Consumer Protection Bureau Aims to Roll Back Rules for Payday Lending • Hacker News Board

Re: Consumer Protection Bureau Aims to Roll Back Rules for Payday Lending

#301

Post by towelr34dy » Mon, Feb 11, 2019, 7:01 PM UTC

quickben wrote: post #300

towelr34dy wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah the outrage mob. So tell me, oh wise one; how do you deal with people who need a lender of last resort? I mean, in your kind, humanitarian and knowledgeable opinion that takes into consideration the reality of people with cash flow issues?

The reality is that instead of people going to a public kitchen , or a shelter, they will get even more in the hole, financial and social. Why are you so interested in getting the vulnerable category even more indebted? >"oh wise one" You'll have a hard time in life with that attitude.

Let me see if I understand: so when we ban pay day loans and all the loan sharks come out, this is the message you have for poor people:

Don't take the loan shark desperate option, accept homelessness/bankruptcy instead of trying to stay afloat. Then you can try and work up from there because it is easier.

I honestly can't believe you want to make the lender of last resort worse for poor people in an effort to get them to hit rock bottom so they can then climb.

I might have had a hard time in life (I've actually taken out short term loans to stay afloat) and I might have an attitude from it, but I can tell you have little compassion for those who were in my situation; so you'll have to excuse the fact that this is personal. A 19 year old me would have been homeless with people like you. I actually am happy I wasn't. I'm happy there are 'exploitative capitalists' and not just 'warm hearted well wishers' up on high horses.

Re: Consumer Protection Bureau Aims to Roll Back Rules for Payday Lending

#302

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Feb 12, 2019, 12:14 PM UTC

towelr34dy wrote: post #301

quickben wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reality is that instead of people going to a public kitchen , or a shelter, they will get even more in the hole, financial and social. Why are you so interested in getting the vulnerable category even more indebted? >"oh wise one" You'll have a hard time in life with that attitude.

Let me see if I understand: so when we ban pay day loans and all the loan sharks come out, this is the message you have for poor people: Don't take the loan shark desperate option, accept homelessness/bankruptcy instead of trying to stay afloat. Then you can try and work up from there because it is easier. I honestly can't believe you want to make the lender of last resort worse for poor people in an effort to get th…

[deleted]

Re: Consumer Protection Bureau Aims to Roll Back Rules for Payday Lending

#303

Post by maratd » Tue, Feb 12, 2019, 3:58 PM UTC

Johnny555 wrote: post #260

maratd wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like, giving the customer a $500 loan at 300% interest that they may never be able to pay back so they end up in an endless cycle of debt. If that's the percentage being charged and that's the best a person can do, that means that person has a very high chance of defaulting on the loan. Which would explain why nobody else wants to lend to that person. With your regulations, that financial institution would not exis…

The same could be said about allowing poor people to seek treatment from unlicensed medical practitioners "If we don't give them our substandard medical care, they'll get it from underground providers that will be even worse". Or let them be served by an unregulated transportation providers "Well yeah, our buses aren't safe, some of our drivers have suspended licenses, but if they don't ride with us, they'll ride wit…

> The same could be said about allowing poor people to seek treatment from unlicensed medical practitioners

No, it can't. Because they can always walk into a hospital and receive treatment, even if they have no capacity to pay. A hospital may not refuse treatment.

> Or let them be served by an unregulated transportation providers

Like Uber?

Interestingly enough, if an unregulated method of transportation becomes popular enough, it gets regulated, not regulated out of existence.

Re: Consumer Protection Bureau Aims to Roll Back Rules for Payday Lending

#304

Post by towelr34dy » Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 3:59 PM UTC

hoaw wrote: post #240

mrhappyunhappy wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except in your example the actual situation would play out like this: person borrows $80, thinks his payment is $20, makes a payment. Next paycheck he sees a withdrawal for $45. Wondering why he brushes it asides figuring only $53 left to pay. Another $45 comes out - ok $8 left all is good. Then sees another $45 come out and panic sets in. Borrower makes a phone call to see what’s going on and why he is overcharged.…

It is supported because it is accepted, especially in places like hacker news, to not be scientifically literate. In fact it is so obviously problematic that you would to a large degree have to be obnoxious to support it without reserve. Which is why you see all these rhetorical arguments, sarcasm and hostile engagements in this thread. Of course from a reasoned perspective this would indicate that you were wrong. Bu…

Scientific literacy = using a grossly disproportionate made up example?

Got it. Or do you mean spelling out what a debt trap is? Is that 'scientific literacy'.

The arrogance of those who want to restrict others is so obvious: You think people are incapable of taking care of themselves. Then you think yourself capable of knowing whats best for them. While simultaneously talking about science. And disregarding people who actually were poor and went through those things. And ignoring the points being made, without giving counter points.

You didn't answer what happens when you remove this lender of last resort? I thought a 'scientifically' minded person such as yourself would be interested in digging for the truth.

Re: Consumer Protection Bureau Aims to Roll Back Rules for Payday Lending

#305

Post by kelnos » Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 9:41 PM UTC

towelr34dy wrote: post #251

kelnos wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. Just because you have agency, it doesn't mean you'll wield it rationally, or even responsibly. And so you get the central question: in what cases should you protect people from themselves? It's a hard question to answer. Given that financial education in the US is nearly nonexistent, I would personally err on the side of protections in the financial sphere. Does that mean that some legitimate cases get de…

So by protection, you mean the bill as it was, that would 'remove pay day lending'. Maybe we'll copy what we did with drugs. Hmm... what guarantees mob option will stop existing? That's what's happened with drugs. Drugs are easily available. Or are you suggesting creating another lender of last resort? I'm sorry, I'm not sure your offering a solution. It seems what is offered is a blind restriction to satiate your ow…

I wasn't coming down for or against the bill as-is at all; merely on the assertion about agency the parent commenter made.

I suggest you calm your anger and finger pointing and avoid reading things that I did not write.

I too agree that the War on Drugs is a boondoggle and has caused more harm and created more criminals (legitimate and otherwise) than we'd have without it. But I think we can agree that having a lot of people (for example) suffering and dying from opioid abuse isn't great either. Rehabilitation programs are the obvious answer, not just jailing people.

Payday lending is a totally different beast. I'm not sure what a great solution might be. While it's physically safer to take a loan from a payday lender than from an illegal, shady, mob-run loan shark, payday lending can still be incredibly harmful. Outright banning probably isn't the answer, but allowing them to run as they have been isn't great either.