Jailed for $280: The return of debtors' prisons http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505144_162-57417654/jailed-for-$280-the-return-of-debtors-prisons/
A better solution would be to force the person to work off the debt by doing some light admin work, e.g. stuffing envelopes or something simple. That would reduce the costs to the taxpayers of putting the person up in a jail.
No, a better solution would be to eliminate any possibility that a person who owes a debt could be hauled off to prison. What you're proposing is getting a person to work for free to pay off a debt. You may not know this, but that was one of the ways, back in the old days, that a person became a slave. Working for someone else for no compensation other, of course, than what it takes to keep you alive to do the actual work is, you know, that very thing. Just because the creditor took a chance and lost on that chance doesn't make him entitled to imprison someone and make him work to pay off that debt. I would have thought we all knew this. Apparently not.
They're not "working for free", they're "working to pay back what they owe". Last I checked, the history books didn't mention that slaves had borrowed any money from the masters for whom they toiled and thus hadn't incurred any obligations to their masters. This woman did. So, unless you have some super-secret history book which states otherwise, your moralistic diatribe comparing her situation to slavery is completely irrelevant. I've noticed lately that a lot of people "know" things I don't know. That the things they "know" happen to be completely false doesn't seem to stop them from claiming to "know" them. Odd, but I put up with it because it seems to be endemic to the times and I don't get paid to correct every mistaken notion that crops up in some fool's head.
So then in your opinion, if someone goes out and gets a bunch of loans, maxes out his credit card and refinances his house to pull all the cash out and then moves to the bahamas to retire...he shouldnt be pursued because the banks, credit cards and mortgage lenders that LOANED him money "took a chance"? Or how about this...lets say there is a company and you buy a bond from them for $50k at 8% interest and the company decides they are not going to pay it because the CEO needs a bonus this year. Should you just be out $50k because YOU took a chance?
Yes. That is how a loan works. You lend money and assume risk of default. Our entire economy benefits from entrepreneurs and lenders being able to take on risk through lending. How many start ups do you think there would be if one had to go to prison or work off debts?..... Not many
Maybe the total number of start-ups would decrease, but would the number of start-ups which succeed actually go down? Maybe all the threat of prison would do would be to discourage marginal start-ups with no chance of success from ever trying. In other words, not every dumbass with a half-baked idea would quit his job, borrow money and fail. Which would actually increase economic efficiency because it would keep people with little to no chance of creating a successful start-up doing whatever it is they were doing before. It's becoming apparent that the opponents of debtors' prisons aren't really all that bright. On that basis alone, they seem like a good idea.
too bad none of you can even comprehend what you read, or you didn't read the article or you are easily brainwashed by the media propaganda. here, I'll make it easy for you who where educated by the Department of Education. The lady was not imprisoned for owing money. She was imprisoned for not showing up in court. otherwise, there's a lot of people out there who wouldn't mind three squares a day and a roof over their head if they could get an easy job like stuffing envelopes. You'll know it is bad when there is a waiting list to get in.
sounds like " Community service" here in UK- u smash up cars, attack some one- the Judge gives u a a community service- all employed by the government- so on the gravy train