3 ms·

You can’t possibly be serious w.r.t. payday lenders. I mean seriously, come on. It’s one of the most predatory types of lending that exists. They often provide

You can’t possibly be serious w.r.t. payday lenders. I mean seriously, come on. 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.

doctorpangloss 8y ago
> The result is denying poor people access to credit. I think it sort of boils down to rayinier's wrong, or at least hopelessly unsophisticated, understanding of credit. When you don't pay your landlord on time, you definitely enter a debt relationship with your landlord. That's credit in every sense but financial. Payday loan companies securitized a form of credit that had low effective "interest" (e.g., late payment penalties) and converted it into something with high interest. Yes, nobody wants to be evicted. But surely, in a strictly rational economic sense, landlords don't want vacant properties either. It's not so obvious what is the "efficient rate," as rayinier says, because based on eviction rates for late payments of rents, it's probably not that high. Foreclosing on people's homes, of course, was a huge disaster and the source of an incredible amount of national economic and emotional misery. So again, just within an economic positivist framework, it's not at all as simple to arrive at "efficient" rates as rayinier assumes. I'm not sure if payday loan companies, which charge a higher interest rate to essentially victimize the same population at an industrial scale, is an economic positive, you know? I wish he would just admit that while some human beings will sometimes be landlords, and therefore deserve some protections, no normal person will literally ever be a payday loan lender, so it seems fit that we ought to use a credit system (late rental payments) that people can imagine justice inside of rather than an usurious credit system nobody will ever be on the right side of.

doctorpangloss 8y ago

> The result is denying poor people access to credit. I think it sort of boils down to rayinier's wrong, or at least hopelessly unsophisticated, understanding of credit. When you don't pay your landlord on time, you definitely enter a debt relationship with your landlord. That's credit in every sense but financial. Payday loan companies securitized a form of credit that had low effective "interest" (e.g., late payment penalties) and converted it into something with high interest. Yes, nobody wants to be evicted. But surely, in a strictly rational economic sense, landlords don't want vacant properties either. It's not so obvious what is the "efficient rate," as rayinier says, because based on eviction rates for late payments of rents, it's probably not that high. Foreclosing on people's homes, of course, was a huge disaster and the source of an incredible amount of national economic and emotional misery. So again, just within an economic positivist framework, it's not at all as simple to arrive at "efficient" rates as rayinier assumes. I'm not sure if payday loan companies, which charge a higher interest rate to essentially victimize the same population at an industrial scale, is an economic positive, you know? I wish he would just admit that while some human beings will sometimes be landlords, and therefore deserve some protections, no normal person will literally ever be a payday loan lender, so it seems fit that we ought to use a credit system (late rental payments) that people can imagine justice inside of rather than an usurious credit system nobody will ever be on the right side of.