4 ms·

>Debt forgiveness in general is a terrible precedent to set. How's that? Seems like the precedent was set a very long time ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J

• ARandomerDude 6y ago
  The key difference is Jubilee was scheduled every 50 years, and was thus predictable. Taking on a debt at, say, year 35 meant both parties knew the remaining term was limited to 15 years, and could adjust the specifics accordingly. This situation is ad hoc, meaning both parties take on the debt assuming repayment, then one party exits, leaving unpaid debt behind. Spontaneous debt dumping, unlike the 50 year cycle in ancient Israel, is destabilizing and encourages debtors to complain loudly, and perhaps violently, to get out of the debt they owe. Doing so successfully encourages consumers to take on bad debt, which is bad for the economy (see 2008).
  • sapienwastey 6y ago
    Yeah, I think this was executed wrongly (allowing the schools who originated the debt to profit and escape unaccountable). I was specifically responding to the 'generally' aspect of the comment, where I think 'generally' debt forgiveness can be a very useful concept, and good for society. Governments don't seem to mind inflating their currency sometimes which is (if denominated in their own) essentially forgiving themselves of debt ;)