Debtor prisons are back

[BSAM]

Hmmm...Let's see here now:

1. Is there a difference between "theft" and "inability to pay"?

2. Isn't the burden mostly on the lender since the lender approved the loan?

3. Shouldn't there be a maximum amount (let's just say $5,000) at which a person knows he could be sent to jail if it can be reasonably demonstrated that he intentionally abused his creditors?

4. Or does it have to be liberal vs. conservative, like all other issues discussed here on ET???

 

[logic_man]

Quote from oldtime:

too bad none of you can even comprehend what you read, or you didn't read the article or you are easily brainwashed by the media propaganda.

here, I'll make it easy for you who where educated by the Department of Education. The lady was not imprisoned for owing money. She was imprisoned for not showing up in court.

otherwise, there's a lot of people out there who wouldn't mind three squares a day and a roof over their head if they could get an easy job like stuffing envelopes.

You'll know it is bad when there is a waiting list to get in.

I actually did catch that she was put in jail for contempt of court. Even if she had been put in jail for the debt itself, I wouldn't mind.

What is it the jackasses who support abortion always say, "Don't support abortion? Don't have one!" Well, that works for this as well.
"Don't support debtors' prisons? Don't go into debt!"

As far as I'm concerned, bring back Shylock's solution of a pound of flesh. Of course, with the fatasses we've got here in the US, we might need to make that two pounds.

 

[trefoil]

Quote from clacy:

Yes. That is how a loan works. You lend money and assume risk of default.

Our entire economy benefits from entrepreneurs and lenders being able to take on risk through lending.

How many start ups do you think there would be if one had to go to prison or work off debts?..... Not many

I swear, it's actually impossible to underestimate the posters on this forum. Not talking about you, but about the folks who don't seem to understand that credit=speculation, and if you lose, you lose. You don't get to take away someone else's freedom because you made a stupid decision, or just plain got taken out by bad luck. Sheesh.

 

[logic_man]

Quote from trefoil:

The Bible? Not well read, are you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_slavery#Debt_slavery

You're going to have to be more explicit about the connection between the Biblical precedents you're citing and the current-day situation. I'm not stupid enough to understand the point you're trying to make.

 

[trefoil]

Quote from BSAM:

Hmmm...Let's see here now:

1. Is there a difference between "theft" and "inability to pay"?

2. Isn't the burden mostly on the lender since the lender approved the loan?

3. Shouldn't there be a maximum amount (let's just say $5,000) at which a person knows he could be sent to jail if it can be reasonably demonstrated that he intentionally abused his creditors?

4. Or does it have to be liberal vs. conservative, like all other issues discussed here on ET???

Credit rating agencies exist precisely to prevent folks who do stuff like this. Most people don't run up debt because they are trying to scam the system. I'm sure there's a percentage, but society long ago made the choice to not allow debt bondage.
I can't believe I'm actually debating this with people who think it's a reasonable choice. It's not.

 

[trefoil]

Quote from logic_man:

You're going to have to be more explicit about the connection between the Biblical precedents you're citing and the current-day situation. I'm not stupid enough to understand the point you're trying to make.

That's fine. You're beyond hope anyway.

 

[oldtime]

Quote from logic_man:

I actually did catch that she was put in jail for contempt of court. Even if she had been put in jail for the debt itself, I wouldn't mind.

What is it the jackasses who support abortion always say, "Don't support abortion? Don't have one!" Well, that works for this as well.
"Don't support debtors' prisons? Don't go into debt!"

As far as I'm concerned, bring back Shylock's solution of a pound of flesh. Of course, with the fatasses we've got here in the US, we might need to make that two pounds.

you crack me up. Now not only does your house get forclosed on, but you also go to jail. So the so called housing crisis becomes the so called incarceration crisis.

this just in, "Not only are millions of people losing their homes, but the government is running out of jail space to imprison them all. Some say we should just let them off Scott free, but others say that would only encourage more defaults. In the meantime, the banks that made these loans are incurring a loss, and that's just not fair."

 

[clacy]

Quote from logic_man:

Maybe the total number of start-ups would decrease, but would the number of start-ups which succeed actually go down?

Maybe all the threat of prison would do would be to discourage marginal start-ups with no chance of success from ever trying. In other words, not every dumbass with a half-baked idea would quit his job, borrow money and fail.

Which would actually increase economic efficiency because it would keep people with little to no chance of creating a successful start-up doing whatever it is they were doing before.

It's becoming apparent that the opponents of debtors' prisons aren't really all that bright. On that basis alone, they seem like a good idea.

What banks are loaning money to "every dumbass with a half-baked idea" for business start ups?

Credit cards, auto loans, etc.... yeah pretty much everyone can get those. But lender beware. You loan money to idiots, you're likely have a high default rate. The risk of default is either secured, in the case of an auto loan, or taken into account with the rate as with credit cards.

If you're not bright enough to understand that if you disincentivize risk taking and entrepreneurship, that there will be strongly negative economic consequences, then you should enroll in a finance or econ class.

 

[BSAM]

Quote from trefoil:

Credit rating agencies exist precisely to prevent folks who do stuff like this. Most people don't run up debt because they are trying to scam the system. I'm sure there's a percentage...

Private credit rating agencies should be outlawed, but that's a whole other story.
True, most people don't run up debt because they are trying to scam the system, but desperate people do desperate things.
At that point, the individual should understand that there is a price for abuse.

 

[logic_man]

Quote from oldtime:

you crack me up. Now not only does your house get forclosed on, but you also go to jail. So the so called housing crisis becomes the so called incarceration crisis.

this just in, "Not only are millions of people losing their homes, but the government is running out of jail space to imprison them all. Some say we should just let them off Scott free, but others say that would only encourage more defaults. In the meantime, the banks that made these loans are incurring a loss, and that's just not fair."

Sorry I'm not some pussified wimp with a soft spot for every sob story that comes down the pike and that I'm actually the kind of man who built this thing we call "Western civilization", starting in ancient Greece, which losers and parasites are now tearing down all around me. So, even though you'll never win my approval, rejoice in the fact that people of your type have won. The fact that your victory is hollow and that within a few generations without people like me around you'll be back to living in grass huts is my only consolation. At the rate you scum are devolving, it wouldn't surprise me if apes had a more advanced civilization than homo sapiens within a few millennia.