8 ms·

Credit Scores and Committed Relationships

30 points by T-A 11y ago

danieltillett 11y ago
Credit scores are like g in that they are highly predictive of a wide range of seeming unrelated human activities. I am always amazed at how humans are so predictable from such simple scores.
logicchains 11y ago
>Credit scores and match quality appear predictive of subsequent separations even beyond these credit channels, suggesting that credit scores reveal an individual's relationship skill and level of commitment. From an economic perspective this looks like time preference. Individuals who place a greater value on enjoyment in the present compared to enjoyment at some time in future are less likely to save money for the future, preferring to enjoy it now, and are also less likely to persist through the difficult parts of a relationship in pursuit of some future benefit from having a lasting relationship. I prefer the economic perspective as it's more impartial, and doesn't make the assumption that lack of "relationship skill" is the cause of relationship failure.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  I thought credit scores were more influenced by payment promptness and reliability rather than saving propensity. Isn’t one of the problems with people with high savings and no debt is that their credit score is lowish purely because they don’t have any evidence of prompt payment of debt?
  - logicchains 11y ago
    You may be right actually, I didn't consider that. I'm Australian and here I think the system works a bit differently, so banks and whatnot will take into account your savings history when determining whether to loan you money. It's still the case in the US though that someone who saves will do a better job of payment reliability than someone who borrows the same amount of money but doesn't save, as the former will always have savings on hand with which to make repayments, while the latter may not.
    - danieltillett 11y ago
      I am Australian too :) We do have credit scores here now, but I have never bother to look into mine (I don’t have any debt other than a credit card which I pay off each month). I think our banks are a bit more holistic when it comes to debt issuing than US banks which seem to be fixated on credit scores. On the topic of credit scores they are a huge pain if you move to the USA. I remember having a huge problem buying almost everything that required monthly payments (phone, cable, rent, etc) because I did not have a credit score. If someone wants a good business idea start a credit rating agency that is able to rate US immigrants and gives them rational credit scores based on their previous credit history in their country of origin.
      - jacques_chester 11y ago
        Some employers have deals with banks to vouch for you when you don't have a score. I got a US credit card when I moved here and bootstrapped my credit profile from that.
        danieltillett 11y ago
        I am self-employeed and luckily wealthy enough that I don’t need debt, but found the process of everyday living very frustrating without a credit score. The fact that you have to play a game to create a credit score says the credit score system is broken, at least when it comes to immigrants.
  - sksk 11y ago
    While your statement about payment promptness is correct, people with good scores tend to save more than others (scores do not use savings or income or wealth into account, however). Credit scores only penalize you when you don't have any credit but most of these good score folks tend to have (or had) a mortgage or have had auto loans, etc. Just because they are not actively opening new accounts does not mean they will be penalized -- credit scores look at pretty much everything in your report and they get credit for their historical good behavior. Another thing to consider is that good credit scores leads to a positive cycle: you don't pay high interest rates on your loans and the extra money saved here allows you to pay down obligations faster, which in turn allows you to save more in the long run.
    - danieltillett 11y ago
      What about people with no debt? If you own your home and don’t carry any consumer debt then you look like a bad credit risk despite being one of the best risks.
      - sksk 11y ago
        It depends on what you mean by 'no debt'. If you mean, they have never ever had a loan then they will most likely not even have a score or a poor one (they will be categorized as a 'no hit' or 'thin file'). Don't have stats top of my head for this group but my hunch is no-hit / thin-file are people with poor access to credit and not many actively avoid debt altogether. If you mean, they had debt but they paid it all off, then they will still get a lot of credit for it. Credit scores look at your 'oldest tradeline' and maintaining good credit over many years is viewed favorably. Their scores will not be as high as someone who had recent credit transaction and managing it well (all else being equal), however, it will still be very good. If you look at the FICO Score, anything above a 760 or 780 is usually just bragging rights -- it hardly changes your rates on mortgages or loans.
        hugh4 11y ago
        I'd lived in the US for about five years before I bothered to get a credit rating. I remember when I was renting an apartment the agent looked shocked that I didn't have one. "How can you not have a credit rating? Don't you have a car? Or a phone?" I said "Uh yeah, I paid cash for my car, and my phone is prepaid". I had a helluva time convincing him that someone who never has to borrow money (and can buy brand new cars for cash) is a better credit risk than someone who borrows money all the freaking time. Eventually I gave in and got a credit card for the sake of miles. Sheesh!
sksk 11y ago
This is a very interesting study. Anyone who has worked in the consumer credit industry will know that credit scores are correlated with a whole bunch of things -- your standard credit default to insurance claims to employment. Anytime you need to identify 'responsible' individuals, credit scores can act as a pretty good proxy although using credit scores is legally kosher only in certain situations. I think their trustworthiness hypothesis is probably weaker than other parts of their analysis. I have my own hypothesis based on my experience working in this industry: Staying in a committed relationship may not be really about 'responsible' behavior but could be due to similarity of financial management styles. Most marriage counselors talk about 'sorting out your finances' before getting married; credit scores are essentially capturing that issue -- people who have very good credit scores tend to be savers (although credit scores do not use income or wealth into account) and ones who have poor scores tend to be financially poor and for the large part spend more than they can afford. Also people with good scores tend to be manage finances in a particular way -- pay bills early, monitor balances regularly, etc. -- while the ones with poor credit scores do not usually pay much attention to finances and miss payments frequently. When you have two people with two different styles of managing money, it can lead to a strained relationship and subsequently lead to separation.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  Does it help a relationship if you have two non-savers together? As you rightly point out, money problems are major cause of relationship conflict and breakdown, but are these less common if you have two reckless spenders in a relationship rather than just one? I would have thought that having two reckless spenders would just accelerate the process of hitting money problems.
  - sksk 11y ago
    That's a good question and I was thinking about the same when I read the paper. I have never investigated this aspect of credit scores in my career so don't really know the answer. My guess is people who have similar score, even if it is bad, probably tolerate each other more than when they have very different styles. I am not sure if the paper looks at this deeply (they seem to only compare differentials and stdev at formation).
austrian 11y ago
Companies in America repeatedly charge people $10, $50, $200 or more than they should have, and then you either have to pay to hire a lawyer or pay them. If you don't then you get a bad credit score, and all the other companies that use the credit system will charge you more. In Austria, credit bureaus like in America are seen as corrupt and criminal. China also doesn't have a central credit bureau. I feel bad for every american when I hear intelligent people muse about making it more complex. You are just increasing the ability of companies to walk on the poor. This creates a bad bottom end of society, which America suffers from and Austria does not. America has crumbling cities like Detroit, and it's because of the criminal thieving credit bureau, but here in this thread we have lots of people talking about the credit bureau without even taking civilization into account.
- hugh4 11y ago
  That's rather a long bow to draw based on the occasional overcharge (which you should be able to get your credit card company to reverse anyway).
  - austrian 11y ago
    No its not. I imagine there are millions of lower class people in America that get charged an extra $50-$500 every month with a dare to hire a lawyer or take a hit on their credit score, of which they can take neither, so they pay a thief his made up fees. There's probably other examples of this I could imagine. Without even speaking about the psychological trauma that is present here, it looks about as criminal as stealing lunch money from random people. This isn't civilized behavior and it should not be tolerated in the USA.
    - hugh4 11y ago
      Statistically if it's never once happened to me it's unlikely that it happens to millions of people a month. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from.
      - 11y ago
jboggan 11y ago
So we need to make a new dating app that matches you by your credit score?

30 points by T-A 11y ago

Credit scores are like g in that they are highly predictive of a wide range of seeming unrelated human activities. I am always amazed at how humans are so predictable from such simple scores.

logicchains 11y ago

>Credit scores and match quality appear predictive of subsequent separations even beyond these credit channels, suggesting that credit scores reveal an individual's relationship skill and level of commitment. From an economic perspective this looks like time preference. Individuals who place a greater value on enjoyment in the present compared to enjoyment at some time in future are less likely to save money for the future, preferring to enjoy it now, and are also less likely to persist through the difficult parts of a relationship in pursuit of some future benefit from having a lasting relationship. I prefer the economic perspective as it's more impartial, and doesn't make the assumption that lack of "relationship skill" is the cause of relationship failure.

danieltillett 11y ago
I thought credit scores were more influenced by payment promptness and reliability rather than saving propensity. Isn’t one of the problems with people with high savings and no debt is that their credit score is lowish purely because they don’t have any evidence of prompt payment of debt?
- logicchains 11y ago
  You may be right actually, I didn't consider that. I'm Australian and here I think the system works a bit differently, so banks and whatnot will take into account your savings history when determining whether to loan you money. It's still the case in the US though that someone who saves will do a better job of payment reliability than someone who borrows the same amount of money but doesn't save, as the former will always have savings on hand with which to make repayments, while the latter may not.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    I am Australian too :) We do have credit scores here now, but I have never bother to look into mine (I don’t have any debt other than a credit card which I pay off each month). I think our banks are a bit more holistic when it comes to debt issuing than US banks which seem to be fixated on credit scores. On the topic of credit scores they are a huge pain if you move to the USA. I remember having a huge problem buying almost everything that required monthly payments (phone, cable, rent, etc) because I did not have a credit score. If someone wants a good business idea start a credit rating agency that is able to rate US immigrants and gives them rational credit scores based on their previous credit history in their country of origin.
    - jacques_chester 11y ago
      Some employers have deals with banks to vouch for you when you don't have a score. I got a US credit card when I moved here and bootstrapped my credit profile from that.
      - danieltillett 11y ago
        I am self-employeed and luckily wealthy enough that I don’t need debt, but found the process of everyday living very frustrating without a credit score. The fact that you have to play a game to create a credit score says the credit score system is broken, at least when it comes to immigrants.
- sksk 11y ago
  While your statement about payment promptness is correct, people with good scores tend to save more than others (scores do not use savings or income or wealth into account, however). Credit scores only penalize you when you don't have any credit but most of these good score folks tend to have (or had) a mortgage or have had auto loans, etc. Just because they are not actively opening new accounts does not mean they will be penalized -- credit scores look at pretty much everything in your report and they get credit for their historical good behavior. Another thing to consider is that good credit scores leads to a positive cycle: you don't pay high interest rates on your loans and the extra money saved here allows you to pay down obligations faster, which in turn allows you to save more in the long run.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    What about people with no debt? If you own your home and don’t carry any consumer debt then you look like a bad credit risk despite being one of the best risks.
    - sksk 11y ago
      It depends on what you mean by 'no debt'. If you mean, they have never ever had a loan then they will most likely not even have a score or a poor one (they will be categorized as a 'no hit' or 'thin file'). Don't have stats top of my head for this group but my hunch is no-hit / thin-file are people with poor access to credit and not many actively avoid debt altogether. If you mean, they had debt but they paid it all off, then they will still get a lot of credit for it. Credit scores look at your 'oldest tradeline' and maintaining good credit over many years is viewed favorably. Their scores will not be as high as someone who had recent credit transaction and managing it well (all else being equal), however, it will still be very good. If you look at the FICO Score, anything above a 760 or 780 is usually just bragging rights -- it hardly changes your rates on mortgages or loans.
      - hugh4 11y ago
        I'd lived in the US for about five years before I bothered to get a credit rating. I remember when I was renting an apartment the agent looked shocked that I didn't have one. "How can you not have a credit rating? Don't you have a car? Or a phone?" I said "Uh yeah, I paid cash for my car, and my phone is prepaid". I had a helluva time convincing him that someone who never has to borrow money (and can buy brand new cars for cash) is a better credit risk than someone who borrows money all the freaking time. Eventually I gave in and got a credit card for the sake of miles. Sheesh!

sksk 11y ago

This is a very interesting study. Anyone who has worked in the consumer credit industry will know that credit scores are correlated with a whole bunch of things -- your standard credit default to insurance claims to employment. Anytime you need to identify 'responsible' individuals, credit scores can act as a pretty good proxy although using credit scores is legally kosher only in certain situations. I think their trustworthiness hypothesis is probably weaker than other parts of their analysis. I have my own hypothesis based on my experience working in this industry: Staying in a committed relationship may not be really about 'responsible' behavior but could be due to similarity of financial management styles. Most marriage counselors talk about 'sorting out your finances' before getting married; credit scores are essentially capturing that issue -- people who have very good credit scores tend to be savers (although credit scores do not use income or wealth into account) and ones who have poor scores tend to be financially poor and for the large part spend more than they can afford. Also people with good scores tend to be manage finances in a particular way -- pay bills early, monitor balances regularly, etc. -- while the ones with poor credit scores do not usually pay much attention to finances and miss payments frequently. When you have two people with two different styles of managing money, it can lead to a strained relationship and subsequently lead to separation.

danieltillett 11y ago
Does it help a relationship if you have two non-savers together? As you rightly point out, money problems are major cause of relationship conflict and breakdown, but are these less common if you have two reckless spenders in a relationship rather than just one? I would have thought that having two reckless spenders would just accelerate the process of hitting money problems.
- sksk 11y ago
  That's a good question and I was thinking about the same when I read the paper. I have never investigated this aspect of credit scores in my career so don't really know the answer. My guess is people who have similar score, even if it is bad, probably tolerate each other more than when they have very different styles. I am not sure if the paper looks at this deeply (they seem to only compare differentials and stdev at formation).

austrian 11y ago

Companies in America repeatedly charge people $10, $50, $200 or more than they should have, and then you either have to pay to hire a lawyer or pay them. If you don't then you get a bad credit score, and all the other companies that use the credit system will charge you more. In Austria, credit bureaus like in America are seen as corrupt and criminal. China also doesn't have a central credit bureau. I feel bad for every american when I hear intelligent people muse about making it more complex. You are just increasing the ability of companies to walk on the poor. This creates a bad bottom end of society, which America suffers from and Austria does not. America has crumbling cities like Detroit, and it's because of the criminal thieving credit bureau, but here in this thread we have lots of people talking about the credit bureau without even taking civilization into account.

hugh4 11y ago
That's rather a long bow to draw based on the occasional overcharge (which you should be able to get your credit card company to reverse anyway).
- austrian 11y ago
  No its not. I imagine there are millions of lower class people in America that get charged an extra $50-$500 every month with a dare to hire a lawyer or take a hit on their credit score, of which they can take neither, so they pay a thief his made up fees. There's probably other examples of this I could imagine. Without even speaking about the psychological trauma that is present here, it looks about as criminal as stealing lunch money from random people. This isn't civilized behavior and it should not be tolerated in the USA.
  - hugh4 11y ago
    Statistically if it's never once happened to me it's unlikely that it happens to millions of people a month. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from.
    - 11y ago

jboggan 11y ago

So we need to make a new dating app that matches you by your credit score?