3 ms·

So it’s really an issue of imprecise title, but the issue is still highly immoral and likely illegal based on the taking clause and the highly discriminatory an

So it’s really an issue of imprecise title, but the issue is still highly immoral and likely illegal based on the taking clause and the highly discriminatory and unequal nature, regardless. The title should have been more like about how the fees, i.e., marginal rates, for higher risk borrowers is being charged to lower risk borrowers. No moral or ethical person could support this, regardless of benefit of penalty. It is indefensible, short of making it voluntary so all the virtue signalers can choose to put their money where their mouth and self-righteousness it. It is still a system to punish good and reward bad.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> but the issue is still highly immoral With reference to what specific system of morality? > and likely illegal based on the taking clause How on earth are LLPAs, under any price schedule, a taking under the 5th? Preferably, with citation to relevant authority. > and the highly discriminatory and unequal nature All laws are discriminatory, but except when certain protected bases of discrimination or certain important rights are implicated, that discrimination only needs to meet the very deferential standard of being rationally related to a legitimate government purpose to be Constitutionally permissible. I'd be interested in hearing whether (and, if so, why) you think a standard beyond rational basis review is applicable here and, more critically, your argument for how the applicable standard of review is not met.