For it to be survivorship bias you would need to address a failure based only off successful cases (survivors). But in this particular case, the premise is that one can attain a good score with or without accruing debt. That’s just a factually accurate statement about reality; it has nothing to do with addressing issues.
I think (and I’m really not trying to put words in your mouth here so correct me if I’m wrong) that the premise you are arguing for is that most Americans will, at some point, rely on borrowed money to make ends meet. In that case it would make more sense to claim survivorship bias because a well-off individual claiming that they don’t need loans is not evidence that there is no problem with our general reliance on loans. They are just a success case or a “survivor”.
For it to be survivorship bias you would need to address a failure based only off successful cases (survivors). But in this particular case, the premise is that one can attain a good score with or without accruing debt. That’s just a factually accurate statement about reality; it has nothing to do with addressing issues.
I think (and I’m really not trying to put words in your mouth here so correct me if I’m wrong) that the premise you are arguing for is that most Americans will, at some point, rely on borrowed money to make ends meet. In that case it would make more sense to claim survivorship bias because a well-off individual claiming that they don’t need loans is not evidence that there is no problem with our general reliance on loans. They are just a success case or a “survivor”.