If someone lends you money, it is only a civil matter, not criminal. There can be a lein placed on personal and real property, but there are limits for personal exemptions to allow the party to still eat and keep his family together. Incarceration does not solve the insolvency.
This article, if you bothered to read through is about the G'umt putting you in jail for not paying their fines, fees, and re-distributive costs.
There are laws against this, as the article states, but reading isn't your specialty, I guess!
It’s not about refusal to pay either.
I just personally feel that refusing to pay back a loan is left and should be treated as such.
If I lend someone $1,000 bucks and they refuse to pay it back, to me that's no different than if they broke into my home and stole $1,000 worth of property. And regardless of what the article says or what the law is, I think it should be treated as theft!
And I don't care one wit about whether they can't pay the debt back if they are in prison! that's not the point, the point is punishment. No one ever says burglars shouldn't be put in prison because they can't then pay back the money stolen.
Without the ability to punish contumacious behavior, civil court orders would be mere advisory opinions. The poor, poor man who stars in this story apparently was able to find enough money to buy drugs and alcohol, just not enough to comply with the court order.