[coldpie]

I want to live in your world of perfectly rational and infinitely wise superhumans. Sadly we live in the real world, and people are under-educated about debt, mislead by marketers, preyed upon by salespeople, and left holding the baggage. Adding and enforcing regulations about how debt can be issued, and helping people who have been victimized, seems like a practical resolution to the problem, rather than the one based on wishful thinking that you propose.

[theli0nheart]

I think we're both describing the real world. People can simultaneously be held responsible for their debts and be under-educated about debt, mislead by marketers, etc. The question is who pays when a borrower makes a mistake—the lender or the borrower.

If you label all borrowers who can't pay back their loans as "victims", wouldn't that make the practice of lending itself immoral? In your opinion, why not just outlaw lending completely and be done with it? That way no one can be taken advantage of.

[coldpie]

I have a hard time foisting the responsibility for all $108 billion onto the borrowers. There's something more at play here than personal irresponsibility.

[CoryG89]

> If you label all borrowers who can't pay back their loans as "victims", wouldn't that make the practice of lending itself immoral?

No. It is only immoral to knowingly lend to someone who can't and won't be able to repay the loan.