Earlier quoted context omitted.
The counterpoint is what's the point of reducing losses on bankruptcy if it makes the entire business climate worse? By trying to protect creditors you just make everyone poorer.
Does it? You could equally well argue that punishing CEOs for bankruptcy makes banks more willing to lend money, improving the business climate. And of course for startups in the early years it's not that relevant anyways, since nobody will lend you anything until you have revenue. VCs invest instead of lending and aren't owed anything if you shut the company down.
Banks can take into account the borrowing history of the executive teams already.
> And of course for startups in the early years it's not that relevant anyways, since nobody will lend you anything until you have revenue.
Being unable to make payments on leases, etc, is pretty likely for startups that fail.