Let's stipulate that credit card companies wouldn't win any
popularity contests these days. But let's also stipulate
that this is chiefly the fault of cardholders: no
corporation forced anyone to take or use a card, run up a
balance, or keep on spending after higher rates were raised or
extra charges imposed. People like their credit
cards, despite the high cost.
But the facts never get in the way of Congress.
Legislators, as usual, are coming to the rescue.
Reports the Washington Post:
Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said the bill "will help
create a more fair, transparent and simple consumer credit
market."
Card executives said the changes will force them to charge
higher rates and annual fees to delinquent customers and those
in good standing.
"This bill fundamentally changes the entire business model of
credit cards by restricting the ability to price credit for
risk," said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the
American Bankers Association. He said that lending would become
more risky and that, "It is a fundamental rule of lending that
an increase in risk means that less credit will be available
and that the credit that is available will often have a higher
interest rate."
Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for
the Financial Services Roundtable, an industry group, said
available credit could be reduced by as much as $2 billion.
Those with the weakest credit histories would be hardest hit.
When credit cards were introduced about 50 years ago, issuers
practiced a one-size-fits-all approach of charging an annual
fee and roughly the same interest rate of about 18 percent to
everyone. As the industry became more deregulated in the 1980s,
around the time that credit scores were introduced, issuers
were able to separate the risky from the not-so-risky borrower
and tailor the terms of card contracts.
Better disclosure makes sense. Micro-managing credit terms
does not.
Consider: we have an economic crisis largely caused by
too many people being too irresponsible with credit.
Congress believes the solution is to restart consumer
spending. So Congress plans to:
1) cut consumer credit;
2) reduce the ability of companies to sort customers by
credit risk; and
3) punish people who carefully manage their accounts
Yup. That's right. As if we didn't need further
evidence, Congress is full of idiots.
When credit cards were introduced, banks did NOT mail
solicitations to family dogs, cats, and minor children, either.
When credit cards were introduced, banks did not seek "market
share" at the expense of intelligent underwriting. And banks
earned about 15% pretax on credit-card operations.
But when banks started chasing "market share" in the utterly
irrational belief that more cards=more profits, DOH! Some people
failed to repay!! DOH!!
Now we have bankers taking TARP funds for their salaries,
benefits, and bonuses--the very same bankers who issued tens of
millions of credit cards to risky risky risky credits.
And they convince you that it is NOT THEIR FAULT!!
Sucker.
Martin| 5.20.09 @ 11:53AM
There need to be tight restrictions on how credit cards are
marketed, banning unsolicited mailings. Allowing mass credit card
mailings is like allowing mass marketing of heroin; the product
is equally addictive and damaging. There's no question the bottom
end of the credit card industry is a massive value-subtracter
from the US economy.
Real American| 5.20.09 @ 12:54PM
just because some people are too moronic to throw their junk mail
away doesn't mean that the rest of us responsible people should
pay for their mistakes. Regardless of all their mass mailings, no
one forces anyone to sign up a new credit card and go on a
spending spree that they can't afford to repay. NO ONE! If you
idiots can't be responsible for your own actions, then fuck off.
I'm not paying for it.
Pete| 5.20.09 @ 1:16PM
This is the same concept that was behind the mortgage mess (and
subsequent recession) the Democrats caused. "Affordable housing
for all, regardless of creditworthiness - Credit for everyone!"
Oh, whoops, many of the risky loans defaulted, better get
responsible people to pony up. I agree with RA above, this is BS
- a big federal gov ponzi scheme and I want no part of it. The
best thing to do is be aggressive with you interpretation of tax
law, like the messiah's buddies in the ruling class.
Also, those of us who are responsible credit card users will just
stop using them...so the credit card companies will be stuck with
the irresponsible credit card people. Makes a lot of sense,
right?
This is what happens when those who know nothing about business
(Congress and the president) make decisions that affect business.
Bunch of idiots.
lawrence stich| 5.20.09 @ 10:35AM
When credit cards were introduced, banks did NOT mail solicitations to family dogs, cats, and minor children, either.
When credit cards were introduced, banks did not seek "market share" at the expense of intelligent underwriting. And banks earned about 15% pretax on credit-card operations.
But when banks started chasing "market share" in the utterly irrational belief that more cards=more profits, DOH! Some people failed to repay!! DOH!!
Now we have bankers taking TARP funds for their salaries, benefits, and bonuses--the very same bankers who issued tens of millions of credit cards to risky risky risky credits.
And they convince you that it is NOT THEIR FAULT!!
Sucker.
Martin| 5.20.09 @ 11:53AM
There need to be tight restrictions on how credit cards are marketed, banning unsolicited mailings. Allowing mass credit card mailings is like allowing mass marketing of heroin; the product is equally addictive and damaging. There's no question the bottom end of the credit card industry is a massive value-subtracter from the US economy.
Real American| 5.20.09 @ 12:54PM
just because some people are too moronic to throw their junk mail away doesn't mean that the rest of us responsible people should pay for their mistakes. Regardless of all their mass mailings, no one forces anyone to sign up a new credit card and go on a spending spree that they can't afford to repay. NO ONE! If you idiots can't be responsible for your own actions, then fuck off. I'm not paying for it.
Pete| 5.20.09 @ 1:16PM
This is the same concept that was behind the mortgage mess (and subsequent recession) the Democrats caused. "Affordable housing for all, regardless of creditworthiness - Credit for everyone!" Oh, whoops, many of the risky loans defaulted, better get responsible people to pony up. I agree with RA above, this is BS - a big federal gov ponzi scheme and I want no part of it. The best thing to do is be aggressive with you interpretation of tax law, like the messiah's buddies in the ruling class.
Deborah D| 5.20.09 @ 3:05PM
Pete, you nailed it.
Also, those of us who are responsible credit card users will just stop using them...so the credit card companies will be stuck with the irresponsible credit card people. Makes a lot of sense, right?
This is what happens when those who know nothing about business (Congress and the president) make decisions that affect business. Bunch of idiots.
micky&vicky;| 9.4.09 @ 3:24AM
ghd Hair Straightener
classic ugg boots
rentacar| 11.12.09 @ 5:49PM
This article is very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing .
jiay| 1.11.10 @ 12:58AM
nike outlet
adidas outlet