Sources used in this document:

Nevertheless, it can still be safely assumed that if the particularly players (be they individuals, families acting as one, businesses, corporations or even nation-states) were effectively being forced into doing something they did not want to do, all would opt to find a way to undertake a "fresh start" in one way or another (Biza-Khupe, 2008). The methods and means behind the various types of bankruptcy protections, after all, foresee this, and were designed and have evolved (legally and politically) for the exact purposes of trying to determine how such a recovery could best come about. Good people (or entities of a social nature) want to continue to being good, particularly if they feel at all connected to passing that sense of cultural accomplishment on to their offspring.

The dramatic economic thunderstorm has clearly smudged the boundaries of these nebulous distinctions, however. There is no long such apparent direct links any longer between what people seem to be doing and why they are doing what they are doing. It simply could be the case that people (as individuals or inside a corporation) no longer see bankruptcy itself in the same light as they used to, which has brought about a shift in the stigma associated with that action (Efrat, 2006). And which also means they could no longer see it as a desirable option even if they have to turn toward it, or they may simply have begun to disconnect it from any basic form or moral legitimacy at all. The potency of the norms of enforcement as Efrat (2006:482) says are not as strong as they used to be. Or perhaps it could be the case that the norms are changing in several different ways and thus effectively removing the theoretical grounding from across the elements. It might well be the case that it will no longer be as safe as it used to be to claim that personal and business bankruptcy considerations share the same network of support.

Take the case of the American middle class (Boushey and Weller, 2008). Many statistics demonstrate that this sector is being hurt the most by uncontrollable debt and the related disheveling of their financial circumstances. How might such individuals act when given the chance to stay or leave this classification? Might they not want to sink lower, as it were, to the lesser social classes (where public benefits may be available), or might they be just as willing to go the other way and gamble on being able to recover with bigger and better results? Could they become reckless in one way or the other or might they be recovering from the storm by moving to an entirely different set of normative opportunities, some of