Travelling and leaving debts behind

[phildwyer]

i did this

they really try and initmidate you for about 6 months and then they stop I don't believe the whole thing that it all disappears at all. even if they write off your debt that is still on a record somewhere and they don't ever let you go.

BUT

it isn't as scary as they make out, the law does say that if you indicate that you are still willing to pay the debt within your own means then legally they can't take anything off you. if you think about it like you might be in the same situation without going abroad, you might just lose your job and so on, you do have rights to protect you from losing everything cos you can't pay

but 50 pounds a week isn't really a lot if you can afford to go travelling surely

Its a matter of principle though. People who charge interest for loans are scumbags. If there is any way at all you can get away with not paying them--even if that does mean some slight inconvenience to yourself--then you should take advantage of it. And the truth is: there isn't really anything they can do to you. Debtor's prison is a thing of the past.

 

[Pingu]

i dont normally join in on this sort of thing but ^^ is bollocks

in the UK if you do something like that and get a CCJ you can kiss goodbye (or at least have to pay a higher interest rate or jump through loads of hoops) to getting all sorts of stuff for 6 years (loans, credit cards, current accounts, mortgages, even the ability to rent if they do a credit background check on you)

you can also kiss goodbye to working for anywhere where they do a credit check - banks are the obvious one here but there are others.

much better to come to some sort of arrangement if you can

 

[phildwyer]

i dont normally join in on this sort of thing but ^^ is bollocks

in the UK if you do something like that and get a CCJ you can kiss goodbye (or at least have to pay a higher interest rate or jump through loads of hoops) to getting all sorts of stuff for 6 years (loans, credit cards, current accounts, mortgages, even the ability to rent if they do a credit background check on you)

you can also kiss goodbye to working for anywhere where they do a credit check - banks are the obvious one here but there are others.

much better to come to some sort of arrangement if you can

Well we're going to have to agree to disagree. In my experience, both in the US and the UK, they don't do nearly as many credit checks, or nearly such thorough ones, as they claim. If they did I cerrtainly wouldn't have the credit rating I do, which is excellent. You just have to know who to pay, how much, and when. Usually you can get away with paying almost nothing to nobody.

And just to emphasize: for me this is basically a moral issue. Usury is despicable, and usurers desrve no-one's pity.

 

[derf]

I would come down on the side of paying if you are only off for a year.
Not paying could come back and bite you in the arse if you are unlucky.
All it would take is coming home, meeting your soul mate and going house shopping only to find a big fat fuck off from the mortgage supplier.

Aside from the moral issue it's just not worth the risk.

Have a nice time. Sounds like fun.

 

[phildwyer]

I would come down on the side of paying if you are only off for a year.
Not paying could come back and bite you in the arse if you are unlucky.
All it would take is coming home, meeting your soul mate and going house shopping only to find a big fat fuck off from the mortgage supplier.

Rent then. I do.

 

[Wolveryeti]

And just to emphasize: for me this is basically a moral issue. Usury is despicable, and usurers desrve no-one's pity.

You seem to miss the fact that a loan is a contract entered into by two willing parties. I'm pretty fucking grateful for there being usurious bastards or else I wouldn't be doing my MSc right now. Why on earth would a complete stranger lend money to someone else (bearing in mind risk of default etc) if there wasn't anything in it for them?

 

[phildwyer]

You seem to miss the fact that a loan is a contract entered into by two willing parties. I'm pretty fucking grateful for there being usurious bastards or else I wouldn't be doing my MSc right now. Why on earth would a complete stranger lend money to someone else (bearing in mind risk of default etc) if there wasn't anything in it for them?

We're not talking about "a complete stranger," you make it sound like asking someone for a dime on the street. We're talking about the most powerful institutions in the world--far more powerful than any government--and they way they got so powerful was, basically, by doing nothing. By "lending" money (which doesn't even exist in the first place). They produce nothing, they do nothing but harm. Screw the lot of them, and if you can possibly avoid paying them, do so.

 

[Wolveryeti]

I disagree with pretty much everything you have to say about banks.

They are intermediaries between savers and borrowers. Yes, this does involve real work.
If enough people rip off banks and they go bust, you are basically ripping off their depositors.
No, banks are not more powerful than governments (can they tax you, imprison you, kill you?).
Money does exist. I have some in my pocket.
The appearance of modern finance has played a crucial role in the advancement of science and civilisation. Banks might not actually produce anything but they have played a tremendously important historic role and will continue to do so.

 

[phildwyer]

Money does exist. I have some in my pocket.

No you don't. You have symbols of financial value in your pocket. The financial value represented by those symbols does not exist anywhere outside the human mind. So why should we pay for the "use" of it? Would you pay for the "use" of a car that didn't exist?

 

[phildwyer]

Banks might not actually produce anything but they have played a tremendously important historic role and will continue to do so.

I agree. But the role they have played has been entirely, unmitigatedly and violently destructive. Whether or not people will be so foolish as to allow them to continue playing that role remains to be seen.

 

[Wolveryeti]

A computer program encoded onto a disk doesn't actually 'exist' outside of its being used on a computer. Yet I reckon you would probably agree that computer programmes exist. Money is the same. As long as it fulfils a function, who cares about the metaphysics?

 

[phildwyer]

A computer program encoded onto a disk doesn't actually 'exist' outside of its being used on a computer. Yet I reckon you would probably agree that computer programmes exist. Money is the same. As long as it fulfils a function, who cares about the metaphysics?

I do. In fact I devote my life to analyzing those metaphysics. If more people thought about the metaphysical implications of money, then money (or at any rate usury) would cease to exist. The difference between a computer program and money is that computer programs do not rule the world. Money does. Despite not existing. A bit weird that, wouldn't you say?

 

[Wolveryeti]

I agree. But the role they have played has been entirely, unmitigatedly and violently destructive. Whether or not people will be so foolish as to allow them to continue playing that role remains to be seen.

Banks just lend. There's a case for them using their leverage as lender to exact better behaviour from their debtors, but I can't see how they're causing destruction in their own right.

 

[Y_I_Otter]

Its a matter of principle though.

Too right it is. When you sign for a loan you contractually obligate yourself; in short, you give your word that you'll endevour, as best you can, to repay it.

To most decent folk giving one's word means something, even in this day and age.

 

[Wolveryeti]

I do. In fact I devote my life to analyzing those metaphysics. If more people thought about the metaphysical implications of money, then money (or at any rate usury) would cease to exist. The difference between a computer program and money is that computer programs do not rule the world. Money does. Despite not existing. A bit weird that, wouldn't you say?

Money will always exist because it's more efficient than bartering. Usury will always exist because there is a risk inherent to lending that should properly be compensated for.

I agree with your point that money is loosely based on the real value of things (hence speculators profiting from it etc.). But there is a link. The value of a currency is affected by peoples' beliefs about the soundness of real factors in the economy, and deterioration in these circumstances is mirrored in the exchange rate, albeit imperfectly.

Money is a system of promises, if your point is that promises can affect human behaviour this isn't particularly profound.

 

[phildwyer]

Too right it is. When you sign for a loan you contractually obligate yourself; in short, you give your word that you'll endevour, as best you can, to repay it.

To most decent folk giving one's word means something, even in this day and age.

You think financial institutions give a shit about keeping their word? Wake up and smell the coffee dude.

 

[phildwyer]

Usury will always exist because there is a risk inherent to lending that should properly be compensated for.

In that case, why has it not always existed? Why have most societies (and *every* system of religion and philosophy) regarded it as a monstrously unnatural and anti-social mode of behavior? Why has it generally been restricted to despised pariah-groups? Our society may regard usury as acceptable (though I suspect that that era is rapidly coming to an end as we speak) but we are highly anomolous in this.

I enjoy discussing this with you, but must go now. I will respond to any further comments you may feel like making later today or tomorrow.

 

[Y_I_Otter]

You think financial institutions give a shit about keeping their word? Wake up and smell the coffee dude.

If my attitude towards lending institutions were the same as yours, my approach would be to refuse to have anything to do with them. On principle, like.

I wouldn't make it my business to rip them off and counsel others to do the same.

My bank has never failed to abide by the terms of any contract I've entered into with them. Nor have they failed to make accomodations the two times our business had cash-flow difficulties.

That aside, it is a matter of principle to pay one's debts. For a great many people, sleeping well at night is directly related to their living up to their commitments.

ETA: According to your "principles", if an item in a shop has a higher ticket price than you think the item's worth, is that alone sufficient justification for stealing it?

 

[derf]

Rent then. I do.

True but you could still be bolloxed for anything else you may want for years to come.
Not worth the hassle.
It may well be true that the banks are bastards but they are big bastards with power.
Better to pay if you can.

 

[phildwyer]

It may well be true that the banks are bastards but they are big bastards with power.

You mean to say you've abandoned all hope of a socialist revolution in which we take all our money back from the thieving capitalist bastards before sticking them up against the wall?

 

[phildwyer]

If my attitude towards lending institutions were the same as yours, my approach would be to refuse to have anything to do with them. On principle, like.

I wouldn't make it my business to rip them off and counsel others to do the same.

My bank has never failed to abide by the terms of any contract I've entered into with them. Nor have they failed to make accomodations the two times our business had cash-flow difficulties.

That aside, it is a matter of principle to pay one's debts. For a great many people, sleeping well at night is directly related to their living up to their commitments.

ETA: According to your "principles", if an item in a shop has a higher ticket price than you think the item's worth, is that alone sufficient justification for stealing it?

No, it is usury in particular that I regard as unethical. I believe usurers are worse than thieves, mainly because they are more powerful. I believe that unrestricted usury will destroy the world, and that even the (minimally) restricted usury of our own time is coming pretty darn close to doing so. I consider it not only a principle but a duty to subvert usury and the practices of usurers to the full extent of my abilities. And there is nothing a usurer dislikes more than not being paid back.

 

[Y_I_Otter]

No, it is usury in particular that I regard as unethical. I believe usurers are worse than thieves, mainly because they are more powerful. I believe that unrestricted usury will destroy the world, and that even the (minimally) restricted usury of our own time is coming pretty darn close to doing so. I consider it not only a principle but a duty to subvert usury and the practices of usurers to the full extent of my abilities. And there is nothing a usurer dislikes more than not being paid back.

And the reality that the cost of your position is passed on to people who do honour their commitments, people whose principles include meeting their obligations doesn't bother you at all? I guess we're all schmucks, right?

Where do you suppose people would get loans for homes, vehicles or business improvement without paying interest? Does such an institution exist on your home world?

 

[derf]

You mean to say you've abandoned all hope of a socialist revolution in which we take all our money back from the thieving capitalist bastards before sticking them up against the wall?

socialist revolution. Is there a rolling around pissing your pants laughing smiley?

 

[kerb]

It definitely isn't true that there's a 250 quid a month fine! I went to China for five years, didn't bother deferring, and afterwards just phoned them up and there was no added interest other than that which had accumulated oer the 10 years since I finished Uni.

it only happened within the last couple of years. It was a letter from student loans iirc but knowing me i chucked it out.

perhaps it was dream or one of those false memory type things

 

[treefrog]

I worked out I can either pay off almost everything here, but I'll need to borrow some money out there to buy furniture and stuff. works out cheaper with the conversion rates and stuff.

Not ideal, but that's how these things go...

 

[phildwyer]

socialist revolution. Is there a rolling around pissing your pants laughing smiley?

As I've said many times before, socialist revolutions *always* happen where they're least expected. If they were expected, they wouldn't happen. And now your name is on the list.

 

[phildwyer]

And the reality that the cost of your position is passed on to people who do honour their commitments, people whose principles include meeting their obligations doesn't bother you at all? I guess we're all schmucks, right?

I don't recognize "commitments" to capitalist institutions, which I regard as evil and contemptible in the highest degree. If I could I would put an end to them. By ripping them off I'm doing my bit. Anyone who can possibly avoid paying their debts to such institutions has a moral obligation to do so.

 

[Y_I_Otter]

I don't recognize "commitments" to capitalist institutions, which I regard as evil and contemptible in the highest degree. If I could I would put an end to them. By ripping them off I'm doing my bit. Anyone who can possibly avoid paying their debts to such institutions has a moral obligation to do so.

Moral obligation?

Sounds more like moral bankruptcy to me. You're shunting the responsibility for repayment on honest working people, by increasing the amount they have to repay for their loans.

I ask again, if not for banks, where would people get money for necessary, high-cost things like vehicles, homes and operating capital for small businesses? Who would loan large sums of money to individuals without expecting any return on their investment? You?

 

[phildwyer]

Moral obligation?

Sounds more like moral bankruptcy to me. You're shunting the responsibility for repayment on honest working people, by increasing the amount they have to repay for their loans.

I ask again, if not for banks, where would people get money for necessary, high-cost things like vehicles, homes and operating capital for small businesses? Who would loan large sums of money to individuals without expecting any return on their investment? You?

Yeah alright. How much do you need? I'll be wanting a downpayment mind, to show good faith and that.

 

[Y_I_Otter]

Glib, unfunny evasion, noted.