[TheOtherHobbes]

No it isn't. Many people become debtors because they have no choice.

If the choice is between clocking up an insane credit card bill at astronomical rates or not having your family thrown out onto the street for another month or two because maybe your job search will finally pay off, what would most people pick?

Some people get into debt because they can't manage money. A lot of people get into debt either because they're not paid enough, or they're not paid regularly enough. or the economy fell apart around them for reasons that are nothing to do with them.

And anyone who freelances will tell you stories of clients who refuse to pay for 3-6-9-12 months past due. (Yes, you can always find better clients - if you have enough of a lead time.)

Debtors are debtors because they're at the bottom of the power pile. Many aren't "guilty" of anything except getting screwed over by a business culture which is driven entirely by inhumane feral greed.

[verylittlemeat]

You're moving the goal posts on me. I'm talking about debt collection enforcement not the morality or circumstances of why people take on debt.

[a1369209993]

You're the one who put the goalposts on:

> the rest of the people have a [legitimate] original debt right?

> the narrative of the debtor as victim is a bit oversold.

When in fact the narrative of the debtor as victim is significantly undersold, and many (I suspect, but won't assert, most) original debts were incurred due to usurious and predatory lending.

I wouldn't argue that debt collection enforcement is outright unethical in general, but their cases tend to very flimsy, and if people realize they can easily knock them down... good for them.

[verylittlemeat]

Don't sign the contract and take on the debt if you can't pay it.

If the contracts are usurious and predatory then they probably will not stand up in court if challenged. Most collection agencies settle for 50-70% of the balance of a debt without question anyway.

Debt collectors have to provide proof that you know about your debts and that they are legitimate in order to enforce collection of them. If they can't do that then there is no judgment.

[a1369209993]

> If the contracts are usurious and predatory then they probably will not stand up in court if challenged.

That's exactly what netcan was saying upthread.

[Paul-ish]

> You're moving the goal posts on me. I'm talking about debt collection enforcement not the morality or circumstances of why people take on debt.

Not all people chose to take on debt. From the linked article:

> Medical debt can be particularly devastating and accounts for more than half of all collections activity.

I don't think we can realistically characterize medical debt as a choice for most individuals. If someone is ill and and has medical debt, is it right to issue a default judgement against them for that debt? What if their illness is the reason why they couldn't show up to court in the first place?