Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Who does this NDP leader Jack Layton think he is!

Those poor banks CEO's are barely getting by on their 7 digit salaries(not including bonuses)

At least Harper is trying to help the banks out with corporate tax cuts and letting them charge whatever they like.

Another good reason to not vote NDP!

WWWTT

Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!

  • Replies 165
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

This is actually a very interesting proposal. It would, in the negative, cut into bank profits any maybe make them less willing to issue credit in this manner, but it would also positively effect the lives of many Canadians (not me, since I don't generally carry a balance if I can help it). This is enough to more the NDP into being my second choice. The Liberal policy today was, comparatively, a boring token.

Posted

I have a great idea for people to reduce their credit card debt:

Stop buying non-essential items when you don't already have the money in the bank to pay for them.

SOLVED!

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.

Posted

I have a great idea for people to reduce their credit card debt:

Stop buying non-essential items when you don't already have the money in the bank to pay for them.

SOLVED!

Easy to say. There are one heck of a lot of people that are having to use credit to feed their families. Yes, sure there are those that abuse it, but you can't use such a broad brush.

An even better idea would be to fund and offer financial classes in secondary school.

"They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted

This is actually a very interesting proposal. It would, in the negative, cut into bank profits any maybe make them less willing to issue credit in this manner, but it would also positively effect the lives of many Canadians (not me, since I don't generally carry a balance if I can help it). This is enough to more the NDP into being my second choice. The Liberal policy today was, comparatively, a boring token.

This strikes me as the sort of well-meaning but in the end, dumb policies the NDP are famous for.

It would make it virtually impossible for poorer people to get credit, period. It wouldn't bother me, because I have excellent credit. It wouldn't help me either, since I don't keep anything on my card.

I don't dispute the banks need some reigning in, but simply putting a low cap on rates is too simplistic. The banks will put their money where there is profits to be made. If poorer people default more, which is unquestionably true, and the banks can't charge higher rates, they simply won't give out credit cards to anyone but sure things.

But again, poorer people need credit more than people like me. If my TV breaks, or my stove, or a microwave, or whatever, I can go buy another for cash. Poorer people don't often have much in the way of savings. They need to be able to buy something on time. You lower the profits for that and the credit will become much more difficult to get.

It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy

Posted

Who does this NDP leader Jack Layton think he is!

Those poor banks CEO's are barely getting by on their 7 digit salaries(not including bonuses)

At least Harper is trying to help the banks out with corporate tax cuts and letting them charge whatever they like.

Another good reason to not vote NDP!

WWWTT

Credit cards are unsecured loans. If you've got good credit, you can usually get better rates (I don't pay 20%+ on my credit cards). Regardless, it's still unsecured, which means if you default on it, the banks are SOL. Unsecured credit always has higher interest rates, and rightfully so. If the NDP ever got their way, I'd get a dozen credit cards, with interest rates guaranteed at prime+5%. Of course, I couldn't get a credit, because no bank in its right mind would actually offer them.

Posted

Horrible idea. Credit cards exist as a means of providing convenient transactions, as well as a means for people with absolutely terrible credit to get short term loans. There is no reason to carry a balance on your credit card unless you are in a desperate situation close to bankruptcy - in which case a credit card could be your only option. Putting a cap on credit card rates will just mean companies will look harder at the credit of people they are issuing the cards too, reducing flexibility and ease of access.

Posted

This is another reason why the NDP should never be allowed near any fiscal or economic policy.

His proposal would:

Prohibit low income earners access to credit cards.

Force credit card providers to charge a user fee to hedge their losses against default.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted

at what rate does it become usury though? 15%? 18%? 20+%???

It is a feel good policy for the NDP.

Usury is a term best left in the pulpit. It will resonate with those who have no self control....and encourage same to get higher in debt.

I believe there are already laws in place regarding loan practices.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted

Horrible idea. Credit cards exist as a means of providing convenient transactions, as well as a means for people with absolutely terrible credit to get short term loans. There is no reason to carry a balance on your credit card unless you are in a desperate situation close to bankruptcy - in which case a credit card could be your only option. Putting a cap on credit card rates will just mean companies will look harder at the credit of people they are issuing the cards too, reducing flexibility and ease of access.

I agree that people should not carry a balance on their credit cards, but if that was the case, no one would really need credit cards. People would save up to buy the item, and people would save up for that rainy day. I knew a girl who had 3 credit cards, living on welfare and with a kid. She used one credit card to pay off the other, constantly shifting it around. :/

I rarely carry a balance on my credit card (mostly for business trips now) and I pay cash or debit for everything else now. There was a time I was living on the credit card and getting deeper into debt, but I've learned my lesson. To the point were I was able to live without the card for a few years. But I had to get one again for business travel. Otherwise, I still would not have one.

People also like to pay the minimum every month taking months, perhaps years to pay off the card.

In order to not be a slave to the bank is to pay off the debts, and carry zero balance.

Not sure if a cap would solve peoples spending problems, where they are told to buy buy buy everything that is new new new and improved. And most of those are items that don't improve your quality of life one bit.

Posted

I agree that people should not carry a balance on their credit cards, but if that was the case, no one would really need credit cards.

That is a non sequitor.

Do you often walk around with thousands of dollars in cash just in case you happen to have an emergency?

Do you shop online?

...a bit hard with hard cash

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted

That is a non sequitor.

Do you often walk around with thousands of dollars in cash just in case you happen to have an emergency?

No, my thousands of dollars are in the bank. I have no debt to speak of right now either. And my money is accessible at anytime through a bank machine and my debit card. If that rainy day comes, I should be ok. That would not have been the case 10 years ago for me.

Do you shop online?
Yes I do, but that is not exactly relevant to the issue at hand of capping credit card rates.
...a bit hard with hard cash

You can use 'cash' online. Debit card, electronic payments, paypal, prepaid credit cards. There are other options.

But in the end you got to be smart about it. Are you smart about your money M. Dancer?

Posted

Right now banks can borrow money from the government at .75% and then charge you 30% on your credit card? Where do you think they get the money in the first place to lend to you? It is from the Bank of Canada coming out of your pocket so why shouldn't the government be allowed to cap that rate?

Posted

Yes I do, but that is not exactly relevant to the issue at hand of capping credit card rates.

It's quite relevant vis a vis if you can afford not to have a balance, you don't need credit cards. Whether you use your CC for new clothes or for iTunes, you are using the card....and while paypal apppears here and there and even some have onlinbe debit access, CC acceptance is universal on the web....even with paypal.

And again....

I agree that people should not carry a balance on their credit cards, but if that was the case, no one would really need credit cards.

Is still a non sequitor because many people are using a CC to acquire debt, but for convenience and for emergencies...like a car breaking down in the middle of the night....debit cards are of little use when you need access to thousands of dollars

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted

Right now banks can borrow money from the government at .75% and then charge you 30% on your credit card? Where do you think they get the money in the first place to lend to you? It is from the Bank of Canada coming out of your pocket so why shouldn't the government be allowed to cap that rate?

It might mean that government has some control over the private banks here in Canada.

Posted

It might mean that government has some control over the private banks here in Canada.

I am just pointing out that when the Banks and CC companies borrow money from the government at basically 0% that is our money so we should be allowed to set the rules on them. Seems like an easy to understand position.

Posted

Right now banks can borrow money from the government at .75% and then charge you 30% on your credit card? Where do you think they get the money in the first place to lend to you? It is from the Bank of Canada coming out of your pocket so why shouldn't the government be allowed to cap that rate?

Doesn't matter how much they pay for money, if they lend it to you and you don't pay them back, they are out of pocket, not the government. Cap the rate if you want but they are going to look at their bottom line and adjust their lending criteria accordingly. If you look at bank dividends compared to other successful companies, they are not out of line.

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted

Right now banks can borrow money from the government at .75% and then charge you 30% on your credit card?

Who asks for 30%? That is 10% higher than any I am familiar with.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted

Doesn't matter how much they pay for money, if they lend it to you and you don't pay them back, they are out of pocket, not the government. Cap the rate if you want but they are going to look at their bottom line and adjust their lending criteria accordingly. If you look at bank dividends compared to other successful companies, they are not out of line.

I don't think the banks are bad or evil. I am saying that we have a right as a citizenry to tell the banks if they want our money then we get a say in how that money is spent. If that means setting a cap of 5% above prime than so be it. The banks will give credit to anyone who will pay it back I will tell you that right now.

Posted

Who asks for 30%? That is 10% higher than any I am familiar with.

Still asking for 20% when you get the money from the Canadian people at .75% is highway robbery. It is a 2600% mark up.

Posted

Still asking for 20% when you get the money from the Canadian people at .75% is highway robbery. It is a 2600% mark up.

And as was said above...so? how much risk do the Canadian people assume for this .75%? None? your are right, that is robbery, it should be less....

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted

And as was said above...so? how much risk do the Canadian people assume for this .75%? None? your are right, that is robbery, it should be less....

I think you should look to the US before you tell me the people assume no risk by lending to the banks. The only reason why Canada was in good shape is because the government told the banks what to do and regulated more. Which I must note is what you are saying right now is wrong.

Again in Iceland every person now owes 20,000 dollars more then they did 2 years because the government lent to the banks and they couldn't pay back. If you believe the people assume no risk and thus should have no say then you live in the world of 2006 not in 2011. Hop in a time machine and catch up will you.

Posted

I don't think the banks are bad or evil. I am saying that we have a right as a citizenry to tell the banks if they want our money then we get a say in how that money is spent. If that means setting a cap of 5% above prime than so be it. The banks will give credit to anyone who will pay it back I will tell you that right now.

Then the banks are perfectly capable of getting their money from another source at equally agreaable rates...and we would be out the risk free .75% that we earn...

But never the less, the first repercussion would be that credit for low income canadians would dry up...while the NDP may think they can dictate how much a bank can charge for a risky loan, they can't dictate who the banks decide to lend to.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted

Then the banks are perfectly capable of getting their money from another source at equally agreaable rates...and we would be out the risk free .75% that we earn...

But never the less, the first repercussion would be that credit for low income canadians would dry up...while the NDP may think they can dictate how much a bank can charge for a risky loan, they can't dictate who the banks decide to lend to.

No they can't and I never said they could or should. However I think it is a discussion we should have that money they are lending us is our money, and no in the world is going to lend money to the banks at .75% interest.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,914
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    MDP
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • MDP earned a badge
      First Post
    • DrewZero earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • BlahTheCanuck went up a rank
      Explorer
    • derek848 earned a badge
      First Post
    • Benz earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...