Payday loans

[NineSpine]

This is why banks are required, again, by law, to have branches in underserved areas. Because people often don't have transportation. If they don't comply, they can have their services shut down.



I wasn't talking about the big banks. Do you have any idea how many banks there are? In my city alone, there are dozens of different banks. And that's not counting Credit Unions, of which we have a plethora.

Low income areas typically don't have dozens of different banks and credit unions.

[the game]

Low income areas typically don't have dozens of different banks and credit unions.

So they can't afford to get to the banks but they can afford to get to payday loan places?

[TirielWoW]

Low income areas typically don't have dozens of different banks and credit unions.

No, they don't, but medium to large banks ARE required to have branches in underserved areas. Smaller banks aren't subject to the same regulations as larger banks. It's like a tier system. National banks are under the most stringent rules, followed by regional banks, then the weakest rules are on the smallest banks that only have, maybe, one or two branches in a specific area.

There are banks in my area in underprivileged areas - and yes, I did just double check, using maps.

That doesn't mean that large banks don't try to get out of it. They do. I'm personally waiting for CapitalOne to get smacked by the government because they're shutting down massive numbers of branches, especially in underserved areas, and that's going to get them in trouble. But I don't think their CEO much cares - the bank is just loose money to fund their credit cards anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

So they can't afford to get to the banks but they can afford to get to payday loan places?

Which is messed up, because they would be better off banking. There are transparency rules that banks have to follow that payday lenders often don't (they're supposed to follow them, but there's less chance of a payday lender getting in trouble).

[Gamdwelf]

No, I don't think you get it. You are talking about people that rarely even own the transportation necessary to go to the bank. The working class very often thinks they live in abject poverty, but they don't.

If only people had legs to walk to the bank.

[NineSpine]

So they can't afford to get to the banks but they can afford to get to payday loan places?

Low income areas are drenched in payday loan places. That's the whole business model. They set up shop in poor areas, get people to take one loan, and that puts people into a cycle where they constantly need the loan to stay afloat.

- - - Updated - - -

If only people had legs to walk to the bank.

Let them eat cake!

Not everyone lives walking distance from a bank. Banks do not set up shop in poor areas.

[Cthulhu 2020]

If only people had legs to walk to the bank.

Yeah it'd be nice if payday loans weren't conveniently located in poor areas to prey on the uneducated and poor. Then they'd have to go to other places that wouldn't scam them so hard.

You seem to dramatically underestimate just how predatory payday loan places are, and the effort and lengths they go to to draw people in. And it's mostly through a lot of deception. You say "Their body their choice" but if you're being deceived, is it really your choice? The answer to that of course is no, it's not, if you're not consciously aware of the possible results of your decision or even the full terms, then it's not an honest decision.

We banned trans fats from food because they were only harmful to people, and there really was no up side to using them in food.

[the game]

Yeah it'd be nice if payday loans weren't conveniently located in poor areas to prey on the uneducated and poor. Then they'd have to go to other places that wouldn't scam them so hard.

You seem to dramatically underestimate just how predatory payday loan places are, and the effort and lengths they go to to draw people in. And it's mostly through a lot of deception. You say "Their body their choice" but if you're being deceived, is it really your choice? The answer to that of course is no, it's not, if you're not consciously aware of the possible results of your decision or even the full terms, then it's not an honest decision.

We banned trans fats from food because they were only harmful to people, and there really was no up side to using them in food.

How exactly are they being deceived? The terms of the loan are clearly printed on the forms you fill out to get the pay day loan.

[NED funded]

Oh please. The big banks aren't much better either. I wouldn't be beating my chest about this.

Doesn't Canada only have big banks?

[NineSpine]

How exactly are they being deceived? The terms of the loan are clearly printed on the forms you fill out to get the pay day loan.

There are two levels to the problem:

1. A lower education person often has no idea what the fuck any of that means.

2. Payday loan places are notoriously shady, because the clientele they serve re the people least able to seek recourse if they are lied to or scammed.

[The One Percent]

Fools will be parted with their money.

[the game]

There are two levels to the problem:

1. A lower education person often has no idea what the fuck any of that means.

2. Payday loan places are notoriously shady, because the clientele they serve re the people least able to seek recourse if they are lied to or scammed.

You're not answering my question. You're still making up excuses. What specific part of the contract that they willingly put their signature on are they not clear on? Also if they're not clear on the terms then maybe they shouldn't put their name on it.

[NineSpine]

You're not answering my question. You're still making up excuses. What specific part of the contract that they willingly put their signature on are they not clear on? Also if they're not clear on the terms then maybe they shouldn't put their name on it.

Do you really think "It's acceptable to con people as long as they fall for it" is really the winning argument here?

Borrowers are often told different terms than the paperwork says. They very commonly believe the interest will be much less, either due to outright lies or misleading use of complex financial language on documents. In any case "It's alright to scam people as long as they fall for it" is really not a compelling case.

[the game]

Do you really think "It's acceptable to con people as long as they fall for it" is really the winning argument here?

Borrowers are often told different terms than the paperwork says. They very commonly believe the interest will be much less, either due to outright lies or misleading use of complex financial language on documents. In any case "It's alright to scam people as long as they fall for it" is really not a compelling case.

So you're not going to answer my question then. Good to know.

[NineSpine]

So you're not going to answer my question then. Good to know.

I answered your question kind of explicitly. People are led to believe one rate, but then given paperwork for another. Continue telling me how being a con artist is acceptable if you are good at it.

[the game]

I answered your question kind of explicitly. People are led to believe one rate, but then given paperwork for another. Continue telling me how being a con artist is acceptable if you are good at it.

So then the problem is that they aren't reading what they're signing when they go to a place that has predatory lending practices. Sounds like a case of they're fucking themselves over.

[NineSpine]

So then the problem is that they aren't reading what they're signing when they go to a place that has predatory lending practices. Sounds like a case of they're fucking themselves over.

The argument that it's alright to do something fraudulent if you get away with it is not very compelling, especially when these payday loan companies shower politicians with money to make sure that they can get away with it.

It's not acceptable to engage in predatory lending just because you greased enough hands to get away with it, and the notion that it does make it acceptable is just morally bankrupt quasi-fascism.

[purebalance]

Taking advantage of the people who need the money most. The poor.

Sorry, but no it's not the poor. It's the foolish, ignorant, and desperate. Most poor people who aren't chumps know better. Wanna know the biggest demographic for these? 18 year old fresh out of basic training military single males. They have tons of them outside of bases that have basic training on them.

[the game]

The argument that it's alright to do something fraudulent if you get away with it is not very compelling, especially when these payday loan companies shower politicians with money to make sure that they can get away with it.

It's not acceptable to engage in predatory lending just because you greased enough hands to get away with it, and the notion that it does make it acceptable is just morally bankrupt quasi-fascism.

You're so right. It's everyone else's fault. The people who are signing the contracts are not responsible at all for the situations they put themselves in. Yup everyone else's fault.

[Asiwassaying]

and yet the stance you take is one against personal freedom. Just because you claim to be center right doesn't make it so when positions you take are contradictory to your affiliation. My statement stands as accurate.

You're wrong. That's how blinded you are by your bias.

I admit payday loans suck, but I stated that they provide a necessary service and if we were to ban them we had best place something that fills that need they provide.


All you did was make yourself look dumb cause you have been wrong twice now.

Oh. And i didn't say I was center right. I said I'm independent but lean right in some things. So that's 3 times you've been wrong cause you insist on placing partisan labels in a discussion that has fuck all to do with politics.

[NineSpine]

You're so right. It's everyone else's fault. The people who are signing the contracts are not responsible at all for the situations they put themselves in. Yup everyone else's fault.

Once again "They get away with it" is not a compelling argument for why something is acceptable, especially when the reason they get away with it is by paying politicians to leave them alone.

It's always amazing to me how the victim of a situation should be chastised and held responsible for their actions, but the predator who intentionally ripped them off is somehow totally not responsible at all, and we dare not question them.