Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (62166)	11/4/1999 1:48:00 PM
From: Constant Reader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

That is true, but income like that causes Social Security benefits, if any, to be taxed. These days, I think it also triggers the requirement to use the Alternative Minimum Tax computation.

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (62166)	11/4/1999 2:46:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Ok. My point being that it's a lot of money for a single woman, or man, for that matter. I posted before that I hope she gave it to charity, but after considering further, I hope she had fun with it, because she's in a world of trouble. I suppose that the final solution will be a plea-bargain, a suspended sentence, and a disgorgement, to the extent possible, but I doubt restitution is otherwise an option. If all she's entitled to is $9,600/yr. pension, and, I am guessing, social security, she's probably not much above the poverty line in California, and too old to get a job. Plus, a lot of people will make her into a folk hero, as they will wish they were in her shoes (the old shoes of course, before she got caught). Kids, don't try this at home ~ a younger person would be in worse trouble. But it is pointless to order her to pay if she can't, then the court faces the administrative burden of keeping on her case.