Stop and think about this for a second: If someone intends to not pay, abusive language isn't going to change their minds.

If someone cannot pay, then abusive language has no value either because, well, they cannot pay.

The only case where abusive language is beneficial is if someone is actively trying to pay down their bills, but they have more bills than they can pay all at once and a debt collector wants to get their bill paid before every other debt collector's bill. And gee, that's exactly what happens when someone loses their job / suffers a major medical crisis / etc.

tl;dr: Abusive behavior is useless if someone is NOT going to pay their bills, and only does anything if someone is TRYING to pay their bills: It's a means for collectors to try and jump the line to get their own debt paid first.

And frankly, anyone who thinks that two wrongs make a right is a terrible person.

I never said two wrongs make a right. Both are wrong and that just makes two wrong... nothing right. Both are equally fucked up. So why do we villainize only one?

Because the group not being demonized are mostly comprised of people who are trying their best but in circumstances that make it impossible to live up to their obligations and the group being demonized are mostly comprised of people who are breaking the law.