|
|  |
|
Legal Needs
| [This Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts] | | Topics |
|
|
| |
| Oct 09, 2008 3:46 am |
|
[Discussion] Debt Collection |
SOEB FATEHI
| |
Sorry Vijay for not falling in line with network norms if i have offended.
IMO it is necessary to study and analyze root causes (as far as traceable) in order to get on top of any situation.
The handling of recovery stems from the existence of a need for recovery.
A need for recovery (and mechanism thereto) stems more from an inability to repay than from an unwillingness to repay.
To handle unwillingness to repay, many devices including mortgages and guarantees are effectively in place. Coercion (as widely publicized by the media) is generally not for cases of unwillingness.
Coercion (as widely publicized by the media) is generally observed being used only on the very small personal borrowers.
Here it is pertinent to note that the borrowers have miscalculated their ability to repay or circumstances have befallen them whereby they have lost control. The miscalculation is most often a product of lack of maturity and its resulting recklessness.
Now the burning issue is that whether assault and violence (in any format) has a justifiable place in civilized society? What in the first place is civilized society?
If the law (read lawmaking, jurisprudence & enforcement) is corrupt and / or impotent and / or toothless then new centers of administering justice have an opportunity to be created. From a purely economic (supply and demand) perspective also this is true. An alternate effective police mechanism administered by big brothers springs up in any situation where the traditional mechanism fails. History bears witness to the rise to prominence of small lords and rajas in larger empires and vice versa the creation of empires as protectorates of weak dominions.
Realigning with this thread . . . . I submit that the root causes of borrowings and lendings as a way of life be examined whilst attempting to frame or stipulate on recoveries.
I remind my readers (none old enough to have been around) of what they must have read about the great CRASH of 1929 . . . . was that not a product (majorly) of an unrealistically and nonsustainingly expanded state of credit fueled liquidity?
Lenders in such markets are people with surplus assets who are unwilling to put their assets forward as equity (risks!) and wish to remain in their own shell of not caring a shit for the borrowers' ability whilst sucking the ganna dry!
Borrowers in such markets are those who proverbially spread their legs beyond their mats and live as though there is no tomorrow!
Are these borrowers any different from the feudal lords, who extract lagaan notwithstanding the vagaries of the monsoon, from the landless tillers (toilers).
With that i close this current submission asking again . . . .
Why borrow? Why lend?
Why?
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI (new win) |
|
| |
|
