The thread admits that savvy financial consumers have better options: > Second, credit scores were the most predictive variable of good participant behavior fo

The thread admits that savvy financial consumers have better options: > Second, credit scores were the most predictive variable of good participant behavior for us. But people with high credit scores tend to have better, cheaper options than ISAs. And then claims that the simplicity of the instrument makes them a better option than debt ("simplicity" isn't a virtue if the alternative is middle school pre-algebra levels of "complicated" and comes at much lower prices): > Furterhmore [sic], consumers were consistently confused by ISAs and had a vague sense they were exploitative. I think ISAs are less complicated than debt, but consumers don't have experience with then. His TL;DR has borderline misleading levels of... interpretation. The real story is that ISAs are exploitative and most consumers -- ESPECIALLY the ones who might actually do okay in life -- can't be "educated" out of seeing that an obvious raw deal is an obvious raw deal. So you're left exploiting the folks everyone else considers too risky, who, it turns out, are... too risky. Like... he says so himself, in so many words.