3 ms·

So you think requiring someone to have verified collateral to take out a loan is less oppressive than allowing someone who doesn't have any collateral to use so

by astura 8y ago

So you think requiring someone to have verified collateral to take out a loan is less oppressive than allowing someone who doesn't have any collateral to use solely their reputation to borrow money very cheaply? Your hypothetical system makes financial products only available to wealthy. That's pretty much the definition of oppressive. A system where more people have more access to more products is the fairer one. Debt can be an important tool if used correctly.

astura 8y ago
And without collateral you clearly can't loan to everyone because this is what happens: Borrow money at 1000% interest Don't make any payments. What are they going to do? Sue me? I can't pay, I'm in debt. Hookers and blow for everyone. Borrow more money at 1000% interest. They can't say no!!! Debt for everyone!! Make Payments? Lol. Borrow more money. Don't make payments. Borrow more money. Don't make payments. Continue on forever. It's a money spigot. Nobody would be willing to lend to anyone in this situation without serious collateral and only at very high rates and limited to low risk loans. Reinstituting debtors prison would be the only fix for this problem. And that's 10000 times more oppressive than credit scores. Don't lend to people in debt? Congratulations, now you're back to credit scores!