What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people? • Hacker News Board

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#201

Post by tamana » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:06 AM UTC

arkades wrote: post #162

nkurz wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's different about the payday loan industry such that the "better to have some alternative than no alternative" argument not apply? Running such a business clearly takes lots of work, and clearly there is lots of demand for the services they provide. What differentiates them from other business that provide "value"?

They take extraordinarily high margins, often involving mis-representation to their customers along the way (largely by illustrating their fees as flat numbers, which obfuscates that if you translate it into actual APR terms - to compare to other lenders - they're asking for what equates to absolutely ridiculous interest rates). Generally, if there's a demand for a service, people should come flooding in and reduce t…

Pay day lenders are required by law to publish APR. The ugly truth at the bottom of it is that their customers base is fundamental to stupid to know what is good for them, or too impulsive to make responsible choices, or too desperate to seek alternatives, or too ignorant to know their alternatives.

Their are some easy improvements (education and outreach and banking programs for the poor and poorly educated) and some controversial ones (removing citizen's legal rights and freedoms to make self-destructive decisions)

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#202

Post by superuser2 » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:08 AM UTC

nkurz wrote: post #70

sokoloff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not so sure the corner bodega belongs in the same category with the payday loan assholes. Yes, the corner bodega is more expensive than the full grocery store, but they also probably have way lower sales per hour of labor, lower sales per square foot, lower sales per other overhead (rent, insurance, security, utilities, taxes), higher credit card interchange fees, higher shrinkage and spoilage, and pay more for t…

What's different about the payday loan industry such that the "better to have some alternative than no alternative" argument not apply? Running such a business clearly takes lots of work, and clearly there is lots of demand for the services they provide. What differentiates them from other business that provide "value"?

The parent companies of traditional banks instituted high overdraft fees and the ChexSystems blacklist to steer poor customers away from checking accounts and towards the check cashing and payday loan companies, which they also own, but which have vastly higher margins on poor customers. At least, this is the claim I've seen thrown around.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#203

Post by awt » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:08 AM UTC

thatfrenchguy wrote: post #183

awt wrote: post #45

What if poverty is profitable to the government? What if, through welfare, the government encouraged single motherhood, and thus poverty, and thus dependance on the government? What if single mothers were held responsible for their choice to have children with bad men?

You mean in a country where birth control is not free and where you can have to drive 500 miles to get an abortion if you live in retarded states like Alabama or Texas ? Yeah, sure, blame the poor.

The country in which, afaik and in general, no one forces women to have sex with men who clearly will not be good fathers.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#204

Post by c0nducktr » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:09 AM UTC

brbsix wrote: post #106

c0nducktr wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What if single mothers were held responsible for their choice to have children with bad men? Then children will suffer.

Children will suffer either way. You can accept a relatively small amount of suffering and address the issue in the here and now (stigmatize the women, pose alternatives like adoption, thus set an example of what not to do) or you can go the other route (make excuses, subsidize their behavior) and end up with a massive self-perpetuating culture of single motherhood, dysfunction, and criminality in the long run. We're…

Oh are there only those two options?

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#205

Post by tamana » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:10 AM UTC

ultramancool wrote: post #69

sokoloff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not so sure the corner bodega belongs in the same category with the payday loan assholes. Yes, the corner bodega is more expensive than the full grocery store, but they also probably have way lower sales per hour of labor, lower sales per square foot, lower sales per other overhead (rent, insurance, security, utilities, taxes), higher credit card interchange fees, higher shrinkage and spoilage, and pay more for t…

Even the payday loan guys aren't that bad, many of their users are people who legit just need emergency cash and will pay it back on their next payday. Freakonomics did a pretty good episode discussing advantages and problems with it recently.

A huge portion of payday loans are repeat loans from people trapped in a cycle of debt, taking out loans to pay off interest on previous usurious loans.

Yes, payday loans have defait risk, whixh is part of why they are expensive. But that also shows that many borrowers can't acurally afford them. And the cost of defaults is borne by...the next-pooorest people who barely scrape by, who DO lay off their loans, but pay 50-200% APR

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#206

Post by vkou » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:15 AM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #159

ctdonath wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, say those "exploitive" businesses didn't exist. That doesn't subsequently mean "non-exploitive" alternatives would exist, it just means those customers/employees would have no options (not even "exploitive" ones). Is having no option better than having a bad option, when good options aren't available?

I think it depends. Not having access to temporary credit at all is better than pay day loans. Of course, I'm saying that from my proverbial ivory tower. Philosophically I don't support banning those things, but I'll be damned if they're not fucking evil incarnate.

Not having access to temporary credit means that any hiccup in your finances has you facing eviction, late bill penalties, and in the case of unpaid fines, possibly jail time.

Having access to temporary credit means that same problem, but next month.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#207

Post by tamana » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:17 AM UTC

herbetdangerbri wrote: post #80

zw123456 wrote: post #59

There is an old saying that "if you took all the money away from all the rich people, and spread it around evenly to everyone else, within 2 or 3 years, all the formerly rich would be rich again having taken advantage of the poor who don't know how to make and keep money". This adage, although heartless to be sure, has some degree of truth to it in my view. The problem is twofold, 1) a lot of people become rich not b…

> they feel no remorse for taking advantage of someone else I don't understand what it means 'to take advantage of someone else' in the context of this thread. Is Starbucks taking advantage of me when I want a coffee by selling me a coffee? Is Elton John taking advantage of my desire to see him play live at my party and the fact that there is only one of him by charging me a million dollars to appear? Are the bus com…

It's theoretically trivial: most transactions have a surplus. How is the surplus divided between the seller and buyer? More lopsided, more exploitative.

Some transactions leave one side even worse off, but they execute due to ignorance, stupidity, or force. Those are obviously exploitative.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#208

Post by tamana » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:19 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #97

zw123456 wrote: post #59

There is an old saying that "if you took all the money away from all the rich people, and spread it around evenly to everyone else, within 2 or 3 years, all the formerly rich would be rich again having taken advantage of the poor who don't know how to make and keep money". This adage, although heartless to be sure, has some degree of truth to it in my view. The problem is twofold, 1) a lot of people become rich not b…

Lots of people know how to create value, i.e. combine A and B and wind up with A*B of value. Take Edison, for example. He made himself a fortune by figuring out how to take a glass bottle and add a bamboo filament, and sell a light bulb.

Edison was a capitalist manager and salesman, not much of an inventor. How much value he created vs extracted is up for debate.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#209

Post by tamana » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:22 AM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #93

danharaj wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an incredible statement, what's your support for it?

How about you answer one of my questions before you ask me yet another one. What exactly are you proposing if neither people nor government are allowed to own property? I'm not aware of any such scheme in all of modern civilization. The onus is on you to explain.

Land-Value Tax. Landlord makes money by improving the land and providing services to residents, not by merely owning land in perpetuity. Land is common wealth.

Re: What if the problem of poverty is that it’s profitable to other people?

#210

Post by tamana » Mon, Apr 11, 2016, 4:23 AM UTC

edko wrote: post #91

Being from a country where we have suffered populist governments who "defend the poor" by increasing their numbers, I am convinced that this is very true. Instead of creating jobs and improving education, they give handouts to the poor, and their number has dramatically increased. These jobless people depend on the handouts, so their vote is guaranteed to go to the populist party. In my country, this technique has be…

If this system worked so effectively to its ends, why is bill gates so wealthy and not taxed away?