Are Credit Rating services a De Facto discrimination on the poor and unfortunate?

I think that since illness, through no fault of your own, as if that should have to be added, can ruin your entire rest of your life, at whatever stage it strikes, that suffering from illness, should not be compounded, by making many services ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO DIGNIFIED existence in this modern world blackballed.

Your CAR INSURANCE should not be (*)(*)(*)(*)ed, due to an illness or such.

Your POTENTIAL JOB should not be (*)(*)(*)(*)ed by your illness or such.

Your potential HOUSING should not be (*)(*)(*)(*)ed, due to an illness or such.

 

It is just part of the world wide conspiracy against Blacks.

 

And TRUMP's base.

 

So it is your belief that a private company extending credit to an individual, should not be allowed to consider that individual's payment history in order to decide whether they will give that person money ? Really ?

 

SINCE credit operates more and more like the mark of the beast, ABSOLUTELY.

 

What does that even mean ?

 

No man may buy nor sell save he that hath an adequate OPAQUE credit rating/the mark of the beast. Upon the back of his hand, or forehead. The number of the beast, 666.

 

How do you propose that a private company should decide whether to give a stranger money ? If credit rating were not used, what exactly would incentivize ANYONE to pay back any loan ?

 

Is CAR INS giving you money?

Is a JOB giving you money?

Is HOUSING giving you money?

Or are CREDIT RATINGS convenient methods of soaking folks when they can?

 

My credit rating is higher than the number 666, yet it's quite easy for me to get credit, and to buy and sell.

 

I can see a halfway legitimate argument for the notion that credit rating should not be considered in employment or for car insurance. With that being said, the primary driver of the notion of credit rating is whether or not a lender is going to extend credit to an individual. With that being said, how do you propose that a private company should decide whether to give a stranger money ? If credit rating were not used, what exactly would incentivize ANYONE to pay back any loan ?

 

And the patriot act seemed like a good idea, as long as it is ADMINISTERED BY CHENEY too.


" If credit rating were not used, what exactly would incentivize ANYONE to pay back any loan ?"

Legal remedy, just like always?

 

But none of those things, of necessity, impact your credit rating.

 

How about the kind of study the Repubs try to stop, that determines if added interest payments, are MORE THAN, about right, or less than the cost of chasing bad risk folks.

AT THE VERY LEAST, the added cost to consumers should NOT exceed the costs of administering billings.

 

Patriot Act seemed like a good idea as long as it is "ADMINISTERED BY CHENEY" ? Huh ? How is that topic related to what we are discussing ? Are you using the old trick of acting unstable in the hopes that someone will leave you alone ?

Legal remedy? So in order to recoup their money, they need to sue someone, and since there is no such thing as debtors prison, and credit rating doesn't exist, why would that person pay back that loan ? Did you not think this out before starting this thread ?

 

Why would you think they will pay on a legal judgement if they won't pay back a loan?

You gonna throw them in jail?

 

I'm not able to follow this particular delusional rant. If someone doesn't like credit they can always pay cash.

 

Just think of a credit rating as a morality rating. Moral folks who meet their obligations tend to have large ones. I know I do.

 

Awww, and here I thought we were on our way to a rational discussion.

 

i work in the cc industry. Some people who want more loans or credit would be better off without them. See they are already drowning in interest and want the card to use and get even more interest =___=

but if you let us lend them then we will. stock value is determined mostly by outstanding loans that we have so if you remove the restrictions then the banks will lend.

 

Seize them by their collaterals ! Lol

 

My personal experience with credit rating agencies is that the whole credit system is corrupt. The difference in my rating between agencies was more than 100 points when I refinanced my bike a year ago. My bank used the high score and I got the loan, but it seems they could have used the low score if they wanted to deny me. Maybe someone here in the biz can explain?

 

In that case they would look at your personal history of payment with the bank to determnie which to use. they will most likely err on the side of giving you the loan though.

 

Call me cynical, but it seems set up so that the lender can choose whichever score he wants. How can my credit rating vary by more than 100 points?

 

yup, PLUS SOME FOR THEIR TROUBLE.

cREDIT RATINGS SEEM LIKE A GOOD IDEA, TILL THEY EXPAND THEIR ROLL TO everything. was my point.