271–280 of 292 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But cash-back is not the same as reward points. Cash-back is "money", reward points (more or less) is "discount on given good".
Many cards let you cash out rewards points now. With Chase, for example, you can get a check in the mail, use points to pay off your CC balance directly, or use points on amazon (at full value).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's overstating it. "Whether you've paid back all debts on time" isn't gameable.
Actually it is. Simply take out a couple of loans you don't need and pay them off at the agreed upon schedule.
It shows that the person is planning ahead, is careful with not overspending even if they have cash available, is organized enough to make all the monthly payments on time. To me that seems like a better signal than someone who does need the loan.
How would a person who takes out the same loan, but actually spends the money be a better credit risk?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One card with a yearly fee is probably worth it for the other benefits. Other than that, the traditional way is to downgrade it to a free card. Either way, it's fine if you think it doesn't make sense for you, but it's pretty much no-hidden-costs net positive, and that's why so many people actively churn.
I understand why. Semi-free money. Invest in increasing your income instead. That's my recommendation. Long term thinking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you make a note of it, and send them a letter (certified, receipt requested).
(a) Are they obligated to handle anything that they would handle over the phone via a letter too? I don't feel like many companies would be willing to do this. (b) What if they just do all the typical customer service BS on the phone over snail mail? People spend hours or even days with a lot of back-and-forth to get non-routine stuff sorted out... if you do that over snail mail it could easily take many months to do…
Is there any legal regulation or contract compelling them to respond to you? If so, use that as leverage. If there is not, you may not be able to compel them to do what you want.
We give out all kinds of loan like Educational loan, Business loan, Home loan, Agricultural loan, Personal loan, Auto loan and other loans for good reasons. We give out loans in amounts ranging from $5,000USD - $10,000,000USD at a 3% interest rate with duration of 1-20 years which depends on the amount.
We provide the following services:
*Money Lending
*Investment Opportunities
*Business Services
Email contact: williamlileyfinancialservice@gmail.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very useful links. Thanks. I'd like to know how I can determine what services have such a hold in place for me. This is all pretty absurd. Why should we have to pay to not have our credit history disclosed? We should pay when we want to have it disclosed. Then I would have to pay THREE different companies to not disclose it. Or keep track of which ones won't disclose it. The European model of you owning your own info…
It sounds like extortion to me. I wouldn't be surprised if the data leak was an intentional move to provide incentive to people to sign up for their credit monitoring services or unfreeze fees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Every landlord I've rented from has pulled my credit. There is also a separate tenant screening for real estate that, at least for me, seems to be more reliable as an indicator for trust than the financial credit report. It is possible your landlords are doing the same? Perhaps that’s what you mean by reference checks? > It's more than likely that if I was in a different career, and particularly if that career was…
I haven't been government-cleared for anything (as a matter of principle I won't do work for the federal government), but I've been background-checked repeatedly, including by major exchanges, and never once had a problem. I'd like you tell me more about how you think I've been lucky with respect to my disregard for my credit score. I don't think I have.
I don't understand what this contributes. I guess it's great that won't work for the feds but that's hardly a generalizable position. Are you suggesting that passing the background check for a major exchange informs on the outcome of a public trust clearance or a professional license? Criminal background check portion perhaps, but not character and fitness—I would SWAG you'd need to correct your report before you could proceed.
> I'd like you tell me more about how you think I've been lucky with respect to my disregard for my credit score. I don't think I have.
Your tl;dr sums it up, your strategy works for you, but how it at generalizable even for a limited definition for “tech workers”? Partly I think you’re neglecting the advantage in being established in life before the Great Recession, which is part of why I say you are remarkably lucky. Does your strategy work for the younger cohort who would purchase a home post-2008? Does your strategy help for people who experience a significant adverse life event like divorce or a natural disaster?
That part of your "dispute resolution strategy" is to "ignore mistakes and disputes forever" and live unimpeded, when there are so many who could not do the same (myself included, it'd be a career-ender), leaves me slack-jawed with amazement. My congratulations to you, but I hope you see that few can get away with that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla... Anyway, if you continue down that path, you will get less religious. Not necessarily a bad thing.
Religious flamewar (which this crosses into) is off topic on HN, so please don't post like this.
Hashtag doubledown.
There is no such thing as a "religious flamewar"; there is only a flamewar between "more correct" and "less correct" thinking. Any other assertion caters to prole bullshit, and you should be ashamed of yourself for supporting the critical-thinking-deprived status quo on an intellectual site such as this simply for the sake of avoiding the discussion. I'm sorry. I will agree that it's OT, though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Religious flamewar (which this crosses into) is off topic on HN, so please don't post like this.
My apologies, and thanks for the reminder. I was hoping, in some misguided way, to comment on the debate tactic rather than the underling religious content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually it is. Simply take out a couple of loans you don't need and pay them off at the agreed upon schedule.
Taking out loans that you don't need, not spending the money, and paying them back on time (with interest) should be a very positive credit score indicator. It shows that the person is planning ahead, is careful with not overspending even if they have cash available, is organized enough to make all the monthly payments on time. To me that seems like a better signal than someone who does need the loan. How would a per…
This leads people to do something they don't want to do, and is no more informative than paying all those other bills would have been, merely to increase their score. That's a kind of gaming.