Perhaps this topic wasn't in my interest, because I had a hard time following through the flow of argument. It took me way too long to comprehend the passage. So, if you spot anything strange on my analysis, you're welcome to pick on me
Here is the passage analysis.
P1: Remedial quality of current bankruptcy law and increasing reliance to it, and yet the goal of maintaining stable economy advocates for the shift.
P2: Punitive system used to be highlighted with consideration of failing social responsibility from debtor's part -- little benefit to creditors and damage to economy.
P3: Modern bankruptcy law’s attempt to remedy this shortcomings while focusing on two thoughts through reorganizations — ultimately designed for overall economic stability and creditors’ interest.
Overall: Today’s remedial quality of the bankruptcy law has to be maintained for overall benefits to the society as well as creditors.
Scale here is:
Punitive System < Remedial System
- little benefit to creditors - public good better served by maintaining
- Damage to the economy employment and further stability of economy.
with bankrupt enterprises