6 ms·

Isn't Equifax a government organization? How do they have severance packages?

pjc50 5y ago
It's a para-state agency; while Americans don't have ID cards because they're afraid of surveillance, a private company having a complete database of everyone and veto power over mortgages is fine because it's a private company.
- disgruntledphd2 5y ago
  There's three companies doing it, so they possess the holy blessings of the all-knowing market \s
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - pbak 5y ago
    #latestagecapitalism
- betterunix2 5y ago
  The existence of credit scores has tangible benefits that we take for granted. Without such databases we would all pay much higher interest rates and many more people would be denied loans. Very wealthy people would have little trouble, but low- and middle-income people would find it far more difficult to buy a house or a car. The reason it is better to be run by a private company than the government is not that surveillance, but the near-certainty (at least after everything we saw happen over the past 5 years) that a government credit scores agency would be politicized. We would have the same problems we have with equifax, and a whole new set of problems as e.g. the political party that rewrote the tax code to punish people who voted against them tried to weaponize credit scores.
  - pbak 5y ago
    As seen from another capitalist country, namely Switzerland, I take the "higher interest" rates as a tired argumentative "canard". It's a false idea perpetrated by lobbyists. We don't have such databases. The difference here is that the bank's mortgage divisions have much lower profits, because checking somebody out is actually done by humans. It costs the credit provider more. US style mortgage broker do not exist. Low- and Middle- income people here do not have houses because of high real estate prices due to very restrictive zoning (the country is small), and on average much, much, much more expensive construction than in the US. Here people expect a fully concrete house, near-to-passive level insulation, with 30-40 years free of any big renovation. In conclusion: we do without an Equifax just fine.
    - jkepler 5y ago
      Yet another reason why I think Switzerland would be a great country to move to.
      - pbak 5y ago
        Yes and no. It's not as good as it once was, and purchasing power is slowly but certainly going down. Everything is tightening up. Switzerland is extremely integrated into the western money circuits. If it goes to shit in the US, it'll follow suit at a much slower pace. However, Eurasia is replete with countries which try to imitate Western European successes by applying the same receppies. If you can swing it, the purchasing power is 3-5 times larger on the same net income, and you don't have pesky invasions of your private sphere at each corner. Also, as a Swiss, I can tell you that past the superficial welcome, we're a mountain people. We're really not as warm as others peoples. Over time, depending on your character, it may accrues and impact quality of life. We are also very disciplined in a lot of aspects of life, even outside work. That is a problem for some over time. But if your character fits, you'll have a blast.
    - betterunix2 5y ago
      ...so low- and middle-income people are not buying their own homes under that system, which is exactly what I said. What is the disagreement here? You say that interest rates are not higher, but that is a meaningless statement if people do not generally buy their homes on credit. Low- and middle-income Americans typically buy a home using a mortgage, and credit scores are an important part of that system.
- adolph 5y ago
  The state has broad enough illegal/illegitimate and legal surveillance tools that a nationwide ID card is unnecessary.
psyc 5y ago
It is a publicly traded corporation.
encryptluks2 5y ago
You'd think that one of the credit bureaus responsible for maintaining the most sensitive data, and making it difficult for people to get affordable housing would be a government institution, but nope.
- betterunix2 5y ago
  Would you rather have a government agency assign credit scores? The abuses would be rampant. Right now there is one party openly pushing to restrict voting access to people who are likely to vote for the other party, and a few years ago that same party enacted a new tax code that almost surgically penalized the residents of states that supported the other party; do you really trust such politicians to set up a fair credit rating system? I can see the headlines already: "SCOTUS rules 6-3 in favor of GOP effort to depress credit scores in Democrat-leaning cities," or perhaps, "Northeast states fear wave of foreclosures following GOP overhaul of credit score bureau," or maybe, "Whistleblower: President pressured credit rating agency to attack CNN, NYT reporters." Equifax and the other ratings agencies have plenty of problems, but none of those problems are solved by having the government run things and many new problems would be introduced.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    Then why is the SEC public, it could arbitrarily issue fines and fuck with the share price of any company that didnt donate to your party, maybe it should be private too?
    - betterunix2 5y ago
      Different role, different scope, different situation. The SEC has limited power to target individuals compared to a credit rating agency. It would be a scandal to politicize the SEC, but it would not be the sort of nightmare that a politicized credit rating agency could become. It is also worth pointing out that both the credit ratings and audits of publicly traded corporations are conducted by private-sector companies, not government agencies. The SEC's primary role is to ensure that the rules are being followed, which is a straightforward law-enforcement/regulatory role that makes sense for a government agency.
pepr 5y ago
Equifax is a private company.

It's a para-state agency; while Americans don't have ID cards because they're afraid of surveillance, a private company having a complete database of everyone and veto power over mortgages is fine because it's a private company.

disgruntledphd2 5y ago
There's three companies doing it, so they possess the holy blessings of the all-knowing market \s
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- pbak 5y ago
  #latestagecapitalism
betterunix2 5y ago
The existence of credit scores has tangible benefits that we take for granted. Without such databases we would all pay much higher interest rates and many more people would be denied loans. Very wealthy people would have little trouble, but low- and middle-income people would find it far more difficult to buy a house or a car. The reason it is better to be run by a private company than the government is not that surveillance, but the near-certainty (at least after everything we saw happen over the past 5 years) that a government credit scores agency would be politicized. We would have the same problems we have with equifax, and a whole new set of problems as e.g. the political party that rewrote the tax code to punish people who voted against them tried to weaponize credit scores.
- pbak 5y ago
  As seen from another capitalist country, namely Switzerland, I take the "higher interest" rates as a tired argumentative "canard". It's a false idea perpetrated by lobbyists. We don't have such databases. The difference here is that the bank's mortgage divisions have much lower profits, because checking somebody out is actually done by humans. It costs the credit provider more. US style mortgage broker do not exist. Low- and Middle- income people here do not have houses because of high real estate prices due to very restrictive zoning (the country is small), and on average much, much, much more expensive construction than in the US. Here people expect a fully concrete house, near-to-passive level insulation, with 30-40 years free of any big renovation. In conclusion: we do without an Equifax just fine.
  - jkepler 5y ago
    Yet another reason why I think Switzerland would be a great country to move to.
    - pbak 5y ago
      Yes and no. It's not as good as it once was, and purchasing power is slowly but certainly going down. Everything is tightening up. Switzerland is extremely integrated into the western money circuits. If it goes to shit in the US, it'll follow suit at a much slower pace. However, Eurasia is replete with countries which try to imitate Western European successes by applying the same receppies. If you can swing it, the purchasing power is 3-5 times larger on the same net income, and you don't have pesky invasions of your private sphere at each corner. Also, as a Swiss, I can tell you that past the superficial welcome, we're a mountain people. We're really not as warm as others peoples. Over time, depending on your character, it may accrues and impact quality of life. We are also very disciplined in a lot of aspects of life, even outside work. That is a problem for some over time. But if your character fits, you'll have a blast.
  - betterunix2 5y ago
    ...so low- and middle-income people are not buying their own homes under that system, which is exactly what I said. What is the disagreement here? You say that interest rates are not higher, but that is a meaningless statement if people do not generally buy their homes on credit. Low- and middle-income Americans typically buy a home using a mortgage, and credit scores are an important part of that system.
adolph 5y ago
The state has broad enough illegal/illegitimate and legal surveillance tools that a nationwide ID card is unnecessary.

psyc 5y ago

It is a publicly traded corporation.

encryptluks2 5y ago

You'd think that one of the credit bureaus responsible for maintaining the most sensitive data, and making it difficult for people to get affordable housing would be a government institution, but nope.

betterunix2 5y ago
Would you rather have a government agency assign credit scores? The abuses would be rampant. Right now there is one party openly pushing to restrict voting access to people who are likely to vote for the other party, and a few years ago that same party enacted a new tax code that almost surgically penalized the residents of states that supported the other party; do you really trust such politicians to set up a fair credit rating system? I can see the headlines already: "SCOTUS rules 6-3 in favor of GOP effort to depress credit scores in Democrat-leaning cities," or perhaps, "Northeast states fear wave of foreclosures following GOP overhaul of credit score bureau," or maybe, "Whistleblower: President pressured credit rating agency to attack CNN, NYT reporters." Equifax and the other ratings agencies have plenty of problems, but none of those problems are solved by having the government run things and many new problems would be introduced.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  Then why is the SEC public, it could arbitrarily issue fines and fuck with the share price of any company that didnt donate to your party, maybe it should be private too?
  - betterunix2 5y ago
    Different role, different scope, different situation. The SEC has limited power to target individuals compared to a credit rating agency. It would be a scandal to politicize the SEC, but it would not be the sort of nightmare that a politicized credit rating agency could become. It is also worth pointing out that both the credit ratings and audits of publicly traded corporations are conducted by private-sector companies, not government agencies. The SEC's primary role is to ensure that the rules are being followed, which is a straightforward law-enforcement/regulatory role that makes sense for a government agency.

pepr 5y ago

Equifax is a private company.