Truth in lending? Why bother?
This week I have been watching a political campaign commercial about lending and borrowing money. It seems that here in Ohio, the forces of intelligent design, if I can use those words, would like to rope in some of the lending practices of these cash advance stores. The commercial starts out with the alert that 6,000 good paying jobs are at stake. And, if legislation goes through to prevent people from using these kind of lenders, then these 6,000 good paying jobs will be lost. In the commercial, we have this middle aged white guy wearing a baseball cap and standing next to a pick up truck telling us that if he needs to borrow $100 to fix his truck and then pays back the following week $115, that should be his choice. You know, at this point I agree. And furthermore, if he wants to borrow at that interest rate for a whole year, that should be his choice too. Let us see, $15 in interest charges a week times 52 weeks, gets this Einstein with the baseball cap and the scowl on his face up to at least $782 in interest charges for one year on borrowing $100. Why would anyone want to keep this financial wizard from doing this. This is America. People should be free to let themselves be taken to the cleaners if they want to be. Hell, why bother to help people?
Well, for one thing, this guy in the baseball cap and the pick up truck is an actor, and if he is not an actor, he should be. If this idiot wants to pays 15% interest per week, why should we stop him? How about people suckered into mortgages that they did not understand or could not afford? What do we do about all those people losing their homes? Perhaps the compassionate conservative thing to do would be to put them all against the wall and remove them permanently from the gene pool. Oh, that is not what is meant by compassionate conservative, I am sorry. You see, I am an old 1960’s style Liberal that thought we had a responsibility to help those with less gray matter, old age or some other disability.
The big difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives, is the Liberals have this idea that they can save people from themselves. You know, after all these years, I am beginning to question that. Why bother to have an SEC? Why bother to have rules governing financial transactions at all? If people can not ferret out the truth for themselves, then perhaps they should be taken to the cleaners by stock brokers, loan officers, mortgage originators and cash advance store clerks. Then, after we get rid of the SEC, perhaps we can start on the FDA. In time, perhaps only the sharks would be left, but that is not true because some how nature always makes sure that there will be enough marks for the sharks to feed on.
But, if we do this, can we take these people off the TV news when they lose their homes, their pick up trucks or the clothes off their backs. I do not want to see stupid naked people on the 11pm news just before I am going to sleep.
But, for all of you out there that believe in legislation to protect the consumer from being defrauded, then please disregard the above and vote for OBAMA in November.
Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Terrific wit. I enjoy your writing and analysis. While I'm afraid of bigger government with it's rules, I also see what happens when there aren't enough regulations. What I find amazing is that we are supposed to be a "freedom -of- religion" nation (which basically means we are a religious nation and care for others), but "capitalism" means you can take as much as you want for yourself (without any rules per the Republicans). So, from a religious aspect, one should care and help others, but in a capitalistic, free-enterprise system, you can use any means available (meaning someone's ignorance) to get ahead and prosper youself.
The Republicans advocate a typical strong, religious family, but in reality, they are crooked and conniving (even worse because of their hypocrisy). I would much rather work towards the end of helping everyone, especially those that really need the help I can offer. On the other hand, I despise those that would use me (or others trying to help) because they have deviant minds (such as the person who doesn't want to work or someone that would steal from others, etc).
I certianly don't have answers but I have a feeling about what is right and just. Yes, I want to get ahead and prosper in life but I don't want to crush others on the way. Maybe this is my "liberal" thinking.
Keep up with your writing. I'm glad this medium is available to share ideas and thoughts. Now, if we just get politicians to start working together!
Conservatives. Small government. Lower taxes(?), every man for himself attitude.
Liberals. More government. Higher taxes. Morrre effective government programs.
Which one do YOU want to live in? Me? It easy. Whichever one is devoted to spending the Common Wealth for the Common Good.
Like most things in life a compromise between no regulation and too much regulation is what is needed. I think Winslow's analysis is right on the money, mark, Oh you know what I mean. Sure people want to get a head, make some money, give their children a nice home and a good education, but where do you draw the line. Do you straddle the double yellow line, do you cross over it, or do you drive yourself, but stay in your lane and through your smarts and effort not run others off the road of life. Tough questions when our loved ones hang in the balance. Some will cut corners, tell half truths, do things that are moral or even legally wrong. Is everyone fair game? I know the elderly and some with less gray matter should not be taken advantage of, but in a big country, not everyone thinks the same way. As a society, we need to protect people from being harmed, and being harmed is more than just being safe in their own homes. In our financially complex society, should everyone be expected to be an expert on investing and other types of financial transactions? Do we let the guy borrow the $100 for a week for $115 a week later? Can we protect people from themselves? Or do we just accept it when the shark takes a bite out of this poor fool? Why is it that when it comes to professional sports, an extra ref or instant replay is popular and wanted by the fans, but proper regulation, oversight and auditing in the financial community is thought to be too much big government? We are not even through with the present financial crisis and people are worried about too much regulation. I guess sharks have to eat too.
I believe it is possible to be a capitalist with a conscience and not take advantage of other peoples ignorance, or trusting nature, or both. The world isn't a fair place and there will always be robber baron capitalist types who seem to get rewarded for their selfishness and who will never end up a truckless naked spectical on the 11 o'clock news, but just because they are rewarded doesn't make them right. I think there is a place for the pay day lender businesses, I think most people who use their services are not paying back the loan the next week, people usually get a paycheck every two weeks and if the person borrowing the money is on disability they would be getting a monthly "paycheck", I think payday lenders and rent to own furniture companies are beyond sleazy and set up to take advantage of low-income people and if they want to put it in large print that by the time you own the sofa you could have bought it five times or that the $100 loan will end up costing several hundred dollars, if they inform their customers and they still want to use these services, then this is America and they can do what they want. In other words, you can and should try to help people instead of taking advantage of them and it is the right thing to do, but if someone is bound and determined to do something stupid, you can't stop them.
Post a Comment