Erasing Debt: Rolling Jubilee

[Aetherous]

Rolling Jubilee

 

This group is basically about random people donating money, which buys debt, and then erases it altogether. Totally in line with the ideology of "mercy".

 

100% of the money goes toward this cause, and not to the volunteers that make it happen.

[Aetherous]

Some criticism here.

[joeblast]

The criticism link was only partially correct - it will not have the credit card people trying to incentivize more debt, they already have it in spades.

 

So the question should be asked - exactly who is it that is incentivizing debt???

 

Just a one question quiz for today

[Aetherous]

I don't know anything about this subject...do you have an answer?

[JustARandomPanda]

I don't know anything about this subject...do you have an answer?

 

 

Check this article out.

 

 

Side note: The example he uses - mortgages - is one reason why I've always argued a primary home should not be seen or valued as an "investment" by the average homeowner but rather as a long term consumer good. Anyone who's ever lived in a house can attest how your "investment" will begin to fall to pieces around you bit by bit if you don't keep sinking yet more capital into it's upkeep.

 

 

 

The real solution is one that very few people actually bother to implement. Do as the Stoics advised. Learn to value, rejoice and delight daily in that which you already have rather than constantly searching to acquire yet more. The Stoics developed a host of practices designed to help the Stoic student do exactly that.

[Aetherous]

How do you think that article relates to Rolling Jubilee, Serene?

 

Another article on RJ.

 

edit: Also, I had no idea that the Stoic book had practices. I've been eyeing it up for some time now...pretty good?

Edited November 17, 2012 by turtle shell

[JustARandomPanda]

How do you think that article relates to Rolling Jubilee, Serene?

 

Another article on RJ.

 

Fascinating. I did not realize the Jubilee was specifically for medical debt. Hmmm. I do like the fact that it is a form of compassion for people who are financially distressed through no fault of their own (presumably). I'm not sure anyone would say the average cancer patient somehow is at fault for his/her cancer or inability to pay for treatment of it.

 

OTOH...unless alternative means of payment are found the Jubilee will not be a long term solution because it still has the problems that other kinds of non-income-producing debt have.

 

edit: Also, I had no idea that the Stoic book had practices. I've been eyeing it up for some time now...pretty good?

 

Quite good imo. Most chapters detail a Stoic practice you can begin doing. My favorite is the daily negative visualization. Oddly enough the result is just like the Stoics said. It makes you end up significantly appreciating what you already have. It's an effective way to stave off hedonistic adaption. Other practices end up making you not desire new things without genuine need (new clothes, new movies, new music, new car, new swag, etc etc etc). Bad for capitalism I suppose but good for one's psychological health - not to mention one's bank account. Although the Stoics had practices to prevent you from being attached to money (and status) as well. Other practices deal with pride and anger, etc.

[Aetherous]

OTOH...unless alternative means of payment are found the Jubilee will not be a long term solution because it still has the problems that other kinds of non-income-producing debt have.

 

Not sure what you mean here.

 

(will check out the stoic book!)

Edited November 17, 2012 by turtle shell

[JustARandomPanda]

Not sure what you mean here.

 

(will check out the stoic book!)

 

Ok.

 

This section from the article was primarily what I was thinking of when I said that:

 

Since the additional debt did not create any additional income, more of the household's income is now diverted to paying interest. Even if the additional debt was used to purchase a rental property, if that property's expenses (property taxes, maintenance, etc.) have outpaced rental income increases, or the equity in the rental was extracted in the bubble, then the actual rise in net income might be negligible or even negative.

I know a number of households with substantial real estate assets and upper-middle class incomes, but they are effectively low-income debt-serfs, as most of their income goes to the interest payments on their stupendous mortgages.

 

Exchange the word "mortgages" with stupendous "medical bills" (disregarding the bits about property taxes, maintenance, etc) it has the same problem. Stupendous medical bill debt is a type of debt that has no way of earning income to pay itself back. The only hope is that the medical patient has some other form of income stream or collateral that can compensate for this lack of repayment ability inherent in medical debt.

 

People who fall into Jubilee category are people who had none of those other compensating mechanisms or cash flow streams. It's definitely got them in quite a pickle. And it's why I do like the sentiment behind the Jubilee initiative. However...even though the Jubilee has well meaning motives it doesn't have the means of preventing the same thing from happening to future medical patients.

 

 

p.s. wanted to add...if Jubilee somehow did become a fantastic success it could also drive up the prices of that "pennies on the dollar" debt purchased. So fewer medical debt would be bought to free future medical debtors.

Edited November 17, 2012 by SereneBlue

[Aetherous]

Yea it does really just have one function. Out of the blue, someone will be notified that they don't owe a portion (or maybe all) of their debt.

[Owledge]

I don't have the ability right now to figure all this out, but it sounds like an attempt at a solution WITHIN a scam instead of getting rid of the scam.

How does Rolling Jubilee look on the backdrop of the global pyramid scheme that is the dominant monetary system?

Actors and such are involved, so it might be something that doesn't dig too deeply into truth. Hollywood loves stuff that makes them FEEL doing good, but usually actors don't do very much in-depth research if it sounds good on the surface.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Owledge

[Aetherous]

If you have something real to contribute, feel free.

[Owledge]

What do you mean?

[Aetherous]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/deannazandt/2012/11/28/lets-talk-about-debt-how-rolling-jubilee-aims-to-strike-at-the-crisis/

[Owledge]

That article clarified it.

Philanthropic redistribution of wealth that keeps the system that creates the problems alive by participating in it. Doesn't sound like activism to kinda sabotage or rebel.

It's a bit like that gasoline boycott where you think you can show the gasoline sellers that you control them while not realizing they still control you, because you still need gasoline and will have to get it later and/or from another company: fundamentally flawed approach. They could just as well pay the debt for households directly. Then the banks benefit directly and the vultures somewhat less. But there's hardly any moral disdinction between the former and the latter.

 

What distinguishes fake activism from real activism is that real activists realize that you can't rebel against a system by participating in it.

Oh, this just reminds me of somewhat of an example that I heard about recently: peace activists in Israel. Seems they all oppose occupation of Gaza and West Bank, while none oppose Zionism.

Or how about a popular quote to show the difference: "There will never be a revolution in Germany, because stepping on the lawn is forbidden."

Edited November 28, 2012 by Owledge

[Aetherous]

fundamentally flawed approach

 

I simply disagree completely, when real debt is being erased for real people. The goal of this group isn't to eradicate or change the system...it's just to provide some relief for people ($8,747,970 of relief at the moment).

 

Your argument is like being in a sinking boat, and saying to your shipmate that filling buckets with the water inside and dumping it out isn't going to help your situation...that the boat should simply stop sinking. Yeah man, that'd be nice...but do you want to think of something helpful?

Edited November 28, 2012 by turtle shell

[Owledge]

Your argument is like being in a sinking boat, and saying to your shipmate that filling buckets with the water inside and dumping it out isn't going to help your situation...that the boat should simply stop sinking. Yeah man, that'd be nice...but do you want to think of something helpful?

Plug the holes, or if they are too big, abandon ship. Making people do sysiphos work will only spread despair. The ship is sinking because it wasn't heading for safe waters, but the opposite.

 

Debt relief is one thing. It helps to show that debt is ultimately void. Paying debt for someone else will only solidify the illusion of it being anything else than a monetary scam. What we need is not so much prominent people who give some of the money of which they have more than they need anyway to criminals, but some bravery by standing up to those criminals.

Of course the former will be some temporary relief, but it's not really changing anything. Bad times are built into the system, and they are necessary in order to make clear how the system is flawed. If you buffer the inherent phases of hardship (bank bailouts are another result of this approach), it will confirm that the system is a 'success'.

[Aetherous]

Like I said, if you have something real to discuss, feel free.

[Owledge]

Yeah, like that repeated remark of yours is of any substance. You're just completely disregarding someone else's writings, which is highly disrespectful and denialist, borderline trolling. Don't post on forums if you can't handle people disagreeing with you.

[Aetherous]

Rawr.

 

I just don't appreciate absolutely useless pessimism.

 

By the way, I meant to say this before...but if you have something real to contribute, go ahead and feel free to share.

Edited November 28, 2012 by turtle shell

[JustARandomPanda]

Owledge has a point. I just don't think he explained his position very well.

 

It has to do with the nature of compound interest on types of money transfers that have a far higher likelihood of putting the debtor in a position of involuntary 'debt indentured servitude' to people or institutions whom already have a lot of power thanks to their ratio of capital vis-a-vis the debtor populace.

 

This is actually one of the reasons several spiritual traditions such as Catholicism and Islam were very against interest (aka Usury). Islam for example has many teachings from Mohammed about how Usury (compounding interest on debt) is disapproved by Allah yet profit itself is ok. The two are not the same according to Islam. Catholicism had similar teachings.

 

The reason is simply based on what we see in everyday life. Compounding interest on debt that can not be repaid (setting aside for the moment the reasons for the non-repayment - obviously some legit and others not-so-legit) creates big problems in societies that have negative spill-over effects into areas one would never have thought of it effecting while taking out the loan.

 

If people were content with agreed-upon-in-advance percentage of profit (Catholic and Islamic-style finance - aka simple interest, not compound) then some problems of involuntary debt-servitude that we see today would not be as big an issue in societies. It wouldn't solve every problem of course but it would cut out at least a few significant problems we see today.

 

Owledge was just pointing out that Jubilee - by paying off the loan on the debt collection market - sends zero signals to society the current way the system is set up for certain kinds of debt creates a lot of pain for both the debtor and the creditor if even one thing in the payback schedule doesn't go as planned. A lot of people in these scenarios forget that creditors often do feel pain too (if somewhat less that the debtor of course but nonetheless they don't get out of jail free either...nobody likes losing money).

 

 

Turtle Shell is right however in that Owledge's agitating for changing the system does not help the people who are trapped by that system right this very moment. That's why Jubilee is a double-edged sword. It both helps and hurts.

 

By helping current debtors get out of indentured debt servitude it helps them a great deal - maybe up to 100% - but also sends the signal the market has found a way to help creditors not lose everything on their original loan (although it doesn't help future debtors one bit).

 

Oddly...the fact that medical *does* have such a high default rate tells creditors to price medical loans at a very high interest rate...which then has the adverse effect of increasing the likelihood the debtor will default. The creditor knows this and plans the strategies accordingly.

 

So who benefits from this most? I'd argue neither the creditor nor medical debtor but actually the medical industry. You know...the people who eventually end up with the money the loan was taken out for in the first place. There's zero truly serious threats to the medical industry's business (and thus profit) model right now to make them go on a serious hunt to find ways to make medical treatment more affordable and profitable at the same time. And a serious threat to the medical industry's current business model is the only reason things would or will ever make it change.

[GreytoWhite]

This is in no way a threat to make this sort of thing get harder to do. Collections companies already buy these debts at pennies on the dollar and are happy to be recompensed in any way. There are many debt negotiators out there, a friend of mine had a negotiator take nearly $100,000 in credit card debt down to about $37,000 including the negotiator's fee. Most people will not take advantage of this sort of thing and it will not be threatened.

[GrandmasterP]

http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/

 

These people have been trying for years.

Nothing much has come of it, but their heart is in the right place.