When some business venture goes sour and the entity responsible decides to cut bait in order to save the rest of their business, that's usually considered by mo

When some business venture goes sour and the entity responsible decides to cut bait in order to save the rest of their business, that's usually considered by most to be a good thing, a wise, if unfortunate business decision; there is always risk in business, right? They saved their other investors' interests and their business lived to fight again another day. They made the best of a bad situation. When an individual does the same thing with a mortgage or with their student loans, it's a moral outrage. The default-ors are shamed socially, and thrown to often lawless wolves, (debt collectors) nobody wants to defend them against the reprehensible behavior from even the worst of these debt collectors becuase they can't pay, and because they 'deserve' shaming because they are 'deadbeats'. The same kind of social pressure can't/won't usually be applied to the 'deadbeat' business though. That kind of publicity might harm the their ability to repay their other creditors, keep paying staff, etc. Student-lenders want the profit without the risk. Given the manner in which American colleges have been turned into profit-centers, I am not sympathetic to their problems. I'm in agreement that a mass-default and hastening of the collapse of the current student loan status quo would be a good thing for students and for higher-ed.