Case was dismissed. Based on their own income and expense projections, the debtors did not have sufficient income to pay unsecured creditors under the best interest of creditors test at § 1225(a)(4). The debtor's lack of good faith in filing the case and proposing a confirmable plan was also shown by the lack of accuracy in some schedules and their statement of affairs, poor disclosure of several large pre-petition expenditures, some inconsistencies in their post-petition monthly reports, a lack of timely progress on contested issues with a major creditor, a failure to abide by some Code requirements for post-petition actions by a debtor-in-possession, an inaccurate liquidation analysis, and a failure to timely propose a confirmable plan.