Debtor's Prison -- The Poor Person's Best Friend

JesBeard.com ^ | Jes Beard

[The Loan Arranger]

Years ago, this country did away with debtors prisons. The nation in general, and poor people in particular, would be well served to bring them back. The harm to business from unpaid debt, and the reduced productivity and even business failure unpaid debt can bring, is obvious. Businesses or individuals who are not repaid the money they loaned or who are not paid for the goods or services they produced and sold on credit are prevented from accumulating needed and even expected capital for expansion, and they are frequently thrown into serious financial constraints making it hard to pay their own creditors and employees. This not only can theoretically choke the gross national product, many recessions and even the Great Depression have been in fact brought on at least partly by unpaid debt.

But debt relief measures, either in the form of actual debt forgiveness or in the form of relaxed procedures to collect debt (including the abolition of debtors prisons), are generally thought to help the poor. The idea that once again forcing poor people into involuntary servitude to pay for meager food and shelter is certainly a tough sell. But here goes.

A return to debtors prisons would help poor people in at least five ways: 1) increasing workforce participation; 2) increasing personal responsibility; 3) making it easier for the poor to climb the economic ladder through entrepreneurship; 4) reintroduction of the virtues which have proven the only reliable way of the poor to leave poverty; 5) making credit more readily available.

[sevry]

subsets of subsets

Now you force me to simply repeat the questions, which you refused to answer. Which subset? and which subsets? Spell it out. Tell me. Show me you even know what you're talking about.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

I have answered your question. The only numbers you have given me are data points that are subsets of subsets. It is impossible to draw any sort of conclusion from just those two data points and yet you cling to them as proof.

Putting aside, once again, the fact that their origin is dubious.

Present me with the full data set then we can argue about it. Or actually we won't because it will be clearly laid out in numbers.

[sevry]

I have answered your question

Restating your complaint is not the same thing as answering questions based on that complaint. Just answer the questions. And if you dispute the examples, you need to explain that as well - rather than just saying, in effect, that you find them inconvenient to your opinion.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

I answered.

I dispute the examples because you provide nothing to back them up.

If you ever studied statistic or economics then you know exactly what I am talking about. Heck, if you have taken Consumers Math you know why I say you can not determine anything from those two data points you have provided.

I am not your professor. I am not going to walk you through basic statistics or basic economics.

You didn't even understand when I broke it down for you in post 73 and again in post 157.

You stated that The 1950s were a more prosperous period for the nation.

I have provided you with a number of facts that refute that and yet you can not understand them.

[nopardons]

LOL

[nopardons]

Yawn.......still more lies and personal attacks, used for what...surely not refutation.

You're the one who keeps talking about "having the last word",dear. LOL

You should really 1) answer ALL of my previously asked questions 2) respond to the facts in my posts 3) at least make a stab at refuting/talking about the historical factual figures in my post 4) or just stop replying to me.

[nopardons]

Forget it...he just wants to waste our time with drivel. He doesn't even know what he's arguing about anymore;if he ever did.

[sevry]

He doesn't even know what he's arguing about anymore

I'd say the same for you, except that it seems that you want the last word. Have at it. But you can also stop with the personal attacks at anytime. I think everyone would appreciate that.

[sevry]

I dispute the examples

On what basis? For all the numbers I gave you, which do you think are wrong, and why?

you can not determine anything from those two data points

It was a lot more than two. Some major purchases. Some that just seem like it because of the present cost. You're trying to argue something so at odds with reality that you painted yourself into a corner. Clearly, inflation has outraced any increase in wages over the same period. Where there was the exception, which I've pointed out repeatedly, had other industries or another gone the same way, they'd be giving away cars for free.

But I've said this all, many, many times now. And all you seem content to do is have me repeat myself, rather than reply to what I wrote.

So.

[nopardons]

If you'd stop posting to me,I'd stop replying. :-)

But,unlike you,I do actually remember what the topic of this thread was and what was stated.

You're really very lonely and crave attention,any kind pf attention. That's really it...isn't it? ;^)

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

Clearly, inflation has outraced any increase in wages over the same period.

Clearly not.

1950 Average US Annual Salary: $2,992

2004 Average US Annual Salary; $36,764

Increase by factor of twelve.

$10.00 buying power in 1950 equals $78.38 buying power 2004.

Increase by a factor of eight.

Go to the DOL web site and look it up. I'm done with you.

[attiladhun2]

While we are at it, let's just execute debtors just like petty thieves were once executed. After all, according to some, failure to pay back a debt is really just another form of larceny. At the very least debtors should be flogged with 300 lashes, don't you think?
I have another idea. Debtors could sell themselves or their wives and children into slavery in order to satisfy creditors, now there's an enlightened approach to debt relief!