Credit Card Reform Bill

jlew24asu

was just signed into law.

on the surface this is designed to protect us but do we really want government telling companies what to do?

thoughts?

Cosmo

jlew24asu wrote:

was just signed into law.

on the surface this is designed to protect us but do we really want government telling companies what to do?

thoughts?

...
If you mean Government having to force Credit Card Companies to be TRUTHFUL in their dealings with consumers and act in a manner that is fair because the private sector in unwilling to govern themselves with basic moral values such as Truth and Fairness... then, yes, I think it's a good thing. Just like I think it's a good thing that government intervenes with drivers so they don't drive on the sidewalks because they (the drivers) feel that they are the most important person out there and should be able to do whatever they feel neccessary to get them to Point B.
The point being... if the private sector was fair to people, then government would not have tto step in and force them to be fair.

jlew24asu

heres the link, I forgot.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/22/news/ec ... 2009052215

VINNY GOOMBA

Haven't gotten to deep into this story yet, but if it involves the government interfering in contracts, I would have a problem with that. If it involves the government protecting the consumer from fraud on the part of the credit card companies, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Cosmo

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Haven't gotten to deep into this story yet, but if it involves the government interfering in contracts, I would have a problem with that. If it involves the government protecting the consumer from fraud on the part of the credit card companies, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

...
The contract that Credit Card companies use... have to seen them? They are written in legalese using a font that looks like it was written with an ant typewriter. The only text you can read is the 2% APR... that only last for 30 days on purchases over $100.00 and carrying over a balance, even a penny will result in an increase of the interest. And they often breach their contract by sending out 'amendments' that you never negotiated with them, such as changing the Intrest Rates on past purchases... on thing you have bought under the previous rate.
The only way to go when using Credit Cards is to make the payment in FULL when the bill comes... and you need to send it out immediately because if you are within a week of the due date, some companies hold in the mail room and do not process it until after the due date and charge you a late fee. The Post Office is slow... but, a week to deliver a bill? You can cover yourself by sending it with return receipt requested... but, who does that?

VINNY GOOMBA

Cosmo wrote:

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Haven't gotten to deep into this story yet, but if it involves the government interfering in contracts, I would have a problem with that. If it involves the government protecting the consumer from fraud on the part of the credit card companies, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

...
The contract that Credit Card companies use... have to seen them? They are written in legalese using a font that looks like it was written with an ant typewriter. The only text you can read is the 2% APR... that only last for 30 days on purchases over $100.00 and carrying over a balance, even a penny will result in an increase of the interest. And they often breach their contract by sending out 'amendments' that you never negotiated with them, such as changing the Intrest Rates on past purchases... on thing you have bought under the previous rate.
The only way to go when using Credit Cards is to make the payment in FULL when the bill comes... and you need to send it out immediately because if you are within a week of the due date, some companies hold in the mail room and do not process it until after the due date and charge you a late fee. The Post Office is slow... but, a week to deliver a bill? You can cover yourself by sending it with return receipt requested... but, who does that?

I've never owned a credit card in my life. Outside of a house, education, or a car-- if I don't have the money to buy it, I don't buy it.

So this law asks that the language be more clear in the credit card contracts, and that those contracts are now restricted from varying rates?

JOEJOEJOE

I think both debtors and creditors need to take some responsibility regarding credit card issues. It isn't right for debtors to claim 100% ignorance...they need to research the ramifications before they get too deep into debt because of their spenidning problems!

Cosmo

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Haven't gotten to deep into this story yet, but if it involves the government interfering in contracts, I would have a problem with that. If it involves the government protecting the consumer from fraud on the part of the credit card companies, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

...
The contract that Credit Card companies use... have to seen them? They are written in legalese using a font that looks like it was written with an ant typewriter. The only text you can read is the 2% APR... that only last for 30 days on purchases over $100.00 and carrying over a balance, even a penny will result in an increase of the interest. And they often breach their contract by sending out 'amendments' that you never negotiated with them, such as changing the Intrest Rates on past purchases... on thing you have bought under the previous rate.
The only way to go when using Credit Cards is to make the payment in FULL when the bill comes... and you need to send it out immediately because if you are within a week of the due date, some companies hold in the mail room and do not process it until after the due date and charge you a late fee. The Post Office is slow... but, a week to deliver a bill? You can cover yourself by sending it with return receipt requested... but, who does that?

I've never owned a credit card in my life. Outside of a house, education, or a car-- if I don't have the money to buy it, I don't buy it.

So this law asks that the language be more clear in the credit card contracts, and that those contracts are now restricted from varying rates?

...
The rates can still increase... but, they have to be clear. Clear to the middle of the Bell Curve... the average consumer. If they offer an introductory rate of 2% APR that will be changed if you charge over $100.00 or carry a balance, even of $.01, and will increase to 16%, 19% or 21%... then, they have to tell you that up front, not in the 26,000 word contract that they fit onto a 3x5 card.
Also, they can still change the rates... but not on the balance of your previous purchases... only on purchases past the posted date. Like, say you bought a Flat Screen T.V. for $1,000.00 and have been making payments and 6 months later your balance is $300.00. They cannot put the new rate on the $300.00 for the T.V. you bought 6 months ago. The increased rate will apply to any subsequent purchases.
Credit Card Companies make money by keeping you in debt... but, they act like some sort of benevolent person who is out to help you. No one expects them to not make money... they are a business. All we expect is for them to be fair in our dealings with them and tell us the truth before we sign up with them.

Cosmo

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

I think both debtors and creditors need to take some responsibility regarding credit card issues. It isn't right for debtors to claim 100% ignorance...they need to research the ramifications before they get too deep into debt because of their spenidning problems!

...
That's true. The consumer is not off the hook regarding personal responsibility. But, stupidity should not be penalized or taken advantage of.
...
I, personally, wish that stupidity resulted in pain... like a massive headache or ball cramps. That way, the prescription would be, "Quit being stupid... you stupid shit.". And people would learn at an early stage in life not to be stupid.

norm

The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


line item veto, please!

mickeyrat

norm wrote:

The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


line item veto, please!

That kind od insertion BULLSHIT has got to stop.

soulsinging

jlew24asu wrote:

was just signed into law.

on the surface this is designed to protect us but do we really want government telling companies what to do?

thoughts?

Yes. If they can protect us from ourselves via drug laws, and can protect us from fraud, and can tell companies they have to adhere to environmental, ethical, or non-discriminatory practices, then why not? In any event, I'm for em.

Anon

norm wrote:

The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


line item veto, please!

I have no problem with that. In fact it is a very good idea.

Of course some will think that there are going to be mass killings now because of this, however if a criminal intent on doing so would do it anyway regardless of any laws in place.

Commy

JB811 wrote:

norm wrote:

The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


line item veto, please!

I have no problem with that. In fact it is a very good idea.

Of course some will think that there are going to be mass killings now because of this, however if a criminal intent on doing so would do it anyway regardless of any laws in place.

what are guns designed for?

Anon

Defending ones life.

Commy

JB811 wrote:

Defending ones life.

actually they are designed to kill. which may defend you in the strange very rare circumstance that some guy is trying to rob you or whatver. but if you kill him, you then have to worry about his brothers and friends...and so on.


you defuse one situation and ignite another.



life is much more enjoyable living without fear motivating every decision. chances are you'll never need to protect yourself with a gun.

Anon

So if that mountain lion or bear or whatever decides I look tasty to them decides it wants to try to find out should I just hope for the best? Because that is what this really is all about.

BTW. I like guns. I like my Constitutional Rights to own them. I don't give you grief for still collecting Starting Lineups and He-Men.

Commy

JB811 wrote:

So if that mountain lion or bear or whatever decides I look tasty to them decides it wants to try to find out should I just hope for the best? Because that is what this really is all about.

BTW. I like guns. I like my Constitutional Rights to own them. I don't give you grief for still collecting Starting Lineups and He-Men.

yeah. I live in north idaho. i spend big part of my summer outside, in the mountains., i've seen a few bears and zero lions.


i don't have a problem with carrying a gun in the woods,. its fun to shoot shit, especially sks's and assault rifles. al ot of fun.

but those weapons were designed for 1 thing. to kill. just remember that. its fine in rural idaho pr viginia or wherever, but in the cities these guns don't just dissapear.

Anon

The criminals don't follow these gun restriction laws to begin with. They only hurt law-abiding citizens. Granted a few wackos flip out but it happens with everyday items as well.

I'm willing to bet there are not going to be mass killings in the parks because of this.

on edit: Chicago is the perfect example. Handguns are banned there but how many kids have been killed the last two years due to being shot? Banning guns does not work. Another thing nobody ever asks why the kids are outside messing around at midnight on a school night. Banning guns does not work.

Commy

JB811 wrote:

The criminals don't follow these gun restriction laws to begin with. They only hurt law-abiding citizens. Granted a few wackos flip out but it happens with everyday items as well.

I'm willing to bet there are not going to be mass killings in the parks because of this.

on edit: Chicago is the perfect example. Handguns are banned there but how many kids have been killed the last two years due to being shot? Banning guns does not work. Another thing nobody ever asks why the kids are outside messing around at midnight on a school night. Banning guns does not work.

wait. you're suggesting martial law for these kids?>


when we were in highschool we spent more than a few schools nights with no sleep. we never shot anybody either.

mrvedderson

guns are designed to propel an object at high velocities by means of controlled explosion, what one chooses to do with that power is what makes a person who they are.