GM Discussion Thread

[Associate Justice PiT]

I'm glad you're active, but don't simply report the news, report what happens as a consequence of those events. Though I guess you'll have to wait for legislation to start passing.

     He could report on the effects of older legislation as well.

[Associate Justice PiT]

MArokai you are not helping them, if anything this will lead countries like Iran to crack down on Gays and Lesbians claiming Atlasian influence. Its just a feel good measure that will benefit no one and is instead counterproductive.

Perhaps the immediate effects are not clear, but when these nations see what foregoing trade with us results in they may have change of hearts.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is far more harmful for the poor and students, two of the most vulnerable groups, to get a credit card they shouldn't have received in the first place and land up under crushing amounts of debt, which in turn creates the need for the "recovery" you mentioned. Better they wait some, learn responsibility and get a credit card when they can better manage their finances.

The problem is that if the companies refuse to issue a credit card to them, they won't be able to "recover" there credit. I like the overall idea behind this as I am no fan of irresponsibility on gov't or the citizenry part. I just wish that indeed the abililty for, lets call them matured people, to recover the credit score. Another thing that wasn't mentioned or dealt with is those people whose credit score was ruined through no fault of there own because of ID theft.

The point of the bill is to prevent people having to "recover" in the first place. And the education test clause will allow those who currently need to recover to do so.

     I see none of that in the bill. Basically, you get a credit card, spend wildly, & when you get to the point where they normally would jack it over 20%, they just dump you & you basically try to get bailed out so you can actually have credit again in the future.

[Associate Justice PiT]

MArokai you are not helping them, if anything this will lead countries like Iran to crack down on Gays and Lesbians claiming Atlasian influence. Its just a feel good measure that will benefit no one and is instead counterproductive.

Perhaps the immediate effects are not clear, but when these nations see what foregoing trade with us results in they may have change of hearts.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is far more harmful for the poor and students, two of the most vulnerable groups, to get a credit card they shouldn't have received in the first place and land up under crushing amounts of debt, which in turn creates the need for the "recovery" you mentioned. Better they wait some, learn responsibility and get a credit card when they can better manage their finances.

The problem is that if the companies refuse to issue a credit card to them, they won't be able to "recover" there credit. I like the overall idea behind this as I am no fan of irresponsibility on gov't or the citizenry part. I just wish that indeed the abililty for, lets call them matured people, to recover the credit score. Another thing that wasn't mentioned or dealt with is those people whose credit score was ruined through no fault of there own because of ID theft.

The point of the bill is to prevent people having to "recover" in the first place. And the education test clause will allow those who currently need to recover to do so.

     I see none of that in the bill. Basically, you get a credit card, spend wildly, & when you get to the point where they normally would jack it over 20%, they just dump you & you basically try to get bailed out so you can actually have credit again in the future.

The bill does exactly that...

First, those who would, as you said, "spend wildly" are the ones not getting cards because of this bill. That ensures that fewer people need to be bailed out. For those who have already gotten stuck in such a situation, or who want to get a good deal, they take the education course, pass a test and receive a little bump. Hopefully that will also ensure they don't spend wildly again.

     But they need a credit card first, or else their wild spending would not affect their credit score, so there would be no basis for them being denied a credit card. I'm not sure I follow what you are saying, but college kids would still be getting credit cards. Until they take the course (which they would have no reason to at this stage), there is not much to stop them from racking up charges that they cannot pay back & ending up in this situation.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I don't see the Credit card companies playing nice here. Why should they? They could just as easily screw these people over by dropping them and denying them a credit card, now granted that is the best course for the irresponsible, but again if the credit card companies intend to be a**holes they could just deny them indefinately and prevent them from any meaningfull recovery in there credit score. So no house, no car, no small business, and no more education for them in the future.

    But they need a credit card first, or else their wild spending would not affect their credit score, so there would be no basis for them being denied a credit card. I'm not sure I follow what you are saying, but college kids would still be getting credit cards. Until they take the course (which they would have no reason to at this stage), there is not much to stop them from racking up charges that they cannot pay back & ending up in this situation.

I think you both are missing the point, so let's break it down.

We have people who: deserve cards and use them responsibly, deserve cards and use them irresponsibly, deserve cards and don't get them, don't deserve cards and use them irresponsibly, don't deserve cards and use them responsibly, and don't deserve cards and don't get them.

Those who deserve them and use them responsibly aren't affected by this. Those who deserve them and use them irresponsibly will hopefully be helped by the credit education clause. Those who deserve them, but don't receive cards are likely few in number and are simply a market loss to the credit companies and can use the credit education course to prove to credit companies that they are deserving.

Those who don't deserve and use them irresponsibly are cut out by this law and for good reason, but perhaps by the credit education course they can come to deserve one and prove such to the credit companies. Those who don't deserve and use them responsibly are likely few in number and should be deemed relatively inconsequential in the event that they no longer receive cards from the companies (after all, they don't deserve them). Those who don't deserve them and don't get them are there for a reason.

At the end of the day, the credit companies need to make money, which means they won't shut out people that are profitable (anyone deserving of a card). However, it is harmful to society in the long-run to provide incentives for irresponsible credit use. The hope is that taking the education course, just like defensive driving courses, will appeal to credit companies and lead them to possibly lower interest rates or provide credit to people who weren't able to receive it. But why should we allow the continued destruction of our society by promoting personal debt and destructive credit use.

I never advocated for irresponsibility, I just don't see thinks going as smoothly as you and Marokai claim they will, things never do.

I actually think that the announcement that credit companies will be cutting some people is exactly what should happen. That is a step in the right direction. Once the credit education programs are used things will even out. This is working exactly as planned so far.

     Well if that's your view of things, then that is fine. I remember though that some people in the debate thread made it sound like it would be a great loss for some people to have their credit permanently revoked.