This is some 19th century othering. By your definition every group that is subject to different constraints than you has a pathology. People who cannot afford

This is some 19th century othering. By your definition every group that is subject to different constraints than you has a pathology. People who cannot afford everything they need (even once in a great while, or intermittently) sometimes have to make a choice you don’t: their credit score or keeping their housing, or their credit score or keeping a job, or their credit score or eating. This makes them an increased risk systemically. However representationally they do not have the ability to pull themselves out of poverty because there will be poverty in the system we presently exist in. So if they pull themselves out, someone else slides in, and the systemic risk is the same, and in that context the credit rating is a largely worthless lagging indicator that says “This person at one point in recent history could not afford the commitments they made. We have no idea why, or what those commitment were, or even whether they were the result of financial practices that are now illegal.” What is happening is the world waking up slowly to the idea that a good credit rating is in part a privilege, and not any reflection necessarily of a persons’ ability or willingness to pay for housing.