73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 hour ago, dwy000 said: Its arguable whether it is good for society as a whole but thats true of many, many things (alcohol, gambling, etc). We live in a free society and products get developed where need and demand encourage it. Providing credit for personal need is probably older than mortgages. This horse left the barn centuries ago. Capping credit card interest is not only a horrible way to tackle the perceived problem (because it punishes those who need it most) but it drives activity to worse providers. This isnt a solution, its a headline and the consequences are worse than the problem. That is textbook absurdity. No one who can afford it pays 20 - 30% interest on consumer debt. But go ahead and think usury is OK. Glad you're not running any of my businesses.
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, Marco Van Basten said: I do not think that this is good thing. My point, perhaps badly stated, is that something that will negatively impact 70% of the country (in their view, not in mine neither a borrower nor a lender be) is unlikely to be enacted into law, and if it does get enacted, will most likely get reversed. It will ultimately be good for 70% of the Country. It is short term thinking that gets people in trouble. It will be even better if it is extended in some form or fashion, rather than being a carve-out exception to usury laws. Edited January 12 by 73 Reds missed line
Parsad Posted January 12 Posted January 12 27 minutes ago, Spooky said: The credit card cap is never gonna happen. Didn’t the administration try and DOGE the consumer financial protection bureau? The credit card cap is a non-starter. It would simply reduce the available credit in the system which would cause a recession. Does Trump think Pay Day Loan companies would take up the slack and charge a lower interest rate? Just fucking retarded! These guys are pulling policies out of their asses! Let's give this a whirl...see what happens. Lower interest rates regardless of whether that's good or bad long-term. Get Venezuela selling oil all over the world...wonder what will happen to the price of West Texas intermediate crude! Using his favorite term again...with a Boston accent...What? Are ya fuckin' re-taded?! Cheers!
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, Parsad said: The credit card cap is a non-starter. It would simply reduce the available credit in the system which would cause a recession. Does Trump think Pay Day Loan companies would take up the slack and charge a lower interest rate? Just fucking retarded! These guys are pulling policies out of their asses! Let's give this a whirl...see what happens. Lower interest rates regardless of whether that's good or bad long-term. Get Venezuela selling oil all over the world...wonder what will happen to the price of West Texas intermediate crude! Using his favorite term again...with a Boston accent...What? Are ya fuckin' re-taded?! Cheers! Oh gee - a recession! The World might come to an end. And I think you're wrong. Who pays these interest rates and why? Is that something worth promoting?
dwy000 Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) 16 minutes ago, 73 Reds said: That is textbook absurdity. No one who can afford it pays 20 - 30% interest on consumer debt. But go ahead and think usury is OK. Glad you're not running any of my businesses. Its not usury if its required to earn a return on capital through the credit cycle. The people regularly paying 20-30% are also the ones who are the first to default because they have no other source of funding. Look at all the surprime and auto lenders who bite the dust when the economy slows. I didnt hear much whining when Trump cancelled Biden's $8 cap on late fees. Edited January 12 by dwy000
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, dwy000 said: Its not usury if its required to earn a return on capital through the credit cycle. The people regularly paying 20-30% are also the ones who are the first to default because they have no other source of funding. So how is that beneficial to the economy, not to mention the individual, their dependents, their creditors, and society as a whole? The GOAT investor achieved 20%/year CAGR yet it is fine for people living paycheck to paycheck or no paycheck whatsoever to pay that interest rate and more on depreciating assets or no assets at all? On what planet does that make any sense?
cubsfan Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, 73 Reds said: So how is that beneficial to the economy, not to mention the individual, their dependents, their creditors, and society as a whole? The GOAT investor achieved 20%/year CAGR yet it is fine for people living paycheck to paycheck or no paycheck whatsoever to pay that interest rate and more on depreciating assets or no assets at all? On what planet does that make any sense? Now that is a great question.
gfp Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) @Blake Hampton welcome back to the board! It's been forever. Hope you are doing well Edited January 12 by gfp 1
dwy000 Posted January 12 Posted January 12 12 minutes ago, 73 Reds said: So how is that beneficial to the economy, not to mention the individual, their dependents, their creditors, and society as a whole? The GOAT investor achieved 20%/year CAGR yet it is fine for people living paycheck to paycheck or no paycheck whatsoever to pay that interest rate and more on depreciating assets or no assets at all? On what planet does that make any sense? Because like any personal loan it provides financing for those who either have a temporary need for funding or who have no alternative funding but still need to live. The interest rate only comes into play as a risk/reward for those who provide the credit. If defaults drop, competition drives rate compression thru switching cards and introductory rates. If you are suggesting that there should not be credit offered to anyone who actually needs it then you would eliminate mortgages and corporate lending and pretty much most banking.
Dalal.Holdings Posted January 12 Posted January 12 The problem with this administration is you have a bunch of kooks who want to suck up to DJT and pull antics like Pulte, Jeanine Pirro, etc. Then you have the more competent: Will Pulte be fired ? That or a cage match with him vs Bessent Quote But amid the cocktail-hour din, Bessent lashed out at Pulte in an expletive-laden diatribe. The Treasury secretary had heard from several people that the Federal Housing Finance Agency director had been badmouthing him to Trump, a person close to him said. He wasn’t about to engage in chit-chat as if nothing was amiss. “Why the fuck are you talking to the president about me? Fuck you,” Bessent told Pulte. “I’m gonna punch you in your fucking face.” https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/09/08/scott-bessent-bill-pulte-blowup-00549956
Gregmal Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) I equate the morality argument on lending to a slippery slope that makes legalized gambling virtually a no go as well. Let people choose to be abused, we are all adults. Frankly if the lower rung couldn’t access credit, I think crime would be significantly higher as well. Edited January 12 by Gregmal
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, dwy000 said: Because like any personal loan it provides financing for those who either have a temporary need for funding or who have no alternative funding but still need to live. The interest rate only comes into play as a risk/reward for those who provide the credit. If defaults drop, competition drives rate compression thru switching cards and introductory rates. If you are suggesting that there should not be credit offered to anyone who actually needs it then you would eliminate mortgages and corporate lending and pretty much most banking. Didn't answer the question. CC companies can deny CC applications. Everyone is not "legally entitled" to a CC. There are means other than credit cards in order to live. As someone involved in direct lending and credit businesses I find it unconscionable that companies can charge such interest rates to people with no legitimate means of repayment. And you completely avoided the real issue (good for the economy?), which guido-like interest rates are clearly NOT.
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Gregmal said: I equate the morality argument on lending to a slippery slope that makes legalized gambling virtually a no go as well. Let people choose to be abused, we are all adults. Frankly if the lower rung couldn’t access credit, I think crime would be significantly higher as well. Legal gambling (as opposed to illegal gambling with a bookie, e.g.) is a different issue - theoretically you can only lose what you bet, you don't pay perpetual interest on your losses. You can lose everything you bet but not more than everything.
Malmqky Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) @73 Reds what are your thoughts on student loans? Do you view someone taking out $200k @ double digit APR for a bachelors in underwater basket weaving just as predatory as credit card APR @ 20%+? I bring this up because if we are going to cap interest rates on CCs, I think the same logic would naturally apply to all forms of lending, including lending done by the federal government (which I think it has no business participating in). Along the same lines, payday loans, etc? Where do you draw the line in the sand on what the government can and cannot dictate? Should the gov be allowed to ban companies from selling foods full of sugar? Edited January 12 by Malmqky
dwy000 Posted January 12 Posted January 12 4 minutes ago, 73 Reds said: Didn't answer the question. CC companies can deny CC applications. Everyone is not "legally entitled" to a CC. There are means other than credit cards in order to live. As someone involved in direct lending and credit businesses I find it unconscionable that companies can charge such interest rates to people with no legitimate means of repayment. And you completely avoided the real issue (good for the economy?), which guido-like interest rates are clearly NOT. This is actually my point (and seemingly Greg's). Getting a credit card is a personal choice. Its not forced on you. You know the rates when you sign up. Yes, CC companies turn people down and thats a good thing because the people they turn down are the ones most likely to default - if they accepted them the interest rates would need to be way higher. There seem to be 2 issues here. 1. Should there even be subprime or similar lending to those who cant afford it; and 2. What interest rate should they be charged. The first is answered by the fact that we are a free society and it provides needed credit for those who have few other options. And most people happily apply. The second is just market forces. Thats the rate thats needed to justify providing credit to this group. If you cap it, as everyone has pointed out, the reaction will be to immediately cut off needed credit for a massive portion of the population
gfp Posted January 12 Posted January 12 I know 73 Reds' customers are professionals and they are in business and happy to enter into loans with him and can understand his point of view. But I still didn't expect a super strong "usury is wrong" argument from an actual hard money lender. 73 Reds is coming for your collateral - not your kneecaps!
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Malmqky said: @73 Reds what are your thoughts on student loans? Do you view someone taking out $200k @ double digit APR for a bachelors in underwater basket weaving just as predatory as credit card APR @ 20%+? I bring this up because if we are going to cap interest rates on CCs, I think the same logic would naturally apply to all forms of lending, including lending done by the federal government (which I think it has no business participating in). Along the same lines, payday loans, etc? Where do you draw the line in the sand on what the government can and cannot dictate? Should the gov be allowed to ban companies from selling foods full of sugar? Student loans is a more complex issue. I have no issue with student loans (or any loans, really) as long as there is a legitimate means of repayment by the debtor. Ideally, the purpose of the loan is an education that leads to a productive job or career; hardly the same as financing consumer debt. I also don't know of any student loans at rates of 20%+/year. And student loans are not the only way to get an education for those without means; I went to school with many folks who worked to pay for their educations while going to school (myself included). Others pursued alternative forms of assistance like grants, scholarships, etc... It is a complicated issue because of how valuable a higher education is normally viewed.
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 10 minutes ago, dwy000 said: This is actually my point (and seemingly Greg's). Getting a credit card is a personal choice. Its not forced on you. You know the rates when you sign up. Yes, CC companies turn people down and thats a good thing because the people they turn down are the ones most likely to default - if they accepted them the interest rates would need to be way higher. There seem to be 2 issues here. 1. Should there even be subprime or similar lending to those who cant afford it; and 2. What interest rate should they be charged. The first is answered by the fact that we are a free society and it provides needed credit for those who have few other options. And most people happily apply. The second is just market forces. Thats the rate thats needed to justify providing credit to this group. If you cap it, as everyone has pointed out, the reaction will be to immediately cut off needed credit for a massive portion of the population I think that is just silly. Find me someone (anyone) who applied for a CC with the specific intent to pay max interest and minimum monthly payments. No one is happy or content doing that. And it is not good for anyone. It should not even be an option to begin with.
dwy000 Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, 73 Reds said: Student loans is a more complex issue. I have no issue with student loans (or any loans, really) as long as there is a legitimate means of repayment by the debtor. Ideally, the purpose of the loan is an education that leads to a productive job or career; hardly the same as financing consumer debt. I also don't know of any student loans at rates of 20%+/year. And student loans are not the only way to get an education for those without means; I went to school with many folks who worked to pay for their educations while going to school (myself included). Others pursued alternative forms of assistance like grants, scholarships, etc... It is a complicated issue because of how valuable a higher education is normally viewed. Doesnt almost every loan have a legitimate means of repayment when its issued? If there isnt, the applicant is rejected. Ironically, its student loans that have the least legitimate means of repayment because its just a trust me on finishing school and getting a job. The interest rate is determined by market forces required to cover a return after defaults.
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, dwy000 said: Doesnt almost every loan have a legitimate means of repayment when its issued? If there isnt, the applicant is rejected. Ironically, its student loans that have the least legitimate means of repayment because its just a trust me on finishing school and getting a job. The interest rate is determined by market forces required to cover a return after defaults. No! How is it that college students are literally bombarded with CC applications?
dwy000 Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, 73 Reds said: I think that is just silly. Find me someone (anyone) who applied for a CC with the specific intent to pay max interest and minimum monthly payments. No one is happy or content doing that. And it is not good for anyone. It should not even be an option to begin with. Nobody applies with that intention but they know that is the outcome if they dont pay it off every month. And they know their own likelihood of not being able to do so which is why they take all the introductory offers and transfer benefits. The only people who dont care about rates on cards are people who pay it off every month and its moot.
dwy000 Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, 73 Reds said: No! How is it that college students are literally bombarded with CC applications? Because the cc companies know they are the most likely group who is going to be great customers for decades to come and want to get them early. And then cross sell them.
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) 5 minutes ago, dwy000 said: Nobody applies with that intention but they know that is the outcome if they dont pay it off every month. And they know their own likelihood of not being able to do so which is why they take all the introductory offers and transfer benefits. The only people who dont care about rates on cards are people who pay it off every month and its moot. The punishment and solution for not being able to pay your bills should never be an increasing inability to pay your bills. Edited January 12 by 73 Reds words
SharperDingaan Posted January 12 Posted January 12 If you want 10% CC rates, make CC's harder to get, buy the 30-day defaults, turn the funds owed into government debt, and garnishee the debtors wages. No different to how student loan debt is now treated. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/trump-moving-forward-student-loan-184801146.html SD
73 Reds Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) 1 minute ago, dwy000 said: Because the cc companies know they are the most likely group who is going to be great customers for decades to come and want to get them early. And then cross sell them. That's horseshit. No foresight whatsoever. And not good for the economy, society, the debtor or his/her creditors. Edited January 12 by 73 Reds missed line
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now