I have to ask because I know someone in exactly that situation.
Yeah, that thinking will make things better for everyone.
>> So “enduring the consequence” of bad credit from losing a home because you lost your job and couldn’t get a new one, part age and part bad economy, is to remain jobless and become destitute and dependent on government?
You’re putting words in my mouth; that’s not what I said.
I said that forgiveness and evading the consequences of one’s actions are different **concepts** — and they are. Forgiveness doesn’t automatically lead to “no penalty”. If you murder my loved one, I may forgive you — but I still want you to do your sentence.
But to address your implicit question, which is, “do I think the consequences you describe are fair”:
No. I think they suck for the individual you describe.
However, I don’t think the answer is government enforcement of an information blackout. If the individual is truly deserving and truly a victim of unfortunate circumstances, and not bad judgment, then they ought to be able to convince an employer of that.
Freedom => free markets, not government assurance of outcomes.
I would be just as “not in favor” of a rule or law that went the OTHER way, that is, precluded employment only because of someone’s bad credit rating or criminal record.