• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should loans be illegal?

Should loans be illegal?

  • Certainly, there is no real need for them.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes they should, we can manage without loans.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • something else..(explain)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    29
So?



Yeah. People stop asking for loans they can't pay for....:roll:

The problem is that loans inflate prices, to the level where others have to take loans in order to buy the same things... In the end no one can afford things they should be able to afford.

In the end a house has ended up costing Brits about 30 of their annual wages....
 
No, loans need to be legal. Without that ability we'd be marxists, it seems like a dumb overreaction to the current crisis.

I agree with Hatuey completely, if someone, or some business, bites off more than they can chew then **** 'em. That said, the new bankruptcy laws are BS and need to be reformed, along with more investigation and regulation by the govt in the whole financial sector.

YOU the PEOPLE are the ones who are paying for the bankruptcies of your nations banks and businesses now. You have already paid several thousand dollars already and in future obligations. Just the interest rates amount to 100$ a year.
 
I'm sure that preventing borrowing for household consumption is a sensible way to decrease the extent of consumerism.

But households shouldn't even be allowed to borrow for investment?

Now that's a great idea if you prefer:
  1. underinvestment in education, health care and housing
  2. a lower standard of living for all but a select few
  3. higher inequality

Maybe someone with a better understanding of economics could correct me if I'm wrong.

I am just edging this whole discussion, putting it on the edge to get a point out..

My true opinion on the issue is that we need to limit home loans(and the amounts), we need to make it really strict for private people to get credit, we need to put limits on that credit, all in relations to wages and your savings and such. And we also need to make it easier for start up businesses to get funding, but more difficult for existing businesses to survive only by lending money, or in general make it more difficult for businesses to lend money, except of course new businesses.
 
No, loans should not be illegal. If house values plummet, I will still owe the bank for my house that wouldn't be worth half of what I still owe. It's a selfish point of view, yes. :mrgreen:
 
No, loans should not be illegal. If house values plummet, I will still owe the bank for my house that wouldn't be worth half of what I still owe. It's a selfish point of view, yes. :mrgreen:

I kind of like this analogy...I think a persons success should be rated on how much debt they can acquire and not pay back... before they move on to the next life:)
 
Last edited:
... Why should people be able to loan their way to afford things they cannot afford? And why should this practice again make other people unable to afford what they really should afford without taking a loan?

You are partially correct. People are borrowing far too much to buy things they don't need.

But as long as it is free market and strictly voluntary, I have no problem with it.

On the other hand, when GOVERNMENT (all levels) borrows and borrows and borrows and keeps going deeeeeeeeeeeeeeper into debt, I get mad as Hell. My blood really boils when we realize that the vast majority of things that government buys with this borrowed money are things we are better off WITHOUT, even if they were FREE.


Very interesting...I believe many things would be far better off if we could go back in time and outlaw any form of credit....

I wouldn't outlaw voluntary private credit, but I would gladly outlaw government credit. That would be one good way to keep its growth in check, not to mention eliminate public debts.


Borrowing/lending money is a responsibility; the primary cause of todays depression is that both parties abdicated their responsibility.
Our Congress may have passed laws making credit easier....too easy for too many....

Congress has not only made it too easy. The really bad part is they MANDATED banks to provide loans to irresponsible people who nearly always default.


I love this analogy, I have been using the words "ponzi scheme" in my conversations lately about this financial collapse. Although it is a bit different in exact mechanism, it behaves similarly....

Want a really good Ponzi scheme? Try social security. Don't you wish there was a way to get out of it?


You know what should be illegal?

Banks taking FED bail-out funds and not using them to loan or stimulate businesses or qualified borrowers. Using instead the same funds to shore up their own solvency.]


The solution is simple. DON'T bail them out.
 
I cannot imagine why it should be illegal for me to let someone borrow some of my money, and for me to make money off of it.
 
I kind of like this analogy...I think a persons success should be rated on how much debt they can acquire and not pay back... before they move on to the next life:)

This is exactly what is making our giant snowball of credit on the brink of collapsing and clearly making it a situation far deeper than the "Great Depression"

the bottom level of the credit pyramid is the very basic lending and borrowing with "low" risk. The levels of the pyramid keep building and bailing out the level below of... people passed away leaving debt...people filing bankruptsy and pushing their debt upward...people simply not paying a bill...etc...until it reaches the top of the unstable credit pyramid and all that is left is the relying on the government...which by the way can't help much when their in debt too......then the whole pyramid collapses and creates the largest "Great Depression" in the history of the world...

What happens after every depression....WAR!
 
Last edited:
What the hell are you talking about? :screwy

Money is nothing more then an agreed upon system of barter.

Loaning money, loaning a commodity, such as a pig, or loaning my man hours out isn't any different. I get paid monthly. By the time I receive a paycheck, I loaned my valuable time out for an entire month to my employer.

If you want to banish the ability to get loans, you signal to me that you fail to understand what money actually is.
 
No, I don't think it would make sense to get rid of loans. Should we have a small amount of regulation, sure I can buy that. Make sure contracts are good, things are leveraged correctly, and that people are well informed about the loan they wish to take out. But there's no reason not to have loans in general. Loans are good, they help you get things you may need. Prices for stuff wouldn't drop too much without loans, people just would have less. If I have a good, stable job in which I make lots of money; there's no reason I shouldn't be able to borrow against that so I can get maybe a house or something. Can this be taken too far? Yes of course, and we've seen the results of predation loaning and Wall Street getting their way. Regulate a little bit, and that will help ensure this doesn't happen again. But ending loans...that would be stupid.
 
Loans and credit are absolutely necessary to the perpetuation of this system, so no, they will never be illegal.
 
Loans and credit are absolutely necessary to the perpetuation of this system, so no, they will never be illegal.

You and me just dont fit at all.. It seems you misunderstand ANYTHING and EVERYTHING I say, even this simple question in my thread. We must have an opposite way of thinking.. Where are you from?( is the question that pushes into my head..)

The name implies you are a French immigrant or something.
 
Last edited:
PHP:
Congress has not only made it too easy. The really bad part is they MANDATED banks to provide loans to irresponsible people who nearly always default.
Can this be true ?
It seems to be so absurd.
IMO, Congress cannot do this, not as it is written....
If so, any Congressional Investigation would back-fire and the Representatives would have to resign in disgrace...all of them.....
 
What is this? "Come up with new and interesting ways to make the entire global economy utterly and completely collapse" day?
 
PHP:
Congress has not only made it too easy. The really bad part is they MANDATED banks to provide loans to irresponsible people who nearly always default.
Can this be true ?
It seems to be so absurd.
IMO, Congress cannot do this, not as it is written....
If so, any Congressional Investigation would back-fire and the Representatives would have to resign in disgrace...all of them.....

Correct... Some banks are lending though.
 
You and me just dont fit at all.. It seems you misunderstand ANYTHING and EVERYTHING I say

How, exactly, did I "misinterpret" you? You ask a question "Should loans be illegal?" and go on to say how unnecessary they are. I respond by saying that they are necessary to the system and because of that they will never be made illegal. I responded directly to your points.
 
I believe people should be free to make their own decisions when it comes to loans. I understand the ideal of trying to keep people from bad decisions but, when the state gets involved in these types of personal decisions it only makes them worse.
 
Back
Top Bottom