3 ms·

> ANYTHING that helps get rid of those scum is a huge improvement. And these guys are truly crusaders for the working-class poor that are going to fix the syst

by hurin 11y ago

> ANYTHING that helps get rid of those scum is a huge improvement. And these guys are truly crusaders for the working-class poor that are going to fix the system? Or they are just going to cash in on updating payday-loans to the 21st century Iphone version. I mean it's a good idea and I'm sure they can be very successful if it's well executed. AND I have no doubts they will be just as scummy-bag as the market & regulations allow them to be. Which is very American and I guess it's fine. But please excuse my low tolerance for packaging the profit motive of a company as helping the working class poor.

VikingCoder 11y ago
Competition IS GOOD. If you think that even.me is exploiting their customer base, but is otherwise a good idea, then I sincerely recommend you try to create or help someone who will compete with them, offering similar service. Perhaps for $2.50 a week. And no, they're clearly not going to "fix the system," but it sounds to me like their idea would be good for some people. Would actually help them.
zo1 11y ago
>"But please excuse my low tolerance for packaging the profit motive of a company as helping the working class poor." They're not mutually exclusive, to be honest. You can make a profit AND help the target group. Additionally I hope you're honest as well, and say that's okay instead of bashing them for "making a profit" while helping the needy. On a curious side note... Where abouts exactly do you place "non-profits" in this whole thing? What about government?
- hurin 11y ago
  > They're not mutually exclusive, to be honest. You can make a profit AND help the target group. Additionally I hope you're honest as well, Exactly - and talking about the app "helping the needy" is especially dishonest. Sure she can pay $3 a week instead of a $35 over-draft on her Bank Account -- and if you think that's help then I assume you've never had to live on minimum wage. > Additionally I hope you're honest as well, and say that's okay instead of bashing them for "making a profit" while helping the needy. To be clear, I did not bash the company. They picked a particularly scummy industry that hasn't been disrupted by technology and they are doing their thing -- and the job of their PR department is to sell their technology and part of that is playing up "help the needy". On the other-hand I have a real problem with this as an article. It doesn't start off talking about an app, instead it introduces a particular person, draws in the reader's sympathy to that person's difficulties and then resolves that into marketing a product - basically making a joke of the actual problems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United...). No, I don't seriously believe there is any such journalist who interviews someone living on an unpredictable near-minimum-wage and whose honest first impulse and thought is "they need an app to help them". This is a shill if I've ever seen one.
  - zo1 11y ago
    "Exactly - and talking about the app "helping the needy" is especially dishonest. Sure she can pay $3 a week instead of a $35 over-draft on her Bank Account -- and if you think that's help then I assume you've never had to live on minimum wage." It's not up to me to decide, nor does my income-level have anything to do with the validity of my arguments. You simply have to answer "is this person better off with this thing X". If we go under the assumption that steady-income is better than unpredictable income, then the answer has to be yes because this app satisfies that requirement. Let's not confuse that component with discussion about "real" help for the needy. There may be better ways, but that's a separate talk of "what is the best help for the needy".
    - hurin 11y ago
      > It's not up to me to decide, nor does my income-level have anything to do with the validity of my arguments. You simply have to answer "is this person better off with this thing X". By your logic of: better off == "helping the needy" == Saving a few $bucks General Mills cereal coupons are "helping the needy". That's seriously complete bullshit. If you are going to use strong terms like "helping the needy" I would expect e.g. improved quality of life or another reasonable indicator backed by a well presented position and/or statistics. > my income-level I very much doubt any person living on minimum wage would say "Yes, my quality of life would be improved by a budgeting app for my IPhone". But if you had lived on minimum wage at some-point and honestly thought so, I would have considered it relevant.

by hurin 11y ago

VikingCoder 11y ago

Competition IS GOOD. If you think that even.me is exploiting their customer base, but is otherwise a good idea, then I sincerely recommend you try to create or help someone who will compete with them, offering similar service. Perhaps for $2.50 a week. And no, they're clearly not going to "fix the system," but it sounds to me like their idea would be good for some people. Would actually help them.

zo1 11y ago

>"But please excuse my low tolerance for packaging the profit motive of a company as helping the working class poor." They're not mutually exclusive, to be honest. You can make a profit AND help the target group. Additionally I hope you're honest as well, and say that's okay instead of bashing them for "making a profit" while helping the needy. On a curious side note... Where abouts exactly do you place "non-profits" in this whole thing? What about government?

hurin 11y ago
> They're not mutually exclusive, to be honest. You can make a profit AND help the target group. Additionally I hope you're honest as well, Exactly - and talking about the app "helping the needy" is especially dishonest. Sure she can pay $3 a week instead of a $35 over-draft on her Bank Account -- and if you think that's help then I assume you've never had to live on minimum wage. > Additionally I hope you're honest as well, and say that's okay instead of bashing them for "making a profit" while helping the needy. To be clear, I did not bash the company. They picked a particularly scummy industry that hasn't been disrupted by technology and they are doing their thing -- and the job of their PR department is to sell their technology and part of that is playing up "help the needy". On the other-hand I have a real problem with this as an article. It doesn't start off talking about an app, instead it introduces a particular person, draws in the reader's sympathy to that person's difficulties and then resolves that into marketing a product - basically making a joke of the actual problems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United...). No, I don't seriously believe there is any such journalist who interviews someone living on an unpredictable near-minimum-wage and whose honest first impulse and thought is "they need an app to help them". This is a shill if I've ever seen one.
- zo1 11y ago
  "Exactly - and talking about the app "helping the needy" is especially dishonest. Sure she can pay $3 a week instead of a $35 over-draft on her Bank Account -- and if you think that's help then I assume you've never had to live on minimum wage." It's not up to me to decide, nor does my income-level have anything to do with the validity of my arguments. You simply have to answer "is this person better off with this thing X". If we go under the assumption that steady-income is better than unpredictable income, then the answer has to be yes because this app satisfies that requirement. Let's not confuse that component with discussion about "real" help for the needy. There may be better ways, but that's a separate talk of "what is the best help for the needy".
  - hurin 11y ago
    > It's not up to me to decide, nor does my income-level have anything to do with the validity of my arguments. You simply have to answer "is this person better off with this thing X". By your logic of: better off == "helping the needy" == Saving a few $bucks General Mills cereal coupons are "helping the needy". That's seriously complete bullshit. If you are going to use strong terms like "helping the needy" I would expect e.g. improved quality of life or another reasonable indicator backed by a well presented position and/or statistics. > my income-level I very much doubt any person living on minimum wage would say "Yes, my quality of life would be improved by a budgeting app for my IPhone". But if you had lived on minimum wage at some-point and honestly thought so, I would have considered it relevant.