soon we will be paying their credit cards

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Kenscollick

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
413
Reaction score
2
Location
Michigan
First we had to cover bad mortages, now it is possible we will be paying for deliquent credit card holders.

This is particulary oderous I was taught early on to stay out of debt, I have always tried to spend wisely and not to finance toys. I do use my credit card extensively and always pay in full and on time now it looks like I will be punished once again for good behavior.










--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 19, 2009
Credit Card Industry Aims to Profit From Sterling Payers
By ANDREW MARTIN
Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other perks in recent years.

Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies are going after those people with sterling credit.

Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups.

“It will be a different business,” said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation’s biggest banks. “Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems.”

As they thin their ranks of risky cardholders to deal with an economic downturn, major banks including American Express, Citigroup, Bank of America and a long list of others have already begun to raise interest rates, and some have set their sights on consumers who pay their bills on time. The legislation scheduled for a Senate vote on Tuesday does not cap interest rates, so banks can continue to lift them, albeit at a slower pace and with greater disclosure.

“There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you’ll see the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,” said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the credit card business.

People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel and other perks.

“Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you’re making out like a bandit,” he said. “That’s a third of credit card customers, 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.”

Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy cardholders — “deadbeats” in industry parlance, because they generate scant fee revenue.

“They aren’t charities. They have shareholders to report to,” he said, referring to banks and credit card companies. “Whatever is left in the model to work from, they will start to maneuver.”

Banks used to give credit cards only to the best consumers and charge them a flat interest rate of about 20 percent and an annual fee. But with the relaxing of usury laws in some states, and the ready availability of credit scores in the late 1980s, banks began offering cards with a variety of different interest rates and fees, tying the pricing to the credit risk of the cardholder.

That helped push interest rates down for many consumers, but they soared for riskier cardholders, who became a significant source of revenue for the industry. The recent economic downturn challenged that formula, and banks started dumping the riskiest customers and lowering their credit limits in earnest as the recession accelerated. Now, consumers who pay their bills off every month are issuing a rising chorus of complaints about shortened grace periods, new hidden fees and higher interest rates.

The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders.

Citigroup and Capital One referred comments to the A.B.A. Discover and American Express declined to comment. Bank of America intends to “provide credit to the largest number of creditworthy customers possible, while also remaining prudent in our lending practices,” said Betty Riess, a spokeswoman. Together with JPMorgan Chase, which has said the changes will force it to limit credit availability and raise fees, these banks account for 80 percent of the credit card industry.

Banks are not required to publicly reveal how much money they make from penalty interest rates and fees, though government officials and industry consultants estimate they constitute a growing portion of revenue.

For instance, Mr. Hammer said the amount of money generated by penalty fees like late charges and exceeding credit limits had increased by about $1 billion annually in recent years, and should top $20 billion this year.

Regulations passed by the Federal Reserve in December to curb unexpected interest charges would cost issuers about $12 billion a year in lost fees and income, according to industry calculations. The legislation before Congress would build on the Fed rules and would further squeeze banks’ revenue when they are being hit with a high rate of credit card charge-offs. The government’s stress tests showed that the nation’s 19 biggest banks will take on $82 billion in credit card losses in the next two years.

A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office estimated that 70 percent of card issuers’ revenue came from interest charges, and the portion from penalty rates appeared to be growing. The remainder came from fees on cardholders as well as retailers for processing transactions. Many retailers are angry at the high fees and plan to pass them on to shoppers once the Congressional legislation takes effect.

Consumer advocates say they have little sympathy for credit card issuers, arguing that they have made billions in recent years with unfair and sometimes deceptive practices.

“The business model will change because the business model doesn’t work for the public,” said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at Consumers Union.

“In order to do business under the new rules, they’ll actually have to tell you how much it’s going to cost,” she said.

With many consumers mired in debt and angry at what they consider gouging by credit card companies, the issue of credit card reform has broad populist appeal. Members of Congress and the Obama administration have seized on the discontent to push reforms that the industry succeeded in tamping down when the economy was flying high.

Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, said that while the credit card industry had the right to make a reasonable profit as long as its contracts were in plain language and rule-breakers were held accountable, its current practices were akin to “a series of carjackings.”

“The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn’t want to be carjacked, why weren’t you locking your doors or taking a different road?” Mr. Goolsbee said.

Ron Lieber contributed reporting.
 
The fundamental, underlying problem is that the current administration believes that the "deadbeat" cardholders have done nothing wrong, and need to be "protected" from the bankers who "forced" them into the situation they're in. Personal responsibility is being legislated out of our lives very, very aggressively now.
My solution is an obvious one; I'm paying off what little credit card debt I have and I will never, ever have one again.
I will not participate in a Marxist/socialist system any more than I have to, and that ladies and gentlemen is what this country is turning into. And it won't work, just like it hasn't worked in any other part of the world where that pox has spread.
 
The fundamental, underlying problem is that the current administration believes that the "deadbeat" cardholders have done nothing wrong, and need to be "protected" from the bankers who "forced" them into the situation they're in. Personal responsibility is being legislated out of our lives very, very aggressively now.

Agreed. And I think a big cause of the last statement you make is the amount of litigation that people over here (especially our friends south of the 49th parallel) engage in. For example, you can't watch a car ad without being told that these are "professional drivers on a closed course: do not attempt". Greedy stupid people are litigating left and right, forcing the majority of us (who have a brain and use it) to put up with all that crap.

Another example of (presumed on my part) litigation--or the threat thereof--is the Red Bull ads. They used to be funny, proclaiming Red Bull gives you wings. But now they have to qualify that with some fast talking breathless guy something like "Well, Red Bull doesn't actually give you wings, but it makes you feel envigourated...", etc. How many people actually thought that a drink would make them literally grow wings and started a law suit when drinking Red Bull didn't give them wings?!

The innocent need protecting, sure, but not at the price of dumbing down the entire populace!
 
I do use my credit card extensively and always pay in full and on time now it looks like I will be punished once again for good behavior.

If you are paying your credit cards in full every month so that you don't have to pay any interest (basically, taking advantage of the grace period), then you are using other people's money without paying anything for the privilege. Why do you expect that you should be able to do this? How is it "punishing your good behavior" to expect you to pay some fair value in interest for the privilege of using other people's money?

Personally, I see nothing wrong with limiting the ability of banks to issue credit to anyone and everyone, and then impose usurious interest rates and late fees on those who cannot figure out how to use a credit card responsibly. Banks have been ripping off average consumers for too long with these types of scams.
 
If you are paying your credit cards in full every month so that you don't have to pay any interest (basically, taking advantage of the grace period), then you are using other people's money without paying anything for the privilege. Why do you expect that you should be able to do this? How is it "punishing your good behavior" to expect you to pay some fair value in interest for the privilege of using other people's money?

Personally, I see nothing wrong with limiting the ability of banks to issue credit to anyone and everyone, and then impose usurious interest rates and late fees on those who cannot figure out how to use a credit card responsibly. Banks have been ripping off average consumers for too long with these types of scams.

??????????????????????? Are you kidding I assume?

Doug - out
 
Quote you are using other people's money without paying anything for the privilege. Why do you expect that you should be able to do this?


The other peoples money that I am using are those merchants that have agreed to the terms of the credit card company. I use my credit card as a convenience item and do pay on time.

It is not a privilege it is a term that I agreed to.

I expect to do this because it is terms that I have agreed to if and when those terms change I will decide if those terms are agreeable to me.

the reason that the CC companies have go after the users that play by the rules is becuse there are too many that do not play the rules and I object that I once again have to come to their rescue.
 
I still don't see where you are having to come to anyone's "rescue." The credit card companies are being told that they cannot continue to extort unreasonable late fees and usurious interest rates on unsuspecting consumers. Since these fees make up a large portion of their profits, they are saying that they may have to change the way they do business as far as grace periods and annual fees for all cardholders are concerned.

This is not you bailing out someone else's bad decision. It is you paying your fair share for the credit that you are enjoying. Of course you agreed to the "terms" since you are getting to use someone else's money, get the convenience and fraud protection of paying with a credit card, and are being asked to pay nothing for that privilege! So the terms change and there is no grace period and so you decide not to use the card. Big deal. I don't think the credit card company is going to mind too much, since you weren't paying them anything to begin with.

The problem with the "rules" you are playing by is that they are designed to benefit the well off and punish the poor. Those rules are about to be changed.

And no, Doug, I am not kidding.
 
[Quote

The problem with the "rules" you are playing by is that they are designed to benefit the well off and punish the poor. Those rules are about to be changed.

And no, Doug, I am not kidding.[/QUOTE]


When the new rules are writen I will consider them and if I agree I will abide by them. unlike the abusers of the systems we are currently being forced to bail out.
 
Thanks -- once again -- Rich, for lending your perspective and getting it right. :bowdown:

You know, some of you folks sure seem to be laboring oh so heavily that these credit card issuers (Bankers, lest we forget -- that we all just "bailed out") are some sort of princely fellows that have nothing but the best interest of their "customers" at heart. :ROFL:

What a Crock!!!

But, yeah -- whatever. By all means let's blame the "current administration." Damn shame we can't bring back the "Anything Goes" crowd ("Never met a business I'd care to regulate") -- after all, the Bushies did such a terrific job for our Country. I mean, just look at how much better off we are than eight years ago...:eek:

FWIW, I am fortunate to not be among the legions who are being strangled by these heartless bastards. Seriously, these folks are -- IMHO -- the absolute scum of the earth. They even make me want to believe in hell.

Now -- ask me how I really feel...
 
Those rules are about to be changed.


Look at the bright side.....we will now be able to carry our "six shooters" onto Nat'l Park grounds and wildlife preserves !
 
I can't agree with the method of this rider's introduction, but why do you think I shouldn't be able to defend myself in a national park. "Oh stop, Mr. Bear. Don't eat me." or "Oh please Mr. Nut-Job, don't rape and kill me on the trail."

I've had to use a handgun once to protect myself. Nobody died; nobody was shot; all parties had their own separate sunrise.
 
“There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you’ll see the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base,” said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the credit card business.

"Egalitarian" is a code word for something far more insidious. This group-think concept is reminiscent of the now infamous line, "You can have the car in any color you'd like, as long as it's black". Soon you'll be able to have any credit card you'd like, as long as a federal bureaucracy controls the terms and conditions of the arrangement including but not limited to the interest rate you'll pay. This is a natural byproduct of the increasingly pervasive concept of "economic justice".

People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel and other perks. “Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you’re making out like a bandit,” he said. “That’s a third of credit card customers, 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.”

It should be increasingly clear that handling credit responsibly is obviously socially and morally unjust and must be stopped for the good of all.

Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy cardholders — “deadbeats” in industry parlance, because they generate scant fee revenue.

"Deadbeats" who pay their bills on time and in full just aren't paying their "fair share". That's just not right.

.
 
Soon you'll be able to have any credit card you'd like, as long as a federal bureaucracy controls the terms and conditions of the arrangement including but not limited to the interest rate you'll pay. This is a natural byproduct of the increasingly pervasive concept of "economic justice".

Odd...but somehow I rather suspect that most cardholders would far rather have the federal government set the "terms and conditions" than our oh so "fair-minded" bankers. As Carson might have said, "May the fleas of a thousand camels infest their..." :devil: Oh, never mind. you get the idea.

The recent legislation did not go anywhere near far enough. For example, if it were up to me, I'd set the maximum interest rate at somewhere around Prime + 5% or so. Certainly, 32% is Usury by any definition of the word -- and ought to be illegal. It contributes nothing to society, just makes the poor and downtrodden ever more so. And bankers richer. :mad:

I might suggest that we modify "First, kill all the lawyers" to, "First, kill all the bankers." [not literally, of course, silly]:D
 
Odd...but somehow I rather suspect that most cardholders would far rather have the federal government set the "terms and conditions" than our oh so "fair-minded" bankers.

And that's indicative of a good part of the problem, indeed.

Certainly, 32% is Usury by any definition of the word -- and ought to be illegal.

We agree on this. I'm not a fan of bankers, but no one forces you to use a credit card. Certainly, no one forces you to use it irresponsibly. At least, not yet. :D
 
We agree on this. I'm not a fan of bankers, but no one forces you to use a credit card. Certainly, no one forces you to use it irresponsibly. At least, not yet. :D

True. But it seems that even when one does use their CC responsibly, these, uh, ah, "gentlemen" can change the rates in a rather dramatic fashion anyway -- even with everything paid on time. I guess part of my issue is that all too often there is no sense of reasonableness or consistency applied to these very arbitrary decisions. Just whatever the CC issuer (or their computer) decides to do.:mad:

Totally ridiculous!
 
I'm not a fan of bankers, but no one forces you to use a credit card. Certainly, no one forces you to use it irresponsibly.

And as with most generalizations, life is not quite that simple. These card companies market aggressively to college students who haven't lived on their own yet and haven't necessarily figured out how to use credit responsibly. They also market aggressively to low-income families that simply don't have the resources to pay back and shouldn't be using credit in the first place. They use tactics like low interest rates to get people hooked and then they jack the rates way up once someone has a balance. The escalating interest and late payment fees add up and make it impossible for these people to ever catch up.

In a normal, correctly working, free market, these people would never be granted credit because they are too much of a risk. But the card companies have figured out that these risky applicants can turn into their most profitable customers, since they have the ability to charge usurious rates and late fees once they have them hooked in. This is similar to the problem we had in the housing market, where the banks were making too many risky loans because the profit margin on these loans was huge. You would be amazed at some of the tactics Chase and other banks used to try to force people into foreclosure so they could steal back the houses they had financed. But I digress.

I speak as someone who has been at both ends of the spectrum. As a college student with no job and no real means of support other than financial aid, I was given credit cards with little background check. When I got behind on my rent because I couldn't find a job after graduation, I had to use cash advances from the cards to pay the rent. Not smart, I know. But it was all I knew to do at the time. As a result, I ended up with a balance that I had a very difficult time catching up to, and I almost declared bankruptcy. The simple fact of the matter is that I never should have been given a credit card at that time. I simply did not have the financial means to be able to use credit responsibly, nor the maturity to understand the implications of failing to do so.

Nowadays, I am more like Kenscollick. I use credit cards all the time for all my purchases because of the convenience. But I pay off the balance on time every month and haven't paid interest in many, many years. I do get one percent back on all my purchases from my card too, so I get a nice check from my credit card company every year. So now I am one of the deadbeats that the credit card companies don't like. I expect I will have to start paying something to use my card under the new system. I am fine with that. I don't see any reason I should be able to use other people's money for free and I am amazed that the system has developed the way it has. The poor are paying all the profits for the banks while the rich are enjoying the convenience of using credit for free. What is up with that?
 
I don't see any reason I should be able to use other people's money for free and I am amazed that the system has developed the way it has. The poor are paying all the profits for the banks while the rich are enjoying the convenience of using credit for free. What is up with that?

That one's easy: rich people make the rules, so they're hardly likely to disadvantage themselves. It's the way it's always been, alas, and mostly likely the way it always will be. C'est la vie...
 
That one's easy: rich people make the rules, so they're hardly likely to disadvantage themselves. It's the way it's always been, alas, and mostly likely the way it always will be. C'est la vie...

Cynical, but probably true. ;)
 
Back
Top