However, the problem with the Austrian model is (as has always been stated) it’s overly respectful of lenders (asset holders) without accounting for the moral hazard most money lenders profit from.
This is ‘unsaid’ in the literature of both sides. It’s this competition between the moral premises of consumer vs lenders vs the judiciary (state) that over the priority to which we must grant the malincientives of either party and therefore the rewards of either party.
I tend to err on the side of lender beware almost always, and the lender and borrower beware of the state at all possible times.
All parties: state, lender, and borrower have malincentives.