Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Burrito Now, Pay Later

enterprisevalue.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 364 posts

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#101

Post by s1artibartfast »

cousin_it wrote: post #31

I'm beginning to think that consumer debt simply shouldn't exist. If you don't have money to buy something, don't buy it. If you don't have money for necessities (food/housing/healthcare), putting you into debt isn't the right answer anyway. A safety net is the right answer.

I beginning to think we should have separate legal systems for different people. One where people have more agency and responsibility for the consequences, and one where they are treated like children, but taken care of.

There is actually a fantastic sci-fi novel I highly recommend written by a professor of enlightenment philosophy that uses the as part of the premise. too like the lightning by Ada palmer. [1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Palmer

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#102

Post by ldoughty »

mbStavola wrote: post #92
coolcase wrote: post #2

He brushes over ethical concerns of BNPL but draws the line at sports betting. But BNPL by design encourages you to buy things you can't afford and complicates your finances with more timed bills to pay. It makes it more likely people don't budget well and form buffers. A PNBL would be better, add 10% tithe to every purchase that goes to a checking account. Once that reaches $1k it overflows to an index fund. He says…

From the consumer pov, why would I opt for a PNBL option? If I have the money on hand, wouldn't I just make a regular purchase? Not trying to be snarky, genuinely curious what the sales pitch is here.

That's effectively any membership service where you get a discount... e.g. Amazon prime, arguably... or Membership grocery stores.

Pay up front for benefits that are realized later, upon further action.

I have a membership with my local craft brewery that I love to frequent that similarly could be considered a PNBL like financial thing.

Arguably, it's also gift cards, though yeah, without any benefit, no one really buys gift cards for themselves.

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#103

Post by rtpg »

simplify wrote: post #95
rtpg wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement is pretty subjective! Not going to defend gambling but "junk food" and "overpriced status-symbol vehicles"? Digital goods as an entire concept? You can think it's all for the stupids, but I'm not seeing how it's some objective truth. Even if you're some stoic who thinks spending money on leisure is just incorrect at a fundamental level, but I think you're going to find yourself in the minority there.

To take it even further, why does being in the minority matter at all? Curious what your motivation is for mentioning that aspect.

If you think that objectively spending money on leisure is bad, my claim is that you are in a minority with that thought process.

My implication here is not that being in a minority changes whether something is objectively true or not (it doesn't!). But I will outright say that I do not believe this, and I think that most people do not believe this.

Claiming to believe that leisure is bad objectively is, in my opinion, also a claim that you are "smarter" than the vast majority of people. After all, you have unlocked some reasoning to reach this, that other people seem to have missed. Do you believe to have unlocked some deeper truths through thought? Perhaps! I tend to assume I am far from the smartest person in the room.

Objectivity is the load bearing thing here, of course. If you merely think spending money on leisure is bad, then that's what you think. That can be one of your axioms in your belief system. Stating it as some objective fact is a much stronger claim, that I don't think really holds up to much scrutiny.

This is even before getting into the idea of "objective badness", which is a can of worms.

A lot of work to try and claim objectivity on your side, when the much easier "my belief system is like this, and from that I conclude this other thing" is a perfectly respectable argument when discussing policy preferences.

Added bonus of being honest about what part of your argument is just a belief system is you can then more quickly identify why you disagree with someone else.

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#104

Post by rtpg »

socalgal2 wrote: post #79
rtpg wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement is pretty subjective! Not going to defend gambling but "junk food" and "overpriced status-symbol vehicles"? Digital goods as an entire concept? You can think it's all for the stupids, but I'm not seeing how it's some objective truth. Even if you're some stoic who thinks spending money on leisure is just incorrect at a fundamental level, but I think you're going to find yourself in the minority there.

No, rather I think I can scrape by for the few days it takes to get ahead of the curve for something as cheap as a burrito and then next month I can afford 5 burritos for every 4+interest I could only afford before. Paying for a PS5 or TV on credit I can see because it might take me months to save. But saving for a burrito is arguably something I shouldn't even have to save for in the first place.

To be clear I think the BNPL thing laid out here is Bad(TM), I just got there through my belief system about how society should be organized.

I do not believe that life is measured in how many burritos I can or cannot get access to, so the idea that not using BNPL means I'll get more burritos next month falls a bit flat on me.

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#105

Post by s1artibartfast »

lordnacho wrote: post #21

I have a background in options trading and fixed income markets, basically the kind of professional education one gets while participating in the "financialization of everything". I'm not sure it's great. It's definitely useful for people to be able to unbundle risks. Or rather, it's useful to someone who knows what they are doing. Something like what's described in the article, for instance, where there's a mutual b…

>The same thing happens with actual mortgages. If you lived in a world where nobody lent money for a house, a house would cost a lot less.

I'm more skeptical. I think housing would be radically different in such a world. More people would be renters, more housing would be hereditary, and more would be corporate owned. Houses that were owned would be much smaller and more affordable.

Keep in mind there is a vast amount of areas where new housing can be built controlling the prices.

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#106

Post by s1artibartfast »

darkwater wrote: post #4

> Picture Alice, who forgets a $25 installment on her $100 DoorDash transaction. She’s hit with a $7 late fee, tacked onto her next payment. Annoying, but it probably won’t push her down a debt spiral. This is so disconnected from reality that it's not just worrisome but despicable. Why did Alice missed a 25$? Maybe, just maybe, because she struggles to make ends meet, so if she had problems paying 25$, now she will…

They did say probably.

What percent of people who miss a payment get sent into a debt spiral from a $7 fee?

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#107

Post by JackFr »

mattnewton wrote: post #5

> If you think the price of oil will be $120 after a year, you can use futures or options on futures to make this bet. If you think the S&P 500 will be over 6,500 within 2 years and the yield on 10Y Treasury bonds will be 4.25%, investment bankers will help you express this view for a fee. I’m sorry but I think the either the author or I have entirely lost the plot. Finance is a game we play to make humans better off…

In commodities and certain derivative markets, hedgers need to be matched with speculators. Hedgers are offsetting risk to speculators. Thus a farmer can insulate themselves against a drop in the price of corn and an airline can insulate themselves against a jet fuel hike. To do that someone has to take that risk. It might by to satisfy their risk appetite which will be tied to returns.

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#108

Post by wyager »

spicyusername wrote: post #100

One reason is that someone’s or a company’s income doesn’t always align perfectly with when they want to buy things. When we're talking about financing the construction of a new downtown office tower, a new apartment complex, or the unexpected maintenance of your business's whole auto fleet, I can absolutely see the argument that credit is a mechanism of greasing the wheels of the economy and allowing things to happe…

Expected debt levels are more a function of personal time preference/utility nonlinearity w.r.t. wealth than they are a function of ambient economic conditions. When broke people win the lottery, they usually end up broke again.

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#109

Post by wyager »

hnthrow90348765 wrote: post #96

>Is financing your lunch a sign of societal decay? Maybe, maybe not. I'd have no problems with BNPL if wages kept up with necessities like housing, tuition, and healthcare, or if those services were provided to citizens for free in exchange for higher taxes. Or even if minimum wage would move, like, at all. What I think this is a better sign of is this: a very lopsided finance industry against workers and borrowers d…

> end up losing money to hackers.

How do you imagine this would work for a company using normal fiat payment rails?

Re: Burrito Now, Pay Later

#110

Post by sweeter »

spicyusername wrote: post #100

One reason is that someone’s or a company’s income doesn’t always align perfectly with when they want to buy things. When we're talking about financing the construction of a new downtown office tower, a new apartment complex, or the unexpected maintenance of your business's whole auto fleet, I can absolutely see the argument that credit is a mechanism of greasing the wheels of the economy and allowing things to happe…

I think that is about the most gentle way you can put it. This is an echo of 2008 and the notion that this is normal is so absurd to me. It comes off as super out of touch. Financing groceries is dystopian.
Post reply on HN