Credit Card Reform Bill

jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
edited May 2009 in A Moving Train
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?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    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.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • VINNY GOOMBAVINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,818
    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.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    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?
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • VINNY GOOMBAVINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,818
    Cosmo 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?
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,627
    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!
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    Cosmo 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.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    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.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


    line item veto, please!
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 40,523
    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.
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    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.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    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.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    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?
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    Defending ones life.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    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.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    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.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    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.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    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.
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    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.
  • mrveddersonmrvedderson Posts: 784
    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.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    Commy wrote:
    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.


    I'm suggesting parental responsibility for these kids. People need to stop blaming an object and start looking at the real reason they are doing what they are doing.
  • keeponrockinkeeponrockin Posts: 7,446
    JB811 wrote:
    Commy wrote:
    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.


    I'm suggesting parental responsibility for these kids. People need to stop blaming an object and start looking at the real reason they are doing what they are doing.
    What I wanna know is why these shootings are so common in the USA compared to even Canada. Is it culture? Is it the lack of gun laws? What is it.

    Some parts of Toronto and Vancouver are getting pretty nasty in terms of gangs however.
    Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    Gangs are terrible in Chicago. It isn't the lack of laws as handguns are banned in the city, yet the criminals don't follow laws to begin with.

    Many of the large cities that have high crime rates are flooded with illegal aliens, Chicago/LA, or offer nothing for inner city black youth so they feel like they have no way out.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    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.
    ...
    Regardless of how you feel about the Pork Barrel insert... what exactly does carrying firearms into National Parks have to do with Credit Card Companies no longer being able to raise the Interest Rates on account balances that were argeed upon at the previous rate?
    ...
    If you are saying you think this is a good thing... then, you are validating the means used to get it into law... the Pork Barrel. and if you agree with that, then you cannot oppose the Pork Barrel projects that were tied to the Bank Bail-Out that had nothing to do with financial systems.
    ...
    If the firearms in National Parks is a good and/or needed law... then, let it stand on its own, instead of having to slide in underneath the guise of Credit Card Reform.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • FlaggFlagg Posts: 5,856
    norm wrote:
    The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


    line item veto, please!


    Yes!d For or against guns being wherever, that is a separate issue and should be debated as such.
    DAL-7/5/98,10/17/00,6/9/03,11/15/13
    BOS-9/28/04,9/29/04,6/28/08,6/30/08, 9/5/16, 9/7/16, 9/2/18
    MTL-9/15/05, OTT-9/16/05
    PHL-5/27/06,5/28/06,10/30/09,10/31/09
    CHI-8/2/07,8/5/07,8/23/09,8/24/09
    HTFD-6/27/08
    ATX-10/4/09, 10/12/14
    KC-5/3/2010,STL-5/4/2010
    Bridge School-10/23/2010,10/24/2010
    PJ20-9/3/2011,9/4/2011
    OKC-11/16/13
    SEA-12/6/13
    TUL-10/8/14
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    Flagg wrote:
    norm wrote:
    The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


    line item veto, please!


    Yes!d For or against guns being wherever, that is a separate issue and should be debated as such.


    yeah my point wasn't to get into a gun debate but to show how fucked our govt is
  • FlaggFlagg Posts: 5,856
    norm wrote:
    Flagg wrote:
    norm wrote:
    The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


    line item veto, please!


    Yes!d For or against guns being wherever, that is a separate issue and should be debated as such.


    yeah my point wasn't to get into a gun debate but to show how fucked our govt is


    Yeah, I agree. I meant the gun clause should have never been in the credit card reform bill. It should be its own issue. I completely agreed with Bush Sr. when he pushed for the line-item veto.
    DAL-7/5/98,10/17/00,6/9/03,11/15/13
    BOS-9/28/04,9/29/04,6/28/08,6/30/08, 9/5/16, 9/7/16, 9/2/18
    MTL-9/15/05, OTT-9/16/05
    PHL-5/27/06,5/28/06,10/30/09,10/31/09
    CHI-8/2/07,8/5/07,8/23/09,8/24/09
    HTFD-6/27/08
    ATX-10/4/09, 10/12/14
    KC-5/3/2010,STL-5/4/2010
    Bridge School-10/23/2010,10/24/2010
    PJ20-9/3/2011,9/4/2011
    OKC-11/16/13
    SEA-12/6/13
    TUL-10/8/14
  • decides2dreamdecides2dream Posts: 14,977
    norm wrote:
    The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


    line item veto, please!




    are you serious?!


    wtf?! if this is true, HOW in the world does this shit get lumped together?! :?




    as to the OP....i think it's fine. obviously, there is a line, but overall...hasn't the government told all sorts of businesses all sorts of things of how they can do business and such....no monopolies, etc. i think the government exerting some sorts of controls over business is not entirely new. from what i understand of this legislation, which i admit isn't much.....it all seems to check out a-ok with me. except of course for what norm posted. :shock:
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    norm wrote:
    The law also includes an unrelated measure allowing people to carry guns into national parks.


    line item veto, please!




    are you serious?!


    wtf?! if this is true, HOW in the world does this shit get lumped together?! :?




    as to the OP....i think it's fine. obviously, there is a line, but overall...hasn't the government told all sorts of businesses all sorts of things of how they can do business and such....no monopolies, etc. i think the government exerting some sorts of controls over business is not entirely new. from what i understand of this legislation, which i admit isn't much.....it all seems to check out a-ok with me. except of course for what norm posted. :shock:

    its true and its a classic washington trick that has been happening since the beginning. this is something Obama promised to stop..but hasn't. he still may though, I'll give him more time.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    So many people are upset because people will be allowed to carry guns and defend themselves, and are mad because someone poured water on a terrorist, yet most have no problem with abortion.
Sign In or Register to comment.