3 ms·

I worked at a large OTA (Online Travel Agency) who adopted Affirm a few years back. I vehemently opposed it and told everyone I could up the chain of command. A

I worked at a large OTA (Online Travel Agency) who adopted Affirm a few years back. I vehemently opposed it and told everyone I could up the chain of command. A vast majority of the folks who used it, are the ones who shouldn't use it. Taking out a two year loan for a 3 day vacation.

dubcanada 5y ago
Why? It's actually extremely smart financially as stated in another thread where investing that money over 2 years can actually result in a slightly cheaper item.
- dan-robertson 5y ago
  The general thinking is something like ‘people who can’t pony up the cash right away are more likely to be in a more precarious situation and repeated use of BNPL services can lead to unmeetable obligations either because that person experiences a drop in income or because of many separate loans adding up.’ To some extent the argument feels like saying that poor people are stupid with managing money, which I think isn’t particularly true (though I also suspect there is some correlation in richer societies) but another way to phrase that is that it is much easier to live within your means if you have a lot of means. Certainly people do end up with debt they struggle to afford from schemes like this but it is hard to tell how big an effect it is from reading sob stories in newspapers.
- drc500free 5y ago
  People in the equity class are concerned with financing decisions to arbitrage rate of return spreads. Arbitrating spreads is a game of spreadsheets and math. People in the poverty class are concerned with budgeting decisions to reduce their consumption as much as humanly tolerable. Reducing consumption is a game of psychological warfare between your future self and your present self. The smart financial play is irrelevant to someone who needs to be making budgeting plays. Cheap credit leads to good financial decisions and bad budgeting decisions.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

dubcanada 5y ago

Why? It's actually extremely smart financially as stated in another thread where investing that money over 2 years can actually result in a slightly cheaper item.

dan-robertson 5y ago
The general thinking is something like ‘people who can’t pony up the cash right away are more likely to be in a more precarious situation and repeated use of BNPL services can lead to unmeetable obligations either because that person experiences a drop in income or because of many separate loans adding up.’ To some extent the argument feels like saying that poor people are stupid with managing money, which I think isn’t particularly true (though I also suspect there is some correlation in richer societies) but another way to phrase that is that it is much easier to live within your means if you have a lot of means. Certainly people do end up with debt they struggle to afford from schemes like this but it is hard to tell how big an effect it is from reading sob stories in newspapers.
drc500free 5y ago
People in the equity class are concerned with financing decisions to arbitrage rate of return spreads. Arbitrating spreads is a game of spreadsheets and math. People in the poverty class are concerned with budgeting decisions to reduce their consumption as much as humanly tolerable. Reducing consumption is a game of psychological warfare between your future self and your present self. The smart financial play is irrelevant to someone who needs to be making budgeting plays. Cheap credit leads to good financial decisions and bad budgeting decisions.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]