Credit Card Industry Reforms Are Coming (And It Only Took 30 Years)

By Fact-esque

America has been in the midst of a credit crisis for over a decade, a crisis that Bill Clinton did very little to address, that the Democrats as a whole all but ignored, and that the Bush GOP, pandering as usual to their Corporate America paymasters, did everything in their power to make even worse. Put together, what they have all done is let the financial industry loose to create chaos, a chaos which the mortgage debacle made infinitely worse and which now threatens the second global depression in 70 years.

Now - now - after the damage has been done and the economy is teetering on the edge of freefall, they are finally getting around to doing something about the massive rip-off credit card companies have been pulling on their customers since Reagan first began deregulating the industry.

Stricter regulation of the credit card industry will probably be
approved by the end of the year, consumer advocates, members of
Congress and banking officials said as the comment period on the
Federal Reserve's proposed actions drew to a close last week.

Nearly 56,000 comments poured into the agency via e-mail and regular
mail, a record response for any Fed proposal, said agency spokeswoman
Susan Stawick.

Both the Fed and Congress are working to tighten rules on the credit
card industry. The large response to the Fed's proposal comes on the
heels of congressional action on the issue. The House Financial
Services Committee moved Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney's Credit Cardholders'
Bill of Rights out of committee on July 31. The measure would prohibit
unexpected increases in the rates charged on pre-existing credit card
balances, among other things. Observers said the New York Democrat's
bill probably wouldn't pass the Senate this year because time is
running out.

Nonetheless, the fact that the bill made it out of committee despite
significant pushback from the banking industry and top Republican
lawmakers sends a signal to the Fed that if it doesn't take action,
Congress eventually will....

Yes. Eventually. If the Blue Dogs let them.

The list of credit card scams is as long as Wilt Chamberlain's arm. Hidden charges, improperly inflated charges, new charges added without notice, charges assessed even though the contract forbids them, and on and on and on. They have been gouging consumers without let-up for three decades, but the banking industry's lobbyists are some of the most powerful in Washington, the Pub Corp-Puppets were in power, and the Democrats were wooing the banking industry by explaining that they weren't going to croak the golden goose and then proving it with Joe Biden's assault on the bankruptcy laws.

But the Fed, for one, isn't going to kill the GG either, not really. The regs the Fed is proposing are far short of what's needed even if the conservatives and the bankers are howling in pain like little kids with scraped knees who think they're going to die.

The Fed's proposed rules would, among other things, specify when credit
card issuers can increase interest rates on existing balances, keep
them from calculating finance charges based on the average of balances
over two cycles even if part of the debt has been repaid, and prohibit
late fees on customers who were not given a reasonable amount of time
to pay. The proposal also seeks to regulate overdraft protection on
deposit accounts, requiring banks to let customers opt out of the
service before assessing fees.

But the proposal does not, in all cases, ban the so-called universal
default -- that is, raising a person's interest rate if he or she is
late on an unrelated debt. It also does not address many arbitrarily
high credit card fees
.

(emphasis added)

It also does not address a regulatory structure so loose at this point that you could run a 747 through the loopholes, a looseness that amounts to nothing less than an invitation to defraud consumers. The Fed do a thing like that? It's a little much to expect, even though Bernanke himself has finally admitted that "a much tougher approach is needed to guard against what they call 'unfair or deceptive practices.'"

No shit, Sherlock.

It is long past time for this miserable situation to be dealt with. For quick action I would suggest the credit card companies be told that they're going to have to pay reparations to their consumers since we've been their virtual slaves for decades. The threat should be enough to get them to clean up their act, don't you think?

Comments

(43)

What gets me

The right wingers are going to post here about personal responsibility and argue about the companies being blameless. blah blah blah.

First of all the two are not mutually exclusive. We can talk about changing the culture so people make better decisions. But the credit card companies ARE practicing predatory lending. And or society, culture and economic system are focused on and driven by constant purchasing of goods. This is a big problem that we must face the idiotic right wing one-liners and blind devotion to all things corporate solve nothing.

The reality is that we have a society that is in debt. For those of us that have not allowed the debt to go beyond our means, we are not safe because we practiced "personal responsibility". If the economy crashes we are affected. If the number of people facing foreclosure and bad credit increases, we are affected. On the other hand if everyone were to suddenly become frugal and not use credit, then we are all affected too because the economy would need to adjust.

Personal responsibility.

If your neighbor comes over and shits on your porch, steals your weed eater and shoots your dog, do we just forget that she did this because this was a momentary lapse of personal responsibility, or does it become the personal responsibility of the victim to seek justice via the normal means possible, ie our socialized police departments, ie our government?

Isn't it also the responsibility of our government to determine what legally defines a crime in the first place or do we just play that by ear and allow the porch-shitting, weedeater-stealing, dog-shooting neighbor to determine if she might have strayed from lawfullness?

Bad analogy

Breaking the law requires response from law enforcement - but there is no law against extending credit to those not worthy.

This is known as "bad business practice". Banks and Financial institutions are being pummeled, and rightly so, for making bad loans. People who cannot repay loans they took voluntarily have outlets such as "credit counseling" and "bankruptcy".

I work for a major financial institution, and I can tell you the source of these problems is simple - greed and arrogance. The internal credit control staff were emasculated by the God of false profits.

Unfortunately, it is a cycle the appears about every 15 years or so.

You think this is only some 15 yr. cycle bump.

I see an eye-opening in your near future. You're the expert, of course. But this looks like the onset of a real deep-dish correction...not to make anyone edgy....Whats good about it is it'll clean some deep pus, and moreover, the government(s) will hemorrhage as one dire straits entity. The repair strategy will have fewer....options to debate...action will be swift, and thats what we lack now ...people are still watching and hoping Santa will step in.

By dewbie dubaiAugust 11, 2008 - 5:18pm

All I know is that over the last few years I've seen right wingers and economic "experts" tell us that oil wouldn't reach $100 a barrel and that we weren't going into a recession. There are still a few that argue it isn't a recession. And then you have the bit that Cheney made famous about Reagan proving debt is a good thing.

And still everyone wants to paint this a just a little downturn. Well I believe that when the US consumers stop purchasing as much as they currently do, well the value of the dollar is going to be affected. The dollar is based on faith. We are no longer on the gold standard. Many countries still have faith in the dollar because they sell goods to the US. But if sales in the US dry up then what good is the dollar to them?

According to Monkey Boy, in his interview with Bob Costas ...

when Bob asked for his take on US influence in the Russian/Georgian conflict, since said influence has been battered down by America's problems, Monkey Boy says - we don't HAVE any problems ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keN12U2coK8

As Jon Stewart correctly said last night, Monkey Boy's indifference and delusions ARE our biggest problems.

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
George Carlin

That "interview" was a hoot!

First off, if you're a retarded, unpopular President, Bob Costas is just the pawn you want fawning over you on national TV! Even my wife, not a suspicious person by nature, agreed that the whole thing was a puff piece and sub rosa promotion for Crash W. McBush.

Then too, Chimpy acted once again like he's been hitting the Maotai with a Tsingtao chaser while in Beijing. Or perhaps he's high off that Chinese industrial pollution that he so envies?

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

It was good for a laugh, wasn't it?

It cracks me up whenever I see someone interviewing Monkey Boy, that they stare at him in adulation! Costas looked like he was just waiting for Monkey Boy to ask him to the prom!

Nail, meet hammer. Monkey Boy has GOT to be drunk to even THINK, that we don't have problems.

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
George Carlin

LMAO

Bob did have rather a "wide stance," no? Was he tapping toes off-camera?

Not only was the Monkey partying with the best in Chinese distilled fantasy...I think the combination of jet lag and having to spend 15 hours on Chimp Transport One with the Ape, meant she was "sleeping with Prince Valium."

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

It wouldn't surprise me if Costas was! LOL

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
George Carlin

It's all rather suspicious...

I mean, most middle-aged male sports reporters fawn over the little teenage girl athletes. And here's Bobbo fawning over The Ape.

Could he be...a President Predator? Someone better call Nancy Grace!

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

Maybe Nancy can push Mrs. Costas to suicide!

After she beats on her for not being the 'woman' she ought to be for her man, barefoot, pregnant and chained to the stove. Oh, and for not wearing the Catholic school girl uniform Bobbo bought her for Christmas last year ...

Seriously, did you see the way he was looking at Monkey Boy? VERY creepy ...

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
George Carlin

What I think Bob was thinking...

First, this is from Wikipedia so take it FWIW:

Costas declared on June 27, 2007, that the presidency of George W. Bush had "tragically failed."

I think it is now overwhelmingly evident, if you're honest about it, even if you're a conservative Republican, if you're honest about it, this is a failed administration. And no honest conservative would say that George W. Bush was among the 500 most qualified people to be President of the United States. That's not based on political leaning. If a liberal, and I tend to be liberal, disagrees with a conservative, they can still respect that person's competence and the integrity of their point of view.[4]

He went on to say that, although a liberal, he has voted for some Republicans in the past.

From the somewhat questionable Wikipedia

I think Bob's only thought was "Gosh, here I am, a 56-year-old, soon to be washed up sports guy. This might be my only shot at interviewing the PRESIDENT! Maybe if I kiss his ass enough, they'll even let ME do the weather on "Today" when Al's off with indigestion!"

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

LOL - Maybe he'd like to replace Willard Scott!!

Now THAT is one creepy old man!!

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
George Carlin

No shit!

Is he The Undead at this point? I mean, they keep him around to pander to the old people who favor morning shows!

"Smucker's salutes Caleb Flint of Abilene, Texas. Caleb turns 102 today, but he's still one active old redneck. He prays daily down to the Christian Identity church, and his hobbies are drooling, shitting his sheet, and jerking off at girls' basketball games. Happy Birthday Caleb, you senile old fart!"

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

That's funny! LMAO

I don't know if you watch "The Soup" but Joel McHale, the comedian who runs the show, is always getting on Willard's ass about the creepy way he looks at young girls who happen to be by him ... like McSame, he's a creepy old man !!

"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
George Carlin

yes and no

The right wingers are going to post here about personal responsibility and argue about the companies being blameless. blah blah blah.

2 simple rules: 1) If you can't afford it in cash, don't put it on the card. 2) Pay off the balance every month. If you follow these two rules, then you will NEVER be in credit card debt. It's that simple.

First of all the two are not mutually exclusive.

I agree, somewhat. Hidden charges or secret increases are illegal, instead they are usaully stuffed in some paragraph of some application that no ones reads(again responsibility) but I would support requiring CC companies to send out warning when rates are increased, even if its the card holder's fault. Also, parents and/or teachers should explain (at least briefly) how credit cards and debt works, and how to avoid the pitfalls. (see my two simple rules)

We can talk about changing the culture so people make better decisions. But the credit card companies ARE practicing predatory lending.

And this is where we disagree. Assuming you follow my 2 simple rules, you will NEVER pay any hidden fees, surcharges, or interest.....EVER(note: some companies like american express have annual rates - which is why I don't use them). Add in the fact that I get rewards points when I buy things...the card actually pays ME to own it. Payday loans, car title loans, mafia loans....that's predatory lending. Those have like 200% interest, and are designed to be impossible to pay back.

And or society, culture and economic system are focused on and driven by constant purchasing of goods.

I agree, too many people are obsessed with buying "things." New cars, latest clothes, latest cell phones, newest ipod, etc... But again this is a responsibility issue/society issue. If you follow my two simple rules, then even if you are wasting your money buying things you don't need...at least you can afford them. Blaming a Credit card for reckless spending is like blaming Toyota because you drive your car into a lake. (did you like the one-liner?)

This is a big problem that we must face the idiotic right wing one-liners and blind devotion to all things corporate solve nothing.

so close...a well reasoned, articulate argument...soiled by a pointless, stereotypical view of republicans that serves as nothing more than a meaningless cheap-shot...

You are an idiot

What if you lose your job and have no way to pay your bills but a credit card? Things are not always as simple as you think. You are completely out of touch.

By mrtoadAugust 11, 2008 - 10:19am

You are playing the exact part I said a right winger would play.

It doesn't matter what is responsible spending or not. Our society has this problem. Our economy is based on people spending what they do not have. It is not an easy problem to deal with.

If we wave a magic wand and everyone starts spending only what they have, the amount of purchasing going on will plummet. That affects us all.

If we do nothing and let all those that were "irresponsible" go down in flames it affects us all. ( And on this point there were many people that were acting responsibly but did not expect the down turn in our economy to be so bad.)

Your "solution" to just declare we spend only what we have is something we should strive for as a social norm. But it is not a solution to the mess the entire nation is now in.

It doesn't matter??

Really?

"It doesn't matter what is responsible spending or not. Our society has this problem. Our economy is based on people spending what they do not have."

Our economy is based on a lot of "what they do not have". This is responsible as long as it is based on the expectation of an economic return - for example - "Things I spend on but do not have cash for"

College Education (increased lifetime earning by multiples)
Master's Degree (ditto)
Home (provides opportunity to build equity - as well as sweat equity - and amortizes "rental")
Car (transportation that increases the geographic area in which I can be employed)

This as distinguished from discretionary credit card spending. But this is not exact as well - for example, I have financed many vacations with my kids to Disney, Hershey Park, etc - these are things that they would not have enjoyed in later years, and are an "investment" in a happy family life.

It is a fact that people make bad financial decisions - the crime is that credit card companies continue to extend them credit, even though they do not have the ability to pay.

Hound didn't mention loans to start businesses

Your expectations are grim in their chance of materialization, without a monumental influx of investment in U.S.-based infrastructure/job-generating projects. None of your mentioned "risks" seem to address this--their own long-term basal support

By houndogAugust 11, 2008 - 11:58am

Hey houndog.

You missed the point. AGAIN.

Do you really think I'm advocating continuing the status quo?

My point is that it doesn't do anything to get up on a soap box and point fingers at people for being irresponsible. The nation as a whole shares this problem. We need to find a way to get out of this mess. And yes we do need to change the mindset of people on their spending habits.

You are so funny

"Do you really think I'm advocating continuing the status quo?"

Yes I do - because you say really silly things like:

"And yes we do need to change the mindset of people on their spending habits."

Are you going to be handing out tinfoil hats for this purpose? M-m-m-z-z-z-m-m mindset change, mindset change, must control fists of death.....

We don't need to change people's mindset, people just need to recognize that when you spend beyond your means you go bankrupt, whether your name is Jones or Bear Stearns. If they choose not to recognize it, well, it will happen to them anyway.

"My point is that it doesn't do anything to get up on a soap box and point fingers at people for being irresponsible. The nation as a whole shares this problem. We need to find a way to get out of this mess."

The way out of "this mess" is to let the consumers and banks that created the mess take their losses and learn their lesson so they will not do it again.

The so-called "magic wand" is called "accountability".

By houndogAugust 11, 2008 - 1:43pm

You're bizarre.

You can not comprehend what I'm saying.

'The so-called "magic wand" is called "accountability".'

- That was part of my point Just yelling accountability and pointing fingers does nothing. We let a large number of people go under financially and we all pay the price. We as a society and nation lets this get to this point. We are all part of it.

My comment on changing society was to address that I do accept the notion of accountability. We can't just do it over night. Changing society so that people use credit less often and only for important needs will not fix the mess we are currently in. Furthermore because our economy will take a major hit if people suddenly decrease their shopping habits, we need to consider how to fix the problem.

So like a typical right winger you have offered no solution but to say "accountability". Sorry. You lose.

Let's Ignore, As Usual, the "right-wing" nonsense

And I will try to explain this simply so you will understand.

"We let a large number of people go under financially and we all pay the price".

No, "We all" don't, "they" do. People have been "going under financially" forever (80% of all new businesses fail within the 1st 5 years), and they often learn more from their failures than from anything else.

"We as a society and nation lets this get to this point. We are all part of it."

Uh-h-h (as A G likes to say), No, we didn't. You are no more responsible for Johnies's financial failures then you are for his alcohol, tobacco or porno problems.

"So like a typical right winger you have offered no solution but to say "accountability". Sorry. You lose."

Fortunately, "saying" accountability is not required. Accountability just happens. Depriving someone of their accountability is like changing them from diapers to Depends. Shit still happens, it's just in a bigger package.

"Changing society so that people use credit less often and only for important needs will not fix the mess we are currently in."

Glad to see that at least you recognize reality. Using credit "wisely" not "less often" is what's required. Because people are often incapable of doing that, it is the responsibility of banks to impose reliable credit standards to ensure they do. I agree with you that the banks are responsible for a great deal of this mess - they should go down as well.

By houndogAugust 11, 2008 - 2:46pm

I disagree. But then you have so misunderstood from the start what I'm trying to say that I doubt I can get through to you.

1. I did not say we are "responsible" for others.
2. You have confused my statements on personal responsibility/accountability from the start.
3. We do pay the price for all of this.

If you can not recognize the fact that massive numbers of foreclosures and credit problems do not affect all of us then you are a fool. The value of the dollar hinges on all of this. The interest rates for those of us that do have good credit are affected as well. And that's just a start.

So I stand by my statement that we are all affected.

Let me try to separate two issues for you. These are two separate parts of my original arguments.

1. The immediate problem of foreclosures and credit problems - the problem exists and there is no getting around it. I said the following:
A. Just yelling "accountability" does nothing for the current crisis.
B. If we ignore the problem our entire economy will take a hit and we are all affected (as I said above).
C. A sudden change in purchasing will have on our economy then we will have unemployment as businesses close. The fact of the matter is that the economy is driven by people going into debt and buying what they don't really need. That is what is going on. If you don't see that then you are living in a box.

2. The other issue is the mindset of our society. We cannot continue to function by living off of debt. Accountability should find it's way back into our economy. If any action is taken that resolves the current credit problem and foreclosure problem it must be followed by a change in how our society and economy operate. Otherwise people will build up debt the same as they always have.

I cannot for the life of me see what has gotten into you. You have misrepresented my statements on this thread form the start. You seem awfully angry with me. Is it because I and others have exposed you for the concern troll you are?

It's Not I don'r Understand your point

It's that your "point" is so silly.

"The value of the dollar hinges on all of this. The interest rates for those of us that do have good credit are affected as well. And that's just a start.
So I stand by my statement that we are all affected."

The value of the dollar is based on the desirability of having it as a currency - which has been seriously degraded by (1) massive trillion $ transfer to OPEC and (2) lowering of our interest rates, making our T-Bills less desirous for overseas investment.

This lowering of interest rates is the part that impacts you and me - but in a positive way as our financing is now cheaper (mortgages, car loans, Home Equity, etc.). For example, my daughter just got a student loan for 150 basis points cheaper then the one she got 2 years ago.

"1. The immediate problem of foreclosures and credit problems - the problem exists and there is no getting around it. I said the following:
A. Just yelling "accountability" does nothing for the current crisis."

But mon chere, "accountability" does solve the problem. People with bad debts go bankrupt or work them out, start over, hopefully older and wiser. People whose homes are foreclosed go back to renting, saving their money for a down payment on a house they can afford, when they can afford it.

In the meantime, they work longer, harder, smarter or whatever it takes to get ahead financially. My wife was on unemployment for 6 months, but eventually found the job of her dreams. But of course, unemployment is a state-administered insurance fund, not welfare.

"C. A sudden change in purchasing will have on our economy then we will have unemployment as businesses close. The fact of the matter is that the economy is driven by people going into debt and buying what they don't really need. That is what is going on. If you don't see that then you are living in a box."

I am trying to understand this, grammatical deficiencies and all, but you seem to think that a static economy works. The economy is driven, not "by people going into debt", but by "people borrowing to invest in future economic gains". What do you think companies do when they issue stock? Or bonds? People who go into charge card debt either can afford it or not. If they can, they make payments and all is groovy. If they can't, they go under. But not for good - it's a temporary thing that requires them to work their way back to responsible debt/credit status.

Angry? Moi? Never. It just seems that way cuz you get frustrated with basic facts.

There are many good books out there about credit cycles, how and why they are self-correcting. Start with Adam Smith and work your way forward.

As for "Is it because I and others have exposed you for the concern troll you are?"
- You may continue to be a legend in your own mind - personally the only labels I indulge come on cans ....you guys always get so worked up and emotional - it's just fun.

It's nothing personal, Sonny, just business.

By houndogAugust 11, 2008 - 4:19pm

hounddog

For christ's sake. Do you think I was suggesting a policy or course of action? Tell me where I did.

The basic fact is the mortgage and credit card problems of this nation are too large to suggest they don't affect the economy and all of us. You don't see it and you don't agree. I think that sums up your tantrum.

And my statement about you missing my point stands. My point wasn't "silly". It was misunderstood by you from the start.

I ask again for non-trolls to read my original post and then read the responses of the right wing trolls and tell me whether I was simply not conveying my message properly, or if they just missed the point. If the former then I apologize for not being clear.

ans your solution is

That was part of my point Just yelling accountability and pointing fingers does nothing.We let a large number of people go under financially and we all pay the price. We as a society and nation lets this get to this point. We are all part of it.

What should we(society) have done? taken away their credit cards? How about financial background checks before entering best buy? Oh, I know...the government could control every aspect of your life, and it would provide you with the things it determined that you need?

we're not talking about home loans, or car loans...we're talking about people with Credit card debt....a debt they shouldn't have.

My comment on changing society was to address that I do accept the notion of accountability. We can't just do it over night.

There is no "WE", when individuals decide to make smart choices they will, unless you want to have credit card licenses, (it'd be like a driver's license...but for credit cards...which actually would be a good idea).

Changing society so that people use credit less often and only for important needs will not fix the mess we are currently in.

Houston to Aquarius, come in Aqurius??? we're losing you. Credit is a way of life, using it RESPONSIBLY it the key. I use my card for 95% of my purchases. gas, food, clothes etc....it all goes on the card. But I make sure I have the cash to back it up. (see my two rules). It doesn't matter if you use a credit card spending $100 per month or $10,000 per month as long as you follow the rules.

Furthermore because our economy will take a major hit if people suddenly decrease their shopping habits, we need to consider how to fix the problem.

Please tell me you aren't serious? Americans need to keep living in debt because that will affect the economy? we're not talking about not buying houses, cars, or going to school...we're talking about avoiding credit card debt by being responsible with money. It isn't complicated at all.

So like a typical right winger you have offered no solution but to say "accountability". Sorry. You lose.

So like a typical left winger you blame "big business" completely absolve the "little guy" and once again refuse to accept the concept of being accountable for your own actions.

You have offered no solution either...so sorry you LOSE as well....

By mrtoadAugust 11, 2008 - 3:09pm

Please tell me you aren't serious? Americans need to keep living in debt because that will affect the economy?

Jesus Christ.

Could I get a non-troll to answer one question for me? Am I not getting my point across or is it just the trolls? Where did I say that Americans need to continue to live in debt to keep the economy going? Or let me say where did I advocate that we should continue in this fashion? houndog had the same problem with my statements. I think the trolls believe I'm suggesting that this be allowed to continue. I'm just pointing out the state of things. A sad state it is.

One more time. Our economy right now is running on people building up debt. That is a fact. If we shut off the credit card companies and only allowed people to use credit for homes or cars you would see a big change in the economy and it would be painful. It is a truth we have to deal with in formulating an answer.

The CEO's of big business certainly do not want people to stop going to Target or Wal Mart because they have torn up their credit cards.

You right wingers are so hell bent on to focus on one part of the problem (accountability) that you ignore all else. I agree our society has a problem with how it uses credit. But the problem has grown to a point that we are all affected.

And this is where we

And this is where we disagree. Assuming you follow my 2 simple rules, you will NEVER pay any hidden fees, surcharges, or interest.....EVER(note: some companies like american express have annual rates - which is why I don't use them). Add in the fact that I get rewards points when I buy things...the card actually pays ME to own it. Payday loans, car title loans, mafia loans....that's predatory lending. Those have like 200% interest, and are designed to be impossible to pay back.

Wow, I wish to live in your world, Toady... Where unexpected expenses and unforeseen hardships NEVER befall you. Where is this utopia where medical emergencies never occur, where you're job never gets outsourced, and the leadership isn't doing it's best to destroy the middle class. What fucking country do you live in? Clearly not the good old U.S. of A.

-- McCain = Four more years of the same --

Toadworld....yeah

We both live in America...I just make better choices.

Where unexpected expenses and unforeseen hardships NEVER befall you.

You have plan for the unforeseen. My car has issues, my computer crashes, I have to go to the doctor..... just like everyone else. But I plan for these events accordingly, I don't know WHEN they are going to happen, but I do know they WILL happen.

Where is this utopia where medical emergencies never occur,

Cuba...oh, wait....I have health insurance....and when I was between jobs, I purchased temporary insurance(that I ended up not even needing), so that if something goes wrong my expenses are minimized (see above about preparing for unforseen expenses).

where you're job never gets outsourced,

remember in school, when they said doing well will affect the rest of your life? Maybe you should have listened.

Life is hard and unfair.

And what would happen to you

if you got a serious illness and could not work ever again and you have gone through all your savings and medical insurance? Got a plan for that? Sure you do! Like every hypocritical right winger who hates govt social programs, your plan is just that, A GOVT SOCIAL PROGRAM.

It's all about greed..

Both the credit card and mortgage collapses have the same origin - corporate greed. During the 80's, the credit card industry was growing by leaps and bounds and large corporations could afford to make wise credit dcisions - i.e., only give credit to those who have a reasonable ability to repay. As the industry became supersaturated, they moved to give-aways (reward points) to obtain marketing advantage. As THAT market became staurated (and much less profitable as consumers had the temerity to actually want to cash in their "points"), the credit card industry went to the only large area of growth available -

People with bad credit. Thus began the rush to bankruptcy. As they started drowning in delinquencies & write-offs, they came up with the brilliant idea of raping customers with 30% interest rates and outrageous fees, which, of course, make absolutely no difference if your customer is not going to pay you off in the first place. Even worse, since the delinquent balances are carried for 6 months before write-off, the companies booked the interest as real dollars and then had to write of an even larger balance.

Wall Street at its best.

Ignorance and greed of large corporations knows no bounds.

This right winger isn't......

Credit card companies are scum. I remember the little booths they'd set up on campus at college. My roommate got one when she was a junior and she's still paying the damn thing off. It was hard not to apply for one when it was the first of a term and I had to come up with 700 dollars for freaking books and that's what the greedy bastards counted on. I worked double shifts every weekend instead and am glad I did. They are vultures.

When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks

By IlluminatiHottieAugust 11, 2008 - 12:43pm

I know the campus booths you are talking about. But on the bright side when you sign up for a card you usually get a free gift like Nerf football with a bank logo on it. Or one time they gave out personal size pizzas.
LOL

By the way you were civil in your response and I'm being the same in return. So let me tell you politely that I find your signature line offensive. Not because I am a liberal but because I know about the strain constant deployment is having on the marriages between soldiers and their spouses.

Illumawarmmie when being civil--well alright.

Its okay to bring up Gen. Franks as much as we can, because he was fired for helping McCain steal money from returning vets...wounded vets at that. McCain likes to politely apologize while knifing America in the back. Meanwhile, Franks and McCain both get nice Vet retirement packages. Franks can go back to college and learn to be somebody.

Civility! What a concept

And how true. We've become a society that runs on credit, and the usurers do love to hook them when they're young and in need of books, tuition, and sustenance. For a lot of them, it's not even a question of having the big-ticket items they want before they can afford them. A former boss of mine, 27 at the time, had all of her cards maxed out and didn't make that much more than I did (that's why they were maxed out--L.A. County wasn't cheap even in 1983). Talk about stress.

My wife and I are the kind of people that credit card companies hate. We have one card and pay the whole thing off every month. So, we maintain our incredibly good credit while not paying out the blood money. Even though they keep upping our credit ceiling in hopes we'll take the bait, not a Euro of interest will they get from us.

And I must state that I agree with FUB. If you like this civil tone around here, it would be a good-faith gesture on your part, to choose a less inflammatory sig line.

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

Bush used a credit card I didn't ask for

To pay for an avoidable war and to give the most wealthy a free ride. .

[French : carte, ticket + blanche, blank.]

Its only the free market, or is it?

Was there a coup, to get rid of the mafia, so the credit card companies, could take over their , turf ? All corporations have hidden charges, that also needs to be-looked into, Just look at the cable and cell phones, and see some of the hidden charges, its outrages. And they are not alone.

Iraq Private Sector Falters; Rolls of Government Soar

Iraq Private Sector Falters; Rolls of Government Soar
By CAMPBELL ROBERTSON
Published: August 10, 2008

Hampered by years of violence, a decimated infrastructure, a lack of foreign investors and a flood of imports that undercut local businesses, Iraq’s private sector, particularly its small non-oil economy, has so far failed to flourish as its American patrons had hoped.

In its absence, the Iraqi government has been sustaining the economy the way it always has: by putting citizens on its payroll. Since 2005, according to federal budgets, the number of government employees has nearly doubled, to 2.3 million from 1.2 million.

...

I find it interesting

that you would say the Bill Clinton "did very little to address" predatory credit card practices. I would argue that this was part of his corporatist platform. He addressed it specifically by intentionally doing nothing about it.

He also failed to address unfair trade practices with China and North America. He failed to address not removing regulations on the investment bank industry. He failed to address not turning the formerly Democratic party over to corporate bribes and undue corporate influence causing multi-millionaires like Nancy Pelosi to vote for things like NAFTA.

In other words, he didn't fail to address this. He intentionally exacerbated it. Stop giving this "new kind of democrat", ie. Republican credit for having the intentions to do what a real Democrat would do. He never did.

I think credit cards have masked how bad the economy is

I think if there had not been credit cards over the last ten years, the poverty in our society would be much more visible.

Comments

(43)