Re: Re: Cap One busted in Boise Idaho Can't argue that point LB but on the other hand if everybody robbed all the banks it would sure put the hurt on them too, wouldn't it? So all you got to do is post a bunch of messages telling everybody all they got to do is go rob a bank. Post it enough times and maybe people will believe you. Sorry, but not many want to get their clothes or their dishes out of the goodwill box. So many did that back when and now you can't find a goodwill box anywhere. Rob all the banks and pretty soon there won't be any. Quit buying all that stuff they got in the stores and pretty soon there won't be any stores and there won't be any jobs because nobody will buy anything. Then what? In reality, if one really stops to think about it, if everybody just does nothing but credit repair that won't work either. And if you don't believe that then pray tell me why it is that telling lies to credit bureaus hoping to make them think that a lie is the truth and the truth is a lie don't work all that well? Maybe half the time at best. You know why it only works about half the time? Because them big dummies down at the credit bureau gots them fancy computers and they keep track of what is going on. After a while they wake up and realize what you are doing and where you are going with those cute tricks. So they start telling you they already verified that one or that your dispute is frivolous or they just ignore you hoping you will go away. That's why. I realize that you have good sounding ideas most of the time but they just aren't always all that practical. But don't let that discourage you. You gotta keep on trying ya know.
Re: Cap One BB, I'm almost certain that LB was referring to collection agencies. Never do business with them. I agree with him completely. If no one ever paid a cent to the collection agencies, then they'd be the ones diving in the dumpsters for tasty snacks at 2 AM. And even better, they'd go away and leave us alone. One of the cardinal principles of Creditnet should be to never pay a cent to a collection agency. Actually, it's one of the cardinal principles of living a good life. If we quit subsidizing shady activities and social misfits, then the result is fewer of both. If we just ignore them and let them go away, we benefit every decent person in America, not just ourselves. Because anyone is a potential victim.
Re: Cap One Well, Richguy you just might be right in what you say but it seemed to me that it was pretty obvious that lb was answering a post by kalina whose original topic was about shady practices of Cap1 and a class action lawsuit against them. With that in mind I saw lb's post in the light in which I answered. Although he may very well have been referring to collection agencies I had to believe that he was talking about kalina's original topic which was not collection agencies but rather Cap1 who is a lender. A credit care company who also happens to have a subsidiary side line of collections. I suppose that it is a possibility that either or maybe even both of us could be wrong at this point. Wouldn't surprise me much if both of us was wrong as a matter of fact. Can't argue with that too much. Can't say as I'd care to argue about that either.
Re: Cap One Thanks for your response, BB. I really enjoy some of your posts. After reading everything again, I would have to say you're probably right that Kalinka, and hence LB, were referring to Cap One and probably not to collection agencies in general. It was you who mentioned collection agencies in general terms, which was good. I would say that since Kalinka mentioned the FDCPA, she was probably not referring to Cap One's lending activities, but to Cap One's collection activities, which are NOT incidental but an independent profit center. Issuing cards to people with charged-off debts, in the amount of those debts, is quite different from issuing actual credit to people. If people owe it before they spend it, then it really isn't credit and Cap One really isn't a lender to those people. I see your point about robbing banks. If everything that hurts predatory banks is justified, then robbing them would be justified as well. However, hurting them by not doing business with them is perfectly legal, whereas hurting them by robbing them is illegal. And LB never said that everything that hurts predatory banks is justified even if illegal. So I believe that analogy to be seriously flawed, and the entire argument as well. If your point about not buying things we need, and instead retrieving them from collection boxes, is that parts of our economy depend on credit, then you're quite correct. However, our economy does NOT depend on Capital One. There are many other banks issuing credit cards, which could easily take over Capital One's market share. Not all banks engage in deceptive collection activities, either. So expressing our displeasure with Cap One by refusing to accept their offers of credit (which are also somewhat deceptive) would have little if any effect on the economy. In fact, if we waited to do business with other banks that offered higher credit limits and lower annual fees, then we as individuals and the economy in general could actually benefit. In conclusion, I believe: That I was mistaken in thinking that LB was advocating a boycott of collection agencies, but quite correct in advocating one myself; That LB, whether he was advocating a boycott of Cap One's collection agency or of all its businesses, could have made strong arguments to support either case; That none of the illegal acts or economic problems you mentioned have any causal or logical connection to a possible boycott of Capital One; And that it's still OK to do business with Capital One as a lender, provided the terms are reasonable.
Re: Cap One Richguy, I got a real serious problem with you. I can't find anything you said to argue about this time either. (LOL)
Re: Cap One I'm out to prove that Cap one's activity in particular violates FDCPA big time. We're going with proven and established case law not on a whim. If anybody wishes to defend Cap1, God bless you. We're in America the land of free speech. At the same time, I concurr with Bill about us as Americans giving up our rights one by one to the "Nazis in the wings" of this country and later asking ourselves, how did this happen? LB, the US atty general doesn't give a hoot about what big banks do, they own this country. You and I to them are only like some of so many pebbles in the sand, unimportant to their grand scheme. I've got the ammo, I've got the legal guns, I'm taking my shot at the not so OK corral. After I'm through with all this credit mumbo-jumbo I'm thru with credit. It's just not worth it. Goodwill industries here I come.
Re: Cap One Kalinka, go get 'em! I'm not the least bit against what you plan to do. I'm all for it in fact. But just as a matter of principle I won't go get in on any class action stuff. Like anything else, it has it's time and place.
Re: Re: Cap One Who's defending Cap1? I was just pointing out legal precedence IMO. Yes, individual consumers matter little to giants like Cap1, but consumers also play a big part of the problem. Just observe how some people, even on this board, take the first opportunity to get back into debt again after having gone through major effort to get their credit cleared up. It's one thing to take on debt for a house, medical or other serious emergency, and a car occasionally. But we delude ourselves thinking we deserve vacations, gifts, a new car etc. on credit. Job layoffs, home & car repairs and many other "emergencies" are part of life, so you have to live in such a way that allows you to meet your obligations in a timely manner should your cash flow be temporarily interrupted. Until we as consumers exercise some fiscal responsibility and restraint, we'll always be at the mercy of one giant or another.
Re: Re: Cap One Rina, I agree that there are so many irresponsible people in this world, so many of them are "friends of mine" or customers of my business. It's like some proverb says or should say, "you want to lose a friend? then loan him some money" So many people owe me money but I can't send them a credit card offer to get out of debt . I also agree that so many people easily become "plastic junkies" and will never get out of debt. But it wasn't allways like this or this bad, anyway. I'm old enough to remember when there were no credit cards. People didn't get their heads filled with all kinds of crap on tv and in magazines about "luxurious living" "the rich and famous" and all that junk. Where did all this come from? Why are some people so weak minded to think that they can repay all this excessive plastic debt? Why can't we live with less? Why aren't any effective courses being taught in HS and college to manage your budget and how to raise a family(another big problem) ? What are we lacking here as a culture in the US?
Re: Re: Cap One We can't waste time with junk like that. We got to teach them how to be politically correct. Thats far more important than financial matters, dontcha know? They'll have plenty of time to learn about financial matters and such between looking for home made pipe bombs, ducking sniper's bullets and other such trivial stuff. Then there is football, baseball, basketball, soccer and even ROTC. Got no time for financial junk.
Re: Cap One In one word, kalinka: AFFLUENZA! If your personal finances belonged to a business, would you be fired for the way you're handling them? Do you ever find yourself opening the weekend circulars to figure out what you need instead of taking inventory of what you already have, then making a shopping list? Do you find yourself seriously considering financing a car beyond 3 years because otherwise you couldn't afford the monthly payment? Do you know {insert product} salesmen who are as eager to help you figure out how long it'll take to save up the cash as they're eager to calculate your monthly payments? Once the social stigma was removed from being in debt, it became easier to cave in, hence our debt culture. It's no compliment when a CC offer says you deserve their card: it only means you deserve to be indebted to them. TV isn't a medium primarily meant to inform you, but rather a way of delivering target market audiences to advertisers. What incentives do government-run schools have to teach students to be financially savvy? They want to acclimate us as soon as possible to a lifestyle of consumerism and indebtedness. If you want a different outcome, you have to make it happen.
Re: Cap One Here's a thought: It's normal for low-income people to be in debt for a short time. Students, for example, on low incomes will inevitably incur debt if credit is available. Then when they get good jobs, they should be able to pay off any debt carrying normal interest rates within a few years. (Of course, subprime debt or excessive spending on entertainment can interfere with this perfectly normal process.) But what's really killing our country is the phenomenal amount of debt incurred by educated, professional people who can't live within their high incomes. These are the people who could be saving a lot of money and lowering interest rates for everyone else. Instead, they borrow to buy imported cars, foreign vacations, luxury homes, and ridiculously expensive meals and drinks. A free country needs an independent middle class with property, savings, and a long-term outlook. But today in the USA, even upper-middle-class people behave like poor people because they refuse to delay their gratification. So they become fitting subjects for any tyrant willing to lie until they lose interest because they're too busy consuming.
Re: Cap One I suppose it mignt be nice if we really could blame if all off on the rich or the poor or the middle class or the Mexicans pouring across our borders or whatever, whoever. And all of them have a hand in the mix of course, but that isn't the only problem we have by a long shot. Our government is the heaviest contributor to the debt load. Taxation is a heavy hand in our wallets, not only on payday but as we spend it to boot. People simply do not realize how heavy that hand is. There are taxes on top of taxes, layer after layer. That also makes the debt burden the people have to pay that much harder. Then failied policies such as Nafta & Gatt and other trade treaties have additionally hurt us by taking away the jobs that we would otherwise have had. People claim now that was is a bad thing for our economy and ever increasing numbers of people are demonstrating in the streets against the upcoming war against Iraq. To me that is a very strange thing indeed. You see, back when I was a kid America was just beginning to emerge from the great depression that followed the crash of 1929. And to add to the misery of the people we also suffered the great drouth that swept across much of our nation. FDR had just been elected when I was still in diapers. One of his early acts was to hand us another huge economic blow by causing our nation to file bankruptcy. That was about the time that Hitler was just coming to power. And it was Hitler and his allies, Italy and Japan who were to eventually give us the "solution" to our economic problems. They put Americans to work making bombs, guns, battleships, airplanes and everything else it took to defeat them. Food had to be produced in quantities never before imagined possible. So war proved to be a very good thing for America economically back then. Now it is seen as a terrible thing to do to our economy. What is the difference? I'll tell you what it is. Back then we put our factories and our people to work and everybody supposedly made money even though they had to trade not only their future but the future of their childred and their grandchildren probably well past the 7th generation to do it. Made no difference. They did what they had to do. They rolled up their sleeves and went to work. Now its different because we produce only a small part of what is needed to fight a war. Now we have to buy it from other countries. We no longer have the industrial base that would be required to produce the weapons and we have also destroyed our agricultural base which we would need if this thing gets out of hand. So what was once good for us is now a bad thing for us. Will we never learn? Wouldn't surprise me one little bit if we don't have to file bankruptcy yet once again. It isn't just the people who do things wrong its also our government.
Re: Cap One BB, The government can make things worse, absolutely. Would you believe that I lost not just one but two jobs to NAFTA-related relocations? However, the government is really good at making things worse, but really poor at making things good in the first place. Any advanced, industrialized, civilized country is based on a middle class getting educated and saving money for productive investment. The alternative would be having the government itself printing money or using tax money for investment, both dangerous ideas. Saving in significant amounts is absolutely necessary for a healthy economy, and for national sovereignty as well, since borrowing from foreigners is the third dangerous alternative. And by definition, only middle- and upper-class people have enough income to save significant amounts. And in this country, unlike most other advanced countries, very liitle money is saved from income by the middle class. Savings rates here are miniscule compared to Germany or Japan, for example. At times, they are actually negative. The declining middle class may not be the cause of this problem, it may only be an effect. Undoubtedly extortionate taxes, corporate downsizing, global trade, inflated housing prices, unsafe schools, exhorbitant college tuitions, and many other factors have forced the middle class into this dilemma. But for whatever reasons, middle class people are slowly giving in to instant gratification of all kinds, from overconsumption based on credit to the aping of popular entertainment to casual and negligent parenthood. And as reality grows more and more squalid, media-induced and credit-fueled fantasies of consumption grow more inflated and grandiose. The poor will always be with us, but in a free economy (possibly a false assumption!!) will be unable to borrow and spend enough money to damage the national economy. Only middle-class or wealthier people can do this. In the past, middle-class people deferring leisure and consumption were undoubtedly the engine of American economic growth. And not just in order to benefit the overall economy, but especially to benefit themselves and their posterity. That's the traditional middle-class mentality: that you don't even belong to a class, you just conduct your own life properly and hope to meet other people doing the same thing. So I would like to emphasize that we need more people acting like the traditional middle class, i.e. working, saving, and studying. And I believe that the credit system as presently organized is one of a few dozen things distracting middle-class Americans from doing those very things. For example, credit at really good prime rates is available mostly to people whose incomes are high enough that they really don't need much credit. And it is granted almost instantaneously based on totally abstract credit reports, while traditional short-term credit, granted (a) in small amounts (b) on decent terms (c) to lower-income people (d) based on personal relationships, is growing increasingly irrelevant. Maybe a few retail cards or credit unions still reflect that pattern, but the banks are almost totally anonymous, homogenized, and globalized by now. Right now, I'm basically poor and don't really appreciate how the banks treat me. And in the future, I hope to be a rich person, but with middle-class attitudes and behavior, and will try to avoid dealing with the banks as much as possible. If I ever need to use even a fraction of my (hypothetical) prime+1.99% Citibank credit or my 7.99% Chase credit, I'll know I'm in trouble. If anyone out there is up to reading this, thank you for giving me an excuse to sound off.
Re: Cap One In all fairness, only middle-class or wealthier people OR THE GOVERNMENT can borrow and spend enough money to ruin the national economy. But private debt in this country is greater than public debt. And to the extent that government is spending money, we no longer have a free economy, which was both my idealized assumption and the real historical context for building the American economy.
Re: Cap One As long as we're all on our soap boxes I'll throw my 2 cents in. First of all, If you all remember, Nafta and other such "globalization" proposals were put into effect at the time that the whole of the world economic system was on the verge of collapse. The Former Soviet Union was the first one to go because they had no more places to loot, their economic infrastructure went down the tubes because of, among other things, trying to keep up with the Jonses during the cold war and the space race when they coudn't afford it and because their culture could not absorb enough sense of identity with their political/economic regime. The "free world" led by US England/Europe and Japan were on the same economic skids for a number of other reasons that are completely off topic for Cnet. The only short term solution the "economic wonderboys" inside the think tank organizations that we listen to ( rand corp, brookings institution, trilateral comission etc.) came up with the idea to get cheap labor and "transfer of technology" as a short term solution to a broken down industrial infrastructre problem and high labor cost crisis like we had (and still have) here in the "free world". Nafta and the loss of jobs to Mexico and Canada and China was a necessary evil to avoid total economic collapse because our fearles indutrial leaders were not about to tear down all their obsolete factories and build new ones, bust unions or go completely belly up if they could avoid it , which they did. I recently took a trip to Mexico and found out that in the Nafta built industrial region, major displacement of that industry is going on towards China. Whole factories are being uprooted and sent to China very quietly by some major industrial giants such as Ford and others because Mexican labor is no longer cheap enough. So after that is all over with whom are we going to blame? I think the speculators are to blame, bull market this , bear market that, there is no connection to economic reality anymore. What we need is a real economic reformer to bring this country back to economic life, not some Hjalmar Sacht (excuse the spelling) like hitler used to accomplish his "economic miracle". Somebody that can grab the bull by the horns and get everything back into economic line and let the pieces fall where they may.
Re: Cap One Very interesting points, Kalinka. And by the way, thanks for taking on Capital One. I think the NAFTA dilemma helps illustrate my point about saving vs. spending. Only a country with a lot of capital per worker can support high wages in a globally competitive economy. The United Staes just doesn't have enough capital per worker, because people don't save enough money and because capital is diverted into leveraged buyouts, speculation (as you mentioned), consumer debt, etc. So instead of investing money in productive jobs, we have to export the jobs. We are substituting labor for capital, and it isn't our own labor anymore.
