3 ms·

Makes sense, it is not irresponsible to refuse to entertain debts to shady creditors. One is responsible for the fate of one's investments, but not when the inv

Makes sense, it is not irresponsible to refuse to entertain debts to shady creditors. One is responsible for the fate of one's investments, but not when the investment itself is betraying certain ethical and business standards that would be impossible to consistently audit of every investment one made. So unless future investors in Iceland are planning to skate the line between legal and illegal, there's no reason to doubt the future economic potential of Iceland.

tsotha 14y ago
>Makes sense, it is not irresponsible to refuse to entertain debts to shady creditors. It's not irresponsible to refuse to borrow money from shady creditors. But no matter how you dress it up refusing to pay debt freely taken on is theft.
- b1daly 14y ago
  It is not theft by any legal or everyday definition I have ever heard. Even if it were illegal, the crime would not be called theft. Are there any types of debt in the US in which a default is considered considered illegal? Among the many differences between a loan and a theft, is that the transaction is entered into by the choice of both parties. Whether it is a true free choice is another question, as is the issue of fraud in creation or discharge of the obligation.
  - tsotha 14y ago
    >It is not theft by any legal or everyday definition I have ever heard. Even if it were illegal, the crime would not be called theft. I wasn't talking about legality. Clearly what Iceland did was legal. It's still theft if you can pay the money back and you don't. >Are there any types of debt in the US in which a default is considered considered illegal? As a matter of fact, yes. Student loans are not dischargeable in bankruptcy. >Among the many differences between a loan and a theft, is that the transaction is entered into by the choice of both parties. Whether it is a true free choice is another question, as is the issue of fraud in creation or discharge of the obligation. Which all amounts to rationalization in this case. This isn't a case of someone being forced to take on debt by a loan shark.

tsotha 14y ago

>Makes sense, it is not irresponsible to refuse to entertain debts to shady creditors. It's not irresponsible to refuse to borrow money from shady creditors. But no matter how you dress it up refusing to pay debt freely taken on is theft.

b1daly 14y ago
It is not theft by any legal or everyday definition I have ever heard. Even if it were illegal, the crime would not be called theft. Are there any types of debt in the US in which a default is considered considered illegal? Among the many differences between a loan and a theft, is that the transaction is entered into by the choice of both parties. Whether it is a true free choice is another question, as is the issue of fraud in creation or discharge of the obligation.
- tsotha 14y ago
  >It is not theft by any legal or everyday definition I have ever heard. Even if it were illegal, the crime would not be called theft. I wasn't talking about legality. Clearly what Iceland did was legal. It's still theft if you can pay the money back and you don't. >Are there any types of debt in the US in which a default is considered considered illegal? As a matter of fact, yes. Student loans are not dischargeable in bankruptcy. >Among the many differences between a loan and a theft, is that the transaction is entered into by the choice of both parties. Whether it is a true free choice is another question, as is the issue of fraud in creation or discharge of the obligation. Which all amounts to rationalization in this case. This isn't a case of someone being forced to take on debt by a loan shark.