A thing which I think is counter-intuitive:
Society should prefer materially-greater-than-zero defaults on credit obligations and frequent impairment of / losses on equity.
These are both consequences of positive-sum harnessing of risk appetite. (Profits are also a consequence)
If you were to list social safety net programs in the US by size, consumer credit providers would be up there. That is probably a *deeply* controversial point of view, but it rounds to true: they sign up to take losses ~second in society, after a consumer's savings, in emergency.
(This was brought home for me when writing letters for people who had found themselves in consumer debt trouble back in the day. One was dying, unexpectedly, and would not be able to settle their debt, to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars.)
(I drafted a letter asking for the bank's compassion with respect to their final months / heirs, and am told the bank replied "Very sorry etc etc. We'd be obliged if your heirs could send us the certificate when the time comes to papertrail this. Writing off, naturally.")
You can follow @patio11.
Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.
Enjoy Threader? Sign up.
Since you’re here...
... we’re asking visitors like you to make a contribution to support this independent project. In these uncertain times, access to information is vital. Threader gets 1,000,000+ visits a month and our iOS Twitter client was featured as an App of the Day by Apple. Your financial support will help two developers to keep working on this app. Everyone’s contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support Threader by becoming premium or by donating on PayPal. Thank you.