The Juggler said:

brianlux said:

Smellyman said:

My vote

https://youtu.be/C5-DCiKfLoM

Yeah, I like Booty Judge.  Smart guy, good choice.

I watched the last 20-25 minutes or so. He came off real well. 

mrussel1 said:

Meltdown99 said:

mrussel1 said:

Meltdown99 said:

mrussel1 said:

benjs said:

mrussel1 said:

New proposal from Kamela.  I like it.  I also think it's feasible since companies can adjust for merit and tenure.  Second, using a third party certification process is a great idea.  I'm sure SHRM-CP and similar companies will dig it too.  Thoughts?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/equal-pay-kamala-harris_n_5ce18f8de4b09e0578061ac4

I like this a lot. She seems to be thinking pretty globally in terms of the impacts and how they'll be mitigated or how they can be used to support the idea.

Exactly.  Sanders and AOC rolled out that max interest rate of 15% for credit proposal last week.  It was clear to me that they had not thought one minute about how badly that will actually hurt the underserved/poor consumers in this country.  The unintended consequences have already been seen with previous regulation.  Harris's seems to be well thought out and she likely consulted from both perspectives.  Good for her.  Plus it isn't out to destroy a specific company.  

So credit card companies cannot thrive at 15% interest?  Or do they need to charge high interest because the poor/underserved are more likely to be late with payments/default...so if interest rates are capped they would be unlikely to give credit to people with low income?  If this means less credit to people with low income, then this could be a good thing. 

Yes, you're correct.  You can't loan to an underserved/high risk customer at 15%, so you won't lend them money.  In 2009, the Card Act was rolled out and that capped the fees on credit cards.  Without the fees, major banks could not make the numbers work, so they exited the market.  IN their place popped up payday lending which typically falls below the radar of the CFPB, OCC and other regulators.  People with poor credit were forced to go there, which was not better for them.  

Regarding your second comment, it's not a good thing.  Because you can't earn or re-establish credit without borrowing.  And without the ability to borrow you can't: buy a car, buy a house, rent a vehicle, pay for unforeseen repairs, etc.  It's actually a really bad thing at the micro level, but it also stunts economic growth in the economy at the macro level.  

I now realize my 2nd question was not well thought out.  CC's are the easiest way for young people to establish a credit history.

Yes, we've all had to pay our dues with high interest rates early in our lives, or when we slipped up on our bills.  All an interest rate is, is a measurement of the risk to loan someone money.  If you cap it at 15%, it will not only weed out underserved, but probably lower mid-prime as well, people who are at the 600-620 credit scores.  That's a lot of people.  It's why some of these economic proposals are so frustrating to me.  They are not helping the poor in this country at all; they are almost prejudicial.