5 ms·

When people don't pay their debts, the cost ends up going to people who do. I have no sympathy for people who tried to live beyond their means, and are now pay

When people don't pay their debts, the cost ends up going to people who do. I have no sympathy for people who tried to live beyond their means, and are now paying for it. They made their bed, now they have to lie in it.

infinite8s 17y ago
Exactly. No one is entitled to more than what is needed for basic necessities (a roof, clothing, and food). Although some of the blame must go to the companies that enabled people to get into this level of debt.
tptacek 17y ago
When you pay $10,000 to address $1,000 of a $5,000 loan, you have not made things any worse for the rest of us, except to help promote a system that allows unscrupulous creditors to exploit people.
- smallblacksun 17y ago
  It's not the systems fault that those people took out those loans. At some point, people have to take responsibility for their actions instead of always blaming somebody else.
  - tptacek 17y ago
    What does that have to do with your original argument?
TheCondor 17y ago
When the courts step in, what would be the downside to converting the interest rate into one similar to a savings account or bond? The credit card companies are for-profit companies that take some amount of risk in their business. So essentially, they gave out too much credit to a set of people, how much of that do they eat? To me it sounds like an almost optimum situation for them to have someone's wages garnished, and they're still accumulating interest at over 27% and they're making close to no headway on the repayment. Why wouldn't they want someone to be in that situation? In addition to that, they've probably decimated these people's credit. I'm all for living within one's means but some of this is absurd. It seems like they almost have no choice but to declair bankruptcy. At what point to you hurt the credit card company for making a stupid decision to even give these folks credit?

infinite8s 17y ago

Exactly. No one is entitled to more than what is needed for basic necessities (a roof, clothing, and food). Although some of the blame must go to the companies that enabled people to get into this level of debt.

tptacek 17y ago

When you pay $10,000 to address $1,000 of a $5,000 loan, you have not made things any worse for the rest of us, except to help promote a system that allows unscrupulous creditors to exploit people.

smallblacksun 17y ago
It's not the systems fault that those people took out those loans. At some point, people have to take responsibility for their actions instead of always blaming somebody else.
- tptacek 17y ago
  What does that have to do with your original argument?

TheCondor 17y ago

When the courts step in, what would be the downside to converting the interest rate into one similar to a savings account or bond? The credit card companies are for-profit companies that take some amount of risk in their business. So essentially, they gave out too much credit to a set of people, how much of that do they eat? To me it sounds like an almost optimum situation for them to have someone's wages garnished, and they're still accumulating interest at over 27% and they're making close to no headway on the repayment. Why wouldn't they want someone to be in that situation? In addition to that, they've probably decimated these people's credit. I'm all for living within one's means but some of this is absurd. It seems like they almost have no choice but to declair bankruptcy. At what point to you hurt the credit card company for making a stupid decision to even give these folks credit?