91–100 of 305 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cell phones are a necessity and cable provides enormous entertainment value for the money.
Cable is not a necessity. $15 cell plans on $100 phones are easily doable @ $280 per year. How many have a subsidized iPhone on a $50+ monthly plan?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is denying people credit. Payday loans are predatory and perpetuate poverty instead of helping to solve it. It would be great if they were transparent and didn’t try to rob you in the process, but that’s just not how they work.
It’s not like there are lenders serving these demographics that don’t do whatever you think payday lenders are doing wrong.
Anytime I see people defend this kind of practice, the John Ruskin quote comes to mind: “The dullest of all excuses for usury is that some kind of good is done by the usurer.”
I've had to take out loans for my business that were at usury rate. It saved me. If it wasn't there, if it was regulated out of existence; I'd have gone to a shark. I was not going to let cash flow cause me failing. Having said that, I'm very happy there was a lender of last resort that won't break my legs. Despite them screwing me in fees. Honestly, I've never understood people who suffer from legislitis: They see a…
When I had my first real job out of college, I didn't manage my money well and ran out of cash well before my next payday. I went to a check-cashing type of place to try and get a payday loan, but the state had outlawed them a couple of years prior. Had I been granted a payday loan, there's a good chance I'd still be in a cycle of debt stemming from that.
The rules were misconceived to begin with, by people who mistook the symptoms for the problem. There is a ton of competition in payday lending—there is zero reason to believe that payday lending rates are higher than the efficient amount. There is no hint of market failure, systemic risk, or any of the other criteria that typically justify regulating financial institutions. That means this rule wasn’t really a consum…
Payday lenders are predatory. They want to get people locked into a cycle of debt, so that they can charge many times the original amount in interest per year . I'm surprised to see anyone defending them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is denying people credit. Payday loans are predatory and perpetuate poverty instead of helping to solve it. It would be great if they were transparent and didn’t try to rob you in the process, but that’s just not how they work.
It’s not like there are lenders serving these demographics that don’t do whatever you think payday lenders are doing wrong.
The rules were misconceived to begin with, by people who mistook the symptoms for the problem. There is a ton of competition in payday lending—there is zero reason to believe that payday lending rates are higher than the efficient amount. There is no hint of market failure, systemic risk, or any of the other criteria that typically justify regulating financial institutions. That means this rule wasn’t really a consum…
If someone is a tremendous credit risk then maybe they won't be able to get a loan because they're below the artificial limit set by the CFPB, but in some ways this is like a bartender refusing to serve someone who is already falling down drunk. It's a moral risk, but it's hard to call it abusive.
Anytime I see people defend this kind of practice, the John Ruskin quote comes to mind: “The dullest of all excuses for usury is that some kind of good is done by the usurer.”
Not clear to me what that quote is saying. Doesn't that just encompass any possible excuse?
The rules were misconceived to begin with, by people who mistook the symptoms for the problem. There is a ton of competition in payday lending—there is zero reason to believe that payday lending rates are higher than the efficient amount. There is no hint of market failure, systemic risk, or any of the other criteria that typically justify regulating financial institutions. That means this rule wasn’t really a consum…
Nobody is denying people credit. Payday loans are predatory and perpetuate poverty instead of helping to solve it. It would be great if they were transparent and didn’t try to rob you in the process, but that’s just not how they work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GP starts with a fairly simple premise, the rate of default is high, so that much interest is required to make up the shortfall. Of course the rest of it is hinged solely on this premise, rather than acknowledging that the very act is taking advantage of people who can't or won't think far enough ahead to see why it is a very bad idea. It is of course the old argument that some economists use a little too regularly t…
The idea that selling products and services to poor people is “taking advantage of them” in the terms reality demands is bonkers.
It’s one of the most predatory types of lending that exists. They often provide loans with intentionally confusing and borderline disingenuous lending terms with the explicit goal of taking advantage of people.
> The result is denying poor people access to credit.
Lol, I mean, if being practically tricked into loans you can never pay off to the point that it drives entire cycles of poverty is your idea of credit, yeah, then sure, you’re right.
I'm of the mind that many of these lenders are indeed predatory, but prohibiting loans to high-risk borrowers at realistic rates (based on the risk) just leaves them unbanked rather than poorly-banked.
Payday loans are some of the things that the unbanked turn to . Using a payday loan shark does not make one banked.
Not saying that we should therefore allow paydays. Just curious about what the situation is.