> The article claims that as people were granted larger credit lines, that their proportion of credit used remained constant. These two claims don’t make a ton

> The article claims that as people were granted larger credit lines, that their proportion of credit used remained constant. These two claims don’t make a ton of sense to me. That law about gas expanding to fill all available space also applies to spending of credit and income. Most people spend up to the limit. Raise the limit, the amount spent increases too. New job? Time for a new car. Promotion? Let's buy a camper. Thus, proportion of credit used always remains constant. The fees are absurd these days too. It dawned on me one month where I made the minimum payment but it appeared it hadn't gone through. I looked into it, and found they charged me a yearly fee almost as much as the monthly payment. At that point I tripled the minimum payment I was making, because between interest and that the balance was going nowhere. > I wonder if it’s not the reverse: creditors are incentivized to continue to lend you more credit to sustain a specific level of credit utilization. Yep. Your existing lender can raise the limit, or someone else can offer you a new card. The former presents no friction, and you may well spend a chunk of it (and pay interest on it) before you even notice you have it.