisis of sustainable development in the south, and the alarming
emphasis placed on public-private partnership funding and implementation of
sustainable development programmes. The relinquishing of responsibility by
developed countries is marked by their reluctance to commit to specific
disbursements of ODA and by repeated references to voluntary partnerships
and initiatives as a means of financing WSSD programmatic outcomes.

In the absence of firm commitments by governments, Type II partnerships on
water and sanitation services will only increase private sector involvement
in this crucial area. The private sector is already identified as a key
implementer of the ‘Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) for All
Initiative’ involving 28 countries, six UN agencies, the World Bank, and
the Asian and African Development Banks.

Another major threat to universal access to water and sanitation is
liberalisation under the WTO’s rules. Although Member countries have the
right to liberalise at their own pace, and even choose not to open up a
sector under the WTO’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), there
is tremendous pressure especially on developing countries to liberalise.
Thus in the ongoing negotiations at the WTO, developed countries are
submitting extensive ÒrequestsÓ that seek access to every sector in the
developing world, including water services and sanitation.

If developing countries succumb, privatisation of water services initiated
under World Bank and IMF structural adjustment programmes could become
permanent under the binding rules of the WTO. Once a country is locked into
the GATS regime, the right of its government to regulate liberalized
service sectors will be diminished, paving the way for foreign
transnationals to enter the domestic market. Any attempt to reverse the
situation would be subject to WTO disciplines and penalties.

Any real effort to achieve the Millennium Development Goal must therefore
include commitments to review loan conditionalities that impose
privatisation and countries must not be pressured to offer water services
under GATS liberalisation. Essential services should be exempted from GATS.

Conclusion

Privatisation does not address the deeper economic and ecological issues of
water shortages. Questions of why there are water shortages in countries
not under water stress are not resolved by shifting responsibility of
service provision to private companies. Water management and water
distribution are also key factors in determining water supply and universal
coverage. Until and unless rich countries fulfil their commitment to
provide resources for developing countries to build solid, cost-effective
water delivery systems which support the needs of the world’s population
equitably and ecologically, the water woes of the world will not go away.

At the same time, all governments need to recognise and support the
diversity and replication of community water management systems and
practices. These have proven in many countries to be the most sustainable
approach to rural water management for rural populations. The WSSD process
and the last 10 years of the work of the CSD have called for good and best
practices in sustainable development. However, where water resources are
concerned the trend and emphasis are privatisation which has proven
destructive.

Firm commitments must be made at the WSSD to reverse the trend of corporate
takeover in the water and sanitation sector, rather than to accelerate the
process of privatisation and corporate monopoly. Undermining the sovereign
power of governments to regulate supply of water in their countries and
passing the bucket onto private transnationals to steward the world’s water
resources would probably be a most anti-development and anti-ecological step.

Shannon Gennett

Amanda asked:


a. the maintenance of international peace.
b. an increase in the services provided by the federal government.
c. a reduction in the size of the federal government.
d. the repeal of the Alien and Sedition Acts.
e. the reduction of the national debt.

Brett

Jimmy asked:


I cant afford the child support payments the court ordered and am in debt really bad. Most of my debt is credit cards and student loans. I want to do what is in the best interest of my child but dont want to lose my electric and water and also do not want to go to jail. I know I eventually need to file for a motion to reduce my support based on my current income but dont know how long to wait being that the last court settlement was just 2 months ago. Please help. I dont want to lose my daughter but I also know I cant raise her if they put me in jail.
“Child support isn’t a popularity contest.. It’s a mathematical formula.. Your income, your ex’s income, and the amount of time the child spends with each of you. IF you have had an income change, they MIGHT adjust the payment amount… If your income is still the same, the amount won’t go down. Your credit card debt and your loans aren’t your childs problem, and they aren’t the courts problem either…” (this is exactly the kind of thinking I am talking about about and need help from, first of all my credit card debt and loans are my childs problem when it affects my ability to pay child support or set my daughter up for a financially stable future rather than having to struggle once she turns eighteen becausee her mom wants to sit at home and live with her parents and have her car note and car insurance paid for without having to work)
this is exactly the kind of thinking I am talking about about and need help from, first of all my credit card debt and loans are my childs problem when it affects my ability to pay child support or set my daughter up for a financially stable future rather than having to struggle once she turns eighteen becausee her mom wants to sit at home and live with her parents and have her car note and car insurance paid for without having to work)

Judson Gammage

Certified Asshole asked:


Small Governemt
Pro-Abortion
Pro-Gay rights
Low Taxes
Moderate military (focuses more on National Security than world policing)
Debt Reduction
Anti-Affirmative Action
Free market (No government Intervention)
Pro-Capital Punishment
Social Security reform
Health Care REFORM (not Universal Healthcare)
Pro-Farm subsidies
Tort Reform
Anti-Union
Anti-Gun Control
Harsh Illegal immigration Laws
Legalize Marijuana (Find a way to tax and treat as alcohol)

Alishia Harrod

jinxies asked:


We are currently in great standings with our mortgage and the bank which holds the note. Due to unforeseen circumstances, we’ve got a reduction in income. We have a HELOC with another bank and about 50K in consumer debt. We have been unsuccessful in obtaining a refi using an outside broker obtained on the internet. Are biggest setback is our mortgage payment which is a fixed 30yr at 6.5% ($3500 mo). We cannot afford to pay the 1st, HELOC and the consumer debt anymore. We’ve never made a late payment…do we have a good chance with a modification? We have financed 2 houses with our current bank and have a personal relationship with our banks’ broker. We are going to call and ask but I was wondering if banks will modify one loan without having to touch the HELOC? We cannot refi both (not enough income to support it). We could afford to make the payment if we just had a lower 1st. NO WISE ***** COMMENTS!! Serious answers only!
We would sell if the market wasn’t in such a slump…believe me, that was my 1st thought. California is the worst!

Ofelia Hatley

Blockhead asked:


John McCain has revised his proposed economic policy. He no longer intends to balance the federal budget. His revised package includes $400 billion in tax reductions and only $133 billion in spending cuts.

Will this policy, which is basically a continuation of the present policy, create more of a deficit, devalue the dollar further, and drive energy prices even higher? Will it double the national debt yet again?
Or, will it bring prosperity?

What are your thoughts?

Amina Tankson

Sinizter asked:


I plans to remodel the country on 5 fronts

1-heathcare,tort reform,make it legal to buy insurance across state lines.
make it mandatory for employers to provide healthcare to ALL employees and their immediate familys(wife and kids) regardless of pre-existing conditions.

2-debt reduction/Jobs,order the immediate construction of oil drilling platforms off the coast of Alaska,California,and Texas.Legalize marijuana.While the plant it’s self can’t be controlled enough to tax things like smoke shops (that would crop up everywhere) can be. We would save billions doing away with the lost war on marijuana and can utilize hemp,hemp farms,and hemp factories that would create jobs,boost revenue,and make better products.Hemp has been proven to be stronger,cheaper,and last longer that cotton.

3-Illegal immigration,place Texas,Arizona,New Mexico,and California national guard members on the border.Increase penalty’s for those cought in the US illegally.Immediate deportation of all known illegals in the country.

4-Military/foreign affairs,increase the military’s annual budget.Now is not the time to let our guard down.Order stealth bombings of known Iran and North Korean nuclear facilities.Continue pulling troops out of Iraq.Increase funding and troop presence in Afghanistan.

5-Domestic,Ban all community organizations like ACORN from getting ANY tax payer money.Impose a Death Penalty for those convicted of child molestation.Raise a console to “weed out” corruption in Washington and all public offices across the nation.Ban *** marriage in all but one state.Ban abortions in all but one state.Free market,NO GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE.Downsize the government.
Vermont for both

Lekisha Hibberd

Rick asked:


1.An economist who favors smaller government would recommend:
a.tax cuts during recession and reductions in government spending during inflation.
b.tax increases during recession and tax cuts during inflation.
c.tax cuts during recession and tax increases during inflation.
d.increases in government spending during recession and tax increases during inflation.

2.An appropriate fiscal policy for severe demand-pull inflation is:
a.an increase in government spending.
b.a reduction in interest rates.
c.depreciation of the dollar.
d.a tax rate increase.

3.A major advantage of the built-in or automatic stabilizers is that they:
a.simultaneously stabilize the economy and reduce the absolute size of the public debt.
b.automatically produce surpluses during recessions and deficits during inflations.
c.require no legislative action by Congress to be made effective.
d.guarantee that the Federal budget will be balanced over the course of the business cycle.

4.The standardized budget tells us:
a.that in a full-employment economy the Federal budget should be in balance.
b.that tax revenues should vary inversely with GDP.
c.what the size of the Federal budget deficit or surplus would be if the economy was at full employment.
d.the actual budget deficit or surplus realized in any given year.

Neal Tecklenburg

carpediem61874 asked:


Since I was brutalized by my (ex)husband 5 years ago (still incarcerated), I have accumulated medical bills that I can’t afford to pay. My income is at 200% the poverty level and I’m on my own with 2 kids. My hospital has a 75% reduction policy on their charges for people at my income level which I have applied for, but their clinic and other facilities don’t offer any reduction. I can’t afford to pay the total bill (over $8000 for myself and my children), I’d have to file bankruptcy, but this is my only outstanding debt. Can I get them to lower the total? Could an attorney help me do this? Thanks!

Allie Kroh