The average person thinks companies make over 5x the profit they actually make, and they think the amount of profit correlates negatively with how responsible and good for the world the company is (when in fact there's very little discernable correlation, and it may be positive). What profit people begrudge is likely not particularly relevant, given how uneducated those opinions generally are.

It's rarely ever been above 5%. Plus, a default doesn't necessarily mean the creditor lost money equal to the full value of the loan plus all interest payments. Some defaults are haircuts, some a break-even, and others simply fail to realize their full value.

> and they think the amount of profit correlates negatively with how responsible and good for the world the company is (when in fact there's very little discernable correlation, and it may be positive).

Sure, you just have to be willing to ignore "fairness, consumer protection, environmental protection satisfaction, and employee satisfaction" when considering "corporate social responsibility."

> given how uneducated those opinions generally are

So, do they merely have these opinions because they are uneducated or because they're misplacing blame in the system?

Citation on ~5%? I've seen occasional claims that it's that low, but I've often seen it quoted in the ~20-25% range as well. And that ignores the money spent on trying to get borrowers to make good, as well.

> you just have to be willing to ignore fairness, consumer protection, environmental protection satisfaction, and employee satisfaction

Nah, some of the most profitable corporations score really well there. High profit is not well-correlated with bad behavior, even though some bad behaviors can bring high profits. It often just means the company is really good at bringing people things they find useful.

> So, do they merely have these opinions because they are uneducated or because they're misplacing blame in the system?

The people are often educated -- they're merely uneducated on the relevant info for that particular question. Most people don't know how the major systems they interact with work; we should expect them to misplace blame.

People do get a say in the policies of their society in a democracy, whether educated or not. People also think NASAs budget is 50x what it is, but it doesn’t mean we should strip away their right to vote, it means they need to be educated (or their representatives, by proxy). Otherwise it’s just advocating for a technocracy

A technocratic republic, maybe where we got to pick who ends up on legislative subcommittees ourselves[0], might actually be a good thing.

[0] Obviously we can imagine many other forms for a technocratic republic to take; this is just the most similar to the current system, and thus maybe least unreasonable in a path-dependency sense.

Agreed. It very much does depend on the default rate.

FWIW when I now see 10%+ APRs on unsecured loans for presumably highly rated borrowers and much higher rates for riskier borrowers, I’m no longer shocked.