 |
 |





 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
From: jaedian |
Date:
April 6th, 2010 10:47 pm (UTC)
|
| (Link) |
|
In general I think yes. But that is such a broad question. And there are plenty of decisions that seem perfectly reasonable at the time but are in fact disastrous in hindsight. (do we need responsibility police to determine if it was a good choice at the time? - then you qualify for help?)
But there are plenty of choices that end up being bad, that were made based on erroneous assumptions, rather than being irresponsible choices. With the mortgage crisis, certainly some of the people were irresponsible. But many just had faulty assumptions, assuming they would keep getting raises or keep their job, assuming that real estate would go up or at least not go down etc. So I don't see how you can sort out the irresponsible from just unfortunate choices. At least not on a society level.
And certainly, there are plenty of irresponsible decisions that pay off in a big positive way. (risk taking can be quite profitable. And responsible decisions that fail miserably.
And I think there should be some attempt to reduce the penalty for first time offenders whether it be bankruptcy or criminal court. Because sometimes people make mistakes and we should always try and learn from our past mistakes as no-one is perfect. But I think there also has to be some penalty for a mistake, or you won't learn from it. And if it is a repeat pattern, then I wouldn't offer help.
But I do think people who are responsible or hard working or even lucky should be allowed to benefit from any successes as well. Otherwise no-one has any incentive to make good choices in the future. As a side point, I do see a lot of parents nowadays stepping in to save their children from their choices and mistakes. I don't see how children can learn from their mistakes if we do that. And it seems like this could have interesting social ramifications in future generations.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|

|
 |
 |

|
 |