[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.