If you were two people who started on a more or less level playing field, it wouldn't be. The problem with these kinds of systems (at least the ethics of them) is that what conservatives call the "West" which is to say, America, Europe, sometimes Russia depending, or what can also be called the "1st world" is yes, wealthy, yes, successful, but that a great deal of that wealth and success was derived from colonial exploitation of these other countries.
So, in simpler terms, we've spent more or less 4 centuries robbing these people blind, stealing their resources, occasionally their actual people, and murdering them in droves as we did. And now, we sold them cheap phones, and linked them to a network of banks that allow westerners to loan them a tiny, infinitesimal amount of money to us, in exchange for getting a profit when they pay it back.
Now there are people who are going to downvote you and also me because they don't like being reminded that the alabaster clad civilization we all enjoy is built on the backs of just, stressful amounts of slavery, be it literal slaves, economic slaves or political slaves, but it's true. It's also true that our vaults are packed to the brim with wealth that was taken from those who had rightful claim to it. These are unambiguous historical realities.
We here are not fortunate; we are the victors in a war that's been going on since about the time the first iteration of the Dutch East India company was chartered; the war between the haves, and the have-nots. And we have won so hard that it will probably take generations of dedicated effort to make things even remotely equal again.
Edit: Just to make this clear, when I say we are not "fortunate" I merely mean to say that it is not good fortune or some divine will that's put us in this position, as is a common citation of those seeking to maintain this status quo. I'm saying that it was a concentrated, often violent effort that put us here.
I don't disagree with much of what you're saying, but it's orthogonal to the claim that credit availability and its attendant worst cases is worse than lack of credit availability. I'm not sure the evidence supports this: even well-known "horrible exploitation" like payday loans have significant evidence behind the fact that they're net beneficial to the communities they serve.
It seems to me that this is one of those cases where people are conflating a larger problem (global poverty) with a system that incrementally helps the situation (access to credit), due simply to its adjacency. The outcome, in this case and others, is to advocate for making these people's lives _worse_ by removing access to credit.
That is to say, I'm a stronger theoretical supporter than most of radical global redistribution, whether as recompense for colonialism or out of a duty to our fellow humans. But this is more or less a complete non sequitur when it comes to debt, since that responsibility, to the extent you agree with it, says nothing about whether access to credit is helping or harming these people (and all the evidence I'm aware of says that marginal credit extended to the developing world tends to help, though this is an oversimplification).
So, in simpler terms, we've spent more or less 4 centuries robbing these people blind, stealing their resources, occasionally their actual people, and murdering them in droves as we did. And now, we sold them cheap phones, and linked them to a network of banks that allow westerners to loan them a tiny, infinitesimal amount of money to us, in exchange for getting a profit when they pay it back.
Now there are people who are going to downvote you and also me because they don't like being reminded that the alabaster clad civilization we all enjoy is built on the backs of just, stressful amounts of slavery, be it literal slaves, economic slaves or political slaves, but it's true. It's also true that our vaults are packed to the brim with wealth that was taken from those who had rightful claim to it. These are unambiguous historical realities.
We here are not fortunate; we are the victors in a war that's been going on since about the time the first iteration of the Dutch East India company was chartered; the war between the haves, and the have-nots. And we have won so hard that it will probably take generations of dedicated effort to make things even remotely equal again.
Edit: Just to make this clear, when I say we are not "fortunate" I merely mean to say that it is not good fortune or some divine will that's put us in this position, as is a common citation of those seeking to maintain this status quo. I'm saying that it was a concentrated, often violent effort that put us here.