451–459 of 459 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they would just go out of business and the debt would disappear.
I would be quite fine with them going out of business -- I never chose to do business with them. Other businesses would pay a lot of more attention if this were to happen a few times.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm also a human being from planet earth, and if I'm ok with paying X in cash to buy something, and the other persons offers me paying it in interest-free rates, it would be stupid for me not to. Worst case, I move the cash to a 2% interest rate bank account and let it sit there. Best case, there are other investments I can make now with that capital, and end up paying less overall for whatever I was buying because h…
> if I'm ok with paying X in cash to buy something, and the other persons offers me paying it in interest-free rates, it would be stupid for me not to. Disagree. This severely complicates my economy. Instead just having X funds less available, I still have the same funds at disposal, but have to remember I owe X to Y which must be paid by Z. Even just once this makes the simple question “How much disposable funds do…
In fact, if you aren't buying on credit your finances are more complicated because you have to plan ahead make sure you've got future major expenses covered.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s probably not worth it for effectively a sub 1% discount. The discount is small, I agree. But it's always worth it. It's riskless if you have the cash anyway.
The fact that these constructs exist and only make money when people make mistakes should tell you that enough people make mistakes to make it profitable. This makes it not riskless at all. It makes it predatory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> why would a job need a credit check? So they can weed applicants out. This is very common in the fire service. Applications can be 40 pages long and they want you to list each financial account, balances, limits, etc. It's ridiculous. But I know just why they're doing it. I also think such requirements are weeding out minority applicants.
sounds like a very shady and likely illegal thing to do
at least most agencies have stopped asking you to write down all of your social media accounts & passwords. or requiring you to add HR managers/etc as friends.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their job does not include notifying you of negative changes to your credit though.
Doesn’t Chase offer this for free?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that these constructs exist and only make money when people make mistakes should tell you that enough people make mistakes to make it profitable. This makes it not riskless at all. It makes it predatory.
These constructs also helps people buy more expensive items than what they could afford without credit. I wouldn't jump to that conclusion just because it exists. Credit companies also take small fraction of the transaction. The store is willing to pay that fees because it increases their revenue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This statement, which is currently greyed out, is an objective statement of engineering fact about one of the most important technologies introduced in the last one hundred years. I hope I have bought enough street cred to say the following by ghostwriting hundreds of letters to the credit reporting agencies to fix their problems, which are numerous and essentially inevitable given their model and present operations.…
It’s effectively for free, except for the massive society wide risk of fraud that they’ve foisted upon all of us. The stuff looks cheap because, like any polluting industry, the price does not reflect the true cost. Surely there’s some third alternative other than “incompetent credit bureaus enable fraud” and “minorities have bad access to credit because lenders are super racist”?