Elroy, quite right - make lenders responsible for identifying the borrower correctly. Then they'll not be too casual about giving credit. And, make the consequences for criminals so bleak that the incentive to steal goes away.
There is a weird attitude these days, around the world it seems, to blame the victims. If your car is broken into, it's your fault for leaving valuables in view and failing to lock your car. The absurd length the "justice" system goes to in Australia I think it was, was to prosecute people for failing to lock their car. It was/is an offence to leave a car unlocked. I don't think I'm making that up.
The security industry is vast. Security is a complete pain in the neck to normal people [aka honest people].
I think part of the problem is so many people are essentially dishonest [I guess about 60%] that crime is treated as a cost of doing business, a thing to be expected because it's uncool to be goody-two-shoes, it's cool to be on the take, getting away with something. Punishment is actually, contrary to urban legend, not wanted by most people - "there but for the grace of god go I ...".
As you say, when the lenders are sloppy and it costs them money, then they'll be more particular. I had to explain to ASBBank Ltd how their system of ID checking was fundamentally insecure as their staff could be the crime centre. Of course, they don't like to believe that, just as customs were surprised when their staff were running the drugs. No surprise to sensible people - authoritarians have trouble understanding that THEY are the problem.
Mqurice |
