I digress, but I think the US has a healthier attitude towards failure. Maybe I am wrong of course: I never lived there.
When a company goes bankrupt it can bring down with it smaller providers and self employed workers. If you only lose venture capital, that is not so bad as it is part of the risk/reward. Why anyone would like to do business with an entrepreneur that uses bankruptcy to move on? I guess that in-advance payments could be a solution.
Bankruptcy is a last resort mechanism. It makes sense to let people move on when, without bad intention, they just failed a business. To make mistakes is human. But to abuse the privilege betting in high risk business and letting others pay for it seems immoral and not long-term sustainable for the economy.
High risk businesses have a cost. Trying multiple of them and expecting others to swallow looses they did not caused sounds to me like abusing the system meant to get you out of genuine failure.
This is not treating it as a last resort, this is "you rely on repeated bankruptcy" as a part of strategy. So they go into high risk business with expectation that someone else will pay if that fails. (Which is ok in only speculators loose money, but not ok if they end up not paying suppliers, sub-contractors etc for services.)
> Judges and lawyers here push you to keep going and avoid bankruptcy at all cost, but that seriously makes no sense in many cases which can be outside your control.
This is judges and lawyers treating bankruptcy as a last resort.
Judges and lawyers probably do that very close to the extent that that is actually a requirement of the bankruptcy laws, which are intended as a last resort.
Specially the American culture has this idiotic thing where people are so afraid to called a failure or to be someone who quits. That's probably doing more damage than anything to yourselfs.