• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Grieving 9/11 Widow Spends Almost $5 Million

LoKyBuckeye

I give up. This board is too hard to understand.
Kathy Trant Says She Wanted to Rid Herself of 'Blood Money'

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=843920&page=1

Kathy Trant hopes that by coming out publicly with her problem, she can help other chronic shoppers. (ABC News)

June 13, 2005 — When her husband died in the attacks on the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, relatives, friends and strangers opened their hearts and their wallets to Kathy Trant, donating millions of dollars to Trant and her three children.

The money was meant to compensate for the income Dan Trant would have used to support his family for years to come. But to Trant it represented blood money, money that couldn't make up for what she had lost.

Fewer than four years after the attacks, she has blown through most of the money, and is coming out with her story now to warn others against the trappings of chronic spending, a major problem among Americans.

"It's blood money that I don't want," Trant said. "I want my husband back."

After her husband's funeral, Kathy Trant spiraled into deeper and deeper circles of depression. She turned to alcohol and antidepressants to numb the pain, and her weight fluctuated between 90 and 170 pounds.

But as she managed to get one set of problems under control, another problem emerged. Trant started spending out of control.

At the time of his death, Dan Trant, 40, was quickly moving up the ladder as a bond trader at Cantor Fitzgerald, making $130,000 in addition to tens of thousands in bonuses in his final year. Based on his estimated future earnings, the Federal Victim Compensation Fund awarded Kathy Trant $4.2 million, of which she received half. She got another $3 million from friends and family.

"I didn't know how to give back because so many people gave to me when I lost my husband," Trant said.

Trant began lavishing gifts on friends and family. She gave her former housekeeper $15,000 to buy a home in El Salvador, she spent $70,000 to take six friends to the Super Bowl and another $30,000 for a trip for 20 to the Bahamas.

She said Dan would have wanted to help others, and he would have liked to improve their home as well. So Trant spent $1.5 million to nearly triple the size of her suburban New York home. She spent $350,000 on the back yard, installing a full basketball court also equipped for volleyball, tennis and Rollerblading, a heated pool and a hot tub.
 
That's bullshit that a hotshot bond trader's family should get more $$$ from the WTC fund than a fireman or a cook's family. I don't give a shit if he made six figures-the victims' families all lost their loved ones, and should be compensated equally.
 
Upvote 0
The money seems to be the dark shadow in the corner that no one wants to talk about, for obvious reasons. There seem to be some shadowy things happening with that in some cases.



Out of respect for those deceased, however, I'll leave it at that.
 
Upvote 0
stxbuck said:
That's bullshit that a hotshot bond trader's family should get more $$$ from the WTC fund than a fireman or a cook's family. I don't give a shit if he made six figures-the victims' families all lost their loved ones, and should be compensated equally.

agreed. However, I guess life isn't fair. If your loved one was killed randomly in a street corner, you don't get shit. If your loved one was killed randomly walking the street b/c some building fell on him due to a terrorist attack, you get money. fair? nope.

Does this dumb bitch realize that using money to make your house bigger isn't really "getting rid of it"? :roll1:
 
Upvote 0
I think she's full of shit. I bet she just saying that because she doesn't want to look bad for spending all the money that was intended to help her family out. Now she'll probally have to get a job and that scares her so she comes out with this sorry ass attempt to make some quick money
 
Upvote 0
stxbuck said:
That's bullshit that a hotshot bond trader's family should get more $$$ from the WTC fund than a fireman or a cook's family. I don't give a shit if he made six figures-the victims' families all lost their loved ones, and should be compensated equally.
Why were they compensated at all? Does the government compensate "victims" of auto accidents? how about victims of violent crime? Maybe they do and I'm unaware of it but I don't believe it's the government's job to hand taxpayer dollars to "victims" that meet certain criteria.

Then again, they do that everyday to "victims" of just about anything else, so I guess this shouldn't surprise me at all. Alas, most of those dollars get spent about as wisely. :ohwell:
 
Upvote 0
Misanthrope said:
Why were they compensated at all? Does the government compensate "victims" of auto accidents? how about victims of violent crime? Maybe they do and I'm unaware of it but I don't believe it's the government's job to hand taxpayer dollars to "victims" that meet certain criteria.

Then again, they do that everyday to "victims" of just about anything else, so I guess this shouldn't surprise me at all. Alas, most of those dollars get spent about as wisely. :ohwell:
These are all questions that even if you got an answer from the government they would probally be contradicting to everything they've said in the past.

I do agree that they should've been compensated for their loss but not by the government but by the companies that they were employed with. (I guess that the government would still be paying out for the Police and firemens families)
 
Upvote 0
Misanthrope said:
Why were they compensated at all? Does the government compensate "victims" of auto accidents? how about victims of violent crime? Maybe they do and I'm unaware of it but I don't believe it's the government's job to hand taxpayer dollars to "victims" that meet certain criteria.

Then again, they do that everyday to "victims" of just about anything else, so I guess this shouldn't surprise me at all. Alas, most of those dollars get spent about as wisely. :ohwell:
Yeah the government generally does not involve itself in the matters you describe.
OK -- BUT Before we get the stocks ready and have a full fledged Bitch burning a la Salem, MA some perspective.

9/11 Had a huge number of victims.

Many worked in high paid positions.

Many more did not.

Regardless, they were not originally going to get diddly to truly compensate out of certain insurance coverages -- because these could be fairly interpreted as an act of war or of terrorism. Hell, I remember reading that early and thinking how damnably unfair that truly was. Thus (in part) the 9/11 Federal Victim Compensation Fund is born.

Now as for the victims of a violent crime, they may be covered by their own insurance. Certainly, an auto accident resulting in the death of a bread-winner or spouse invokes both insurance coverage and the (strong) likelihood of civil action to recover financial damages.

Contrast that to 9/11 -- who the hell would they sue? Al-Quaeda? Saddam? Clinton, Bush? The airlines?

No, that wasn't going to happen. Hence the reason for the fund.
I will heartily agree with those that say the fund could have metered the money on a more equal, rather than egalitarian basis. Those in the line of Fire and those on the Police and EM squads that gave their lives deserve extra. They should have received their 9/11 funds on top of any standard pension or insurance, not with their take off-set by the same.

As for the woman -- who took not just the cake, but the icing on the cake, the 9/11 funds, her friends and family's money and help -- and has now plowed through it ...

Sheesh, and God Help her. Book-keeping wasn't what her brain was focussed on. None of that money is bringing the Father of her kids back, and I'd humbly submit that is likely still foremost in her mind.

She's dumb, yes -- as in tragically dumb and likely tormented.
 
Upvote 0
stxbuck said:
That's bullshit that a hotshot bond trader's family should get more $$$ from the WTC fund than a fireman or a cook's family. I don't give a shit if he made six figures-the victims' families all lost their loved ones, and should be compensated equally.

I personally don't see a problem with it. The reason is that the fund was set up to make up for the lost potential wages of the deceased. The family of a janitor should get the same compensation as the family of a corporate CEO? Don't think so, since the intent is to make up the wages they would've made had the attack not occured, as noted by the article's statement, "Based on his estimated future earnings, the Federal Victim Compensation Fund awarded Kathy Trant $4.2 million."
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye said:
I personally don't see a problem with it. The reason is that the fund was set up to make up for the lost potential wages of the deceased. The family of a janitor should get the same compensation as the family of a corporate CEO? Don't think so, since the intent is to make up the wages they would've made had the attack not occured, as noted by the article's statement, "Based on his estimated future earnings, the Federal Victim Compensation Fund awarded Kathy Trant $4.2 million."
I don't think the children of the victims of the same attack should be differentiated by economic compensation. I certainly gave some money after 9/11-but I don't want to pay for some rich kids country club membership-dead father or not, while the janitor's widow would still have to work to support his kids, based on "potential earnings". The intent should be to ensure that the children of the victims are comfortable and do not want for education, housing,etc.-not to keep some rich people from Westchester County enjoying the same lifestyle as before.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top