Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BDR who wrote (193177)	9/22/2002 8:17:59 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 436258

I believe putting a bottle of vodka and pouring a drink and putting it in front of an alcoholic is the same thing as what the credit card industry is doing right now. Who is responsible? Some blame the alcoholic if he takes the drink. I blame the credit card industry for pouring it. Reform is needed but I am 100% sure that the proposed bill is the correct solution. If you are losing $ to too many customers then perhaps you are tossing too many drinks to too many drunks. Somewhere reform is needed but those most demanding reform are some of those most resposnible for the mess. How can someone deep in hock with 3 credit cards be offered a 4th? Surely that third and fourth card offer deserves NOTHING IMO if said person decides to default. Perhaps the FIRST credit card company should not bear the problem. Perhaps if a late payment is entered or several of them the company should call the proceeds and stop further credit. Any FURTHER credit extened to chronic late payers should IMMEDIATELY stop that company from collecting ANYTHING in bankruptcy proceedings. Companies offering credit to someone with a history of late payments DESERVES to have those debts go bad. Perhaps if a person has three major cards already a fourth card should not be issued at all! How about two cards? Whay not. Perhaps it is not cards but total Linof of credit. A card company raising lines of credt beyon reasonable TOTAL combined amounts is also irresponsible. I see the solution as I am typing. Don't you. It's about blame and responsibility. If the company extending credit is aware of problems and issues more credit then that additional credit is 100% the fault of the lender. If there was no problems and a good credit score then that is not the fault of the issurer and that person is entitled to attempt at payback. How is that for a solution? Do not extend credit to bad risks or if you do it is YOUR problem not the borrowers. Sub-Prime knows the risks and enters that markey freely. They deserved 100% of the hit. Interest rates are high and that is their cushion. If High interest rates do not cover defaults BOY DID THEY F UP. M