[cmurf]

Lack of teaching empathy is an education issue. No one should think this situation is fair, anyone with sufficient empathy would find this corruption unacceptable in a civil society because it risks loss of trust in it.

The debt company is gaming the system, but it's also ammoral so we should expect this sort of gaming. And perhaps appreciate it for exposing a bug in the rules of civil society, or what should be civil society.

The question is how do citizens react to this weakness in the system being exposed? Selfish individualism says, doesn't affect me, and that just allows more corruption, classism, and distrust. It illiberalizes society. It damages everyone's ability to trust, be trusted, have predictable and fair outcomes.

Yes the courts should be respected, but not by enacting disproportionate punishment for not showing up. The court still needs to be trusted. Why should only the court system, and the debtee be permitted to set the court date and time? Why not give deference to the accused to set the date and time within a 120 day window? It is more fair. Courts serve the people. And the business serves no one.

I also agree with the ACLU's remedies for adequate notification and burden of proof of debt.

[wfo]

>Why not give deference to the accused to set the date and time within a 120 day window?

I definitely agree with this.

>Lack of teaching empathy is an education issue.

I disagree here: we live in a hypercapitalist system. Empathy is a competitive disadvantage. Any company that exercises it is weak, and will be culled eventually by companies that don't. Lack of empathy, brutal selfishness and a willingness to exploit the weak are not a cultural problem, but a natural consequence of an economic structure: we cannot teach our children to be nice and hope that it will go away.