Author Topic: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...  (Read 3836 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lordxizor

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4201
  • Gender: Male
  • and that is the truth.
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #70 on: May 14, 2020, 12:41:17 PM »
With the Indians, there was a language difference and a massive cultural divide being purposefully exploited. For the average white guy in America, they get what debt and property ownership are and they speak English. Which isn't to say people aren't being exploited, they certainly are, but it's not as bad as what was done to the Indians.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #71 on: May 14, 2020, 12:49:07 PM »
In the car during lunch today I was listening to a history professor talking about her book on cheating. She mentioned numerous letters Thomas Jefferson wrote to comrades about how to rip off the Red Man and take his land. Basically, Tom was encouraging the people running trading outposts, governmentally owned at the time, to encourage overspending. Since Tonto barely got the concept of a barter system, or ownership of land, and understood credit even less, it'd be a simple matter to get him massively into debt and seize his land as repayment. Is this acceptable? Is it the White Man's fault that the Indians don't really understand the terms of their agreements? It seems to me that pert near everybody would describe this as fucking disgraceful, but only because we're sympathetic to the Indians. Do it to a white guy and sympathy is replaced by "next time read the contract, dumbass." What's the difference?

I'm not sure how much emphasis I would give this, but I see a fundamental difference.   The student living in Charlotte, NC, and availing themselves of all else this country has to offer, and remaining as a part of the social contract by whatever we're calling "choice" at this moment in time is different than someone that didn't ask to be part of the scheme, didn't buy into the scheme and certainly didn't acquiese to being bound by that scheme with any overt understanding or assent.    If this was a modern day scenario, there's almost no argument (other than fact specific things like age, infirmary, or fraud in the inducement) that the student is not competent to enter into the contract, or that the contract fails for lack of consideration.  I think there's a pretty darn good argument in the case of the American Indian.    Put in lay terms, the current student is like the refs calling Stephon Gilmore for pass interference; it may or may not be a good call, but everyone on the field knows the rules and have agreed, tacitly, that the refs are the final say in the matter.  The American Indian scenario is like Ed Hocule strolling into the Boston Garden ice and flagging Zdeno Chara for pass interference. 

Online Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 23538
  • Gender: Male
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #72 on: May 14, 2020, 12:55:14 PM »
With the Indians, there was a language difference and a massive cultural divide being purposefully exploited.

Math is a language that many can't speak. It's incredibly easy to dupe and take advantage of those that can't do it. Just look at the Multi-Level Marketing schemes. It's not stupid 18 years old getting suckered. That demographic is 30 and 40 year old adults that just don't get math.


Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #73 on: May 14, 2020, 12:59:35 PM »
With the Indians, there was a language difference and a massive cultural divide being purposefully exploited.

Math is a language that many can't speak. It's incredibly easy to dupe and take advantage of those that can't do it. Just look at the Multi-Level Marketing schemes. It's not stupid 18 years old getting suckered. That demographic is 30 and 40 year old adults that just don't get math.
I think it's both. Those 18 year olds have quite often been conditioned to believe that their future depends on taking on debt. And how many of them can really understand the various rules regarding revolving credit. Debt that goes to the bottom of the pile, earns significantly greater interest, and can't be paid off until the debt on top of it is paid off. That sort of thing.

In any case, we're kind of demonstrating the point I was getting at. It's all a value decision, isn't it? This guy should have known better, but that guy shouldn't be expected to? 
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline lordxizor

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4201
  • Gender: Male
  • and that is the truth.
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #74 on: May 14, 2020, 01:03:57 PM »
With the Indians, there was a language difference and a massive cultural divide being purposefully exploited.

Math is a language that many can't speak. It's incredibly easy to dupe and take advantage of those that can't do it. Just look at the Multi-Level Marketing schemes. It's not stupid 18 years old getting suckered. That demographic is 30 and 40 year old adults that just don't get math.


True. But for the modern white guy it's at least still in a language they can speak. "Your interest rate is 10% a year, the term is 10 years, and your monthly payment is $400" is something a person of even below average intelligence should be able to to wrap their head around. Of course there are predatory lenders out there that outright lie, or lie by omitting some details. That's of course wrong. There are certainly improvements that need to be made to the lending process.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #75 on: May 14, 2020, 05:00:38 PM »
I kind of like the analogy of the "language we can't speak", but that still doesn't absolve of responsibility.   I work for a multinational corporation that is headquartered in Europe (legit, not some tax shelter bull crap).   I'm in the middle of a negotiation now with a company from Quebec, and on the first call, there was me and a colleague (from New York) and three people from the other company.  At one point there was mumbling in French Canadian, and even though neither of us on our side speak French - either French Canadian or European French - I was able to squeak out "je ne parle francais" (roughly, "I don't speak French") with a laugh, hoping to disincent them from thinking they had an advantage.   Next call I made sure I had someone on the call that COULD speak French.

Again, at least the person today should KNOW there's a game, or know their limitations.  I don't think it's quite the same as springing an entirely new scheme on someone who up to that point lived under a different social construct.   And look; the American Indian probably didn't have a dog in the Revolution hunt, certainly didn't have a vote, didn't have a voice.  The people we're talking here, they get to be heard through their vote.  They get to tweet how deplorable the other side is, or how much the other side are snowflakes...   the social contract is not a one-way street.  I think if they're going to avail themselves of the good side of the society we live in, they at least have the responsibility of being self-aware as to the strengths and weaknesses they bring to that society.  That's a little harsher than I mean it to sound, but I'm two wines in and getting frustrated that Door Dash isn't here, so... 

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 4174
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #76 on: May 14, 2020, 06:18:09 PM »
I was in investment sales for many years, and we had to make 100% sure that a client understood the risks of an investment.  Giving them the prospectus and saying, "they know the game and their limitations", or "they should know better" absolutely does not fly.  You have to have documented in your notes that things were explained, when and where, and what exactly was said....and clients need to sign off on this.  Lets not even get into if you have an elderly client....wow, then you need a compliance officer on the phone with them to make sure the clients understand.

Some times none of this is done many times it is ALL done, and clients complain.  Do you think firms say..."you should have known better"?  Hell no...they settle and give them their money back.
Clients have a mechanism to complain....all they have to do is call the bank and say the  words "complain"...and all kinds of protocols kick in, and the agents/reps are responsible to defend themselves, or it hits their licence.
The investment & banking industry has MASSIVE infrastructure around compliance, knowing your customer, appropriate recommendations, and making sure the client UNDERSTANDS the transaction.
We CLEARLY do not see that in the student loan industry.  That is not fair.  There is a fiduciary responsibility that the lenders should have, and a level of oversight and compliance monitoring that doesn't exist.

Yes the client should understand....but many times they dont, and with Student Loans, the lender needs to share in that responsibility to ensure there is a true meeting of the minds.

EDIT....and to be clear...I think a very large percentage of borrowers DO understand, or CHOSE not to work on understanding.  Unfortunately, there is a legitimate group that were given incorrect, incomplete, or "rosey" information.  Young adults borrowing money for school can be very vunerable, and we should legislate better practices and regulations to MAKE SURE they understand the consequenses of their actions.  JMO
« Last Edit: May 14, 2020, 06:31:14 PM by eric42434224 »
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #77 on: May 14, 2020, 07:38:45 PM »
I kind of like the analogy of the "language we can't speak", but that still doesn't absolve of responsibility.   I work for a multinational corporation that is headquartered in Europe (legit, not some tax shelter bull crap).   I'm in the middle of a negotiation now with a company from Quebec, and on the first call, there was me and a colleague (from New York) and three people from the other company.  At one point there was mumbling in French Canadian, and even though neither of us on our side speak French - either French Canadian or European French - I was able to squeak out "je ne parle francais" (roughly, "I don't speak French") with a laugh, hoping to disincent them from thinking they had an advantage.   Next call I made sure I had someone on the call that COULD speak French.

Again, at least the person today should KNOW there's a game, or know their limitations.  I don't think it's quite the same as springing an entirely new scheme on someone who up to that point lived under a different social construct.   And look; the American Indian probably didn't have a dog in the Revolution hunt, certainly didn't have a vote, didn't have a voice.  The people we're talking here, they get to be heard through their vote.  They get to tweet how deplorable the other side is, or how much the other side are snowflakes...   the social contract is not a one-way street.  I think if they're going to avail themselves of the good side of the society we live in, they at least have the responsibility of being self-aware as to the strengths and weaknesses they bring to that society.  That's a little harsher than I mean it to sound, but I'm two wines in and getting frustrated that Door Dash isn't here, so...
Does the second paragraph apply to the elderly? The retarded? The old Mexican woman who dropped out of 4th grade to work on the farm? A person who hasn't reached whatever the relevant age is in their particular state? How many Motown recording artists died penniless despite their popularity? Do we blame them for not taking a lawyer along that they didn't know they needed? A person who spent two thirds of his life in prison? Do we need to codify rules to determine who we can and who we cannot rip off?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #78 on: May 15, 2020, 08:22:20 AM »
I dunno bud; some of those, at the level we're talking about - setting policy - I'm saying yes.   And bear in mind that I don't believe that "yes" exists in a vacuum.  I've been saying for DECADES that high schools ought to have classes that cover basic "life" shit, including, for those that might opt to move forward with education, student loans.  I'm also not averse to having programs for people that are well and truly taken advantage of; my position is not a "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke" position, it's just one that is loathe to establish blanket procedures that not only allows, but actually ENCOURAGES ignorance (in the "lack of knowledge" sense of the word).   The onus should be on making us all smarter and more aware, not dumbing things down so that everything is LCD. 

I don't think what I'm saying is "codifying rules to determine who we can and who we cannot rip off", I think it's more codifying rules as to what IS a rip off.   

(It's kind of a separate topic, but not all those examples are apples to apples either; the Motown artists were in a sense American Indians.   We can lament that, but in this day and age, I don't think it's unfair that we're asking that same dude that can play every single note of James Jamerson's (extensive) discography to also learn from his experience in the industry.  Sorry, but there's no excuse for any of those 80's LA dudes to complain about the contracts they signed; it was not uncharted territory.   There are also exceptions already in place for the retarded, the underage, and anyone else deemed uncapable of entering into a contract.)

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #79 on: May 15, 2020, 08:58:09 AM »
I dunno bud; some of those, at the level we're talking about - setting policy - I'm saying yes.   And bear in mind that I don't believe that "yes" exists in a vacuum.  I've been saying for DECADES that high schools ought to have classes that cover basic "life" shit, including, for those that might opt to move forward with education, student loans.  I'm also not averse to having programs for people that are well and truly taken advantage of; my position is not a "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke" position, it's just one that is loathe to establish blanket procedures that not only allows, but actually ENCOURAGES ignorance (in the "lack of knowledge" sense of the word).   The onus should be on making us all smarter and more aware, not dumbing things down so that everything is LCD. 

I don't think what I'm saying is "codifying rules to determine who we can and who we cannot rip off", I think it's more codifying rules as to what IS a rip off.   

(It's kind of a separate topic, but not all those examples are apples to apples either; the Motown artists were in a sense American Indians.   We can lament that, but in this day and age, I don't think it's unfair that we're asking that same dude that can play every single note of James Jamerson's (extensive) discography to also learn from his experience in the industry.  Sorry, but there's no excuse for any of those 80's LA dudes to complain about the contracts they signed; it was not uncharted territory.   There are also exceptions already in place for the retarded, the underage, and anyone else deemed uncapable of entering into a contract.)
Doesn't it feel odd, for you of all people, to be taking the position that we should be basing rules on value judgements, though? You say that you don't see it as codifying rules as to who can be ripped off. Yet you are codifying rules about who should have or couldn't have known better, based on an infinite number of variables, and for the former group, as you see them, they're fair game. "Well, he should have known that undercarriage treatment is a ripoff. Fabric treatment is just Scotchguard, FFS!"  Part of what gets me is the way we celebrate up to a point, and then deplore once they go over the vaguely defined line. It's the same point I made about any of the bullshit Patriots scandals. Belichick is a genius when he get's right up to the line, but the second he touches it he should be banned from the game for cheating. Signing somebody to a ridiculously one-sided contract because they didn't know any better shouldn't be judged based on our assessment of their mental faculties, genetics, ethnicity, or upbringing. You said the Motown artists should be viewed the same way as the Indians, but 80's rappers fit into the "they should have known better" category. You don't see the inherent problem in that?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #80 on: May 15, 2020, 01:58:05 PM »
Maybe I don't; if anything, though, I'm erring on the side of compassion unnecessarily.    When comparing Motown/Compton, the solution isn't to err further and include Compton, it's to say "well then, Motown should have known too".   I'm trying to be a realist about things.   When the Motown folks were digging in, the idea of a "music industry" wasn't at all the same as it is now.   If we agree that there's a value judgment, then I'm fine with throwing that out.   I tried to stick for the most part with legally accepted lines.   14 year olds can't marry, and in part that's because a marriage is a CONTRACT, and a 14 year old can't, in most instances, enter into a contract.  Same here.  If the student loan company fleeces them, it's not government activism that saves them, it's the general law of 200 and 40 some-odd years of jurisprudence that does.   But at some point we decide that that person is old enough to drink, vote, buy a gun, get married, have a kid, and die for their country.  And we can't trust them to cover their bases on a loan contract? 

I'm trying, albeit unsuccessfully, to draw a line that everyone can - grudgingly, if need be - live with, not that everyone loves.   We're here talking about <Charleton Heston voice> Big Bad Corporations <end voice> here, but what happens when you or I go to sell our car without getting fleeced by Car Max.  Do we have to walk through the mechanics of a gas-combustion engine, the pros-and-cons of an automatic transmission, and confirm understanding of the current state of the emissions control program on the car?   Or can we say "look, here's the offer, here's the car.  I can tell you what service records I have, I can arrange to have your mechanic look at it, but bro, as-is sale."    Getting a mechanic to look at a prospective car is the thing as getting a lawyer to look at a deal you're about to do.

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #81 on: May 15, 2020, 02:08:49 PM »
Maybe I don't; if anything, though, I'm erring on the side of compassion unnecessarily.    When comparing Motown/Compton, the solution isn't to err further and include Compton, it's to say "well then, Motown should have known too".   I'm trying to be a realist about things.   When the Motown folks were digging in, the idea of a "music industry" wasn't at all the same as it is now.   If we agree that there's a value judgment, then I'm fine with throwing that out.   I tried to stick for the most part with legally accepted lines.   14 year olds can't marry, and in part that's because a marriage is a CONTRACT, and a 14 year old can't, in most instances, enter into a contract.  Same here.  If the student loan company fleeces them, it's not government activism that saves them, it's the general law of 200 and 40 some-odd years of jurisprudence that does.   But at some point we decide that that person is old enough to drink, vote, buy a gun, get married, have a kid, and die for their country.  And we can't trust them to cover their bases on a loan contract? 

I'm trying, albeit unsuccessfully, to draw a line that everyone can - grudgingly, if need be - live with, not that everyone loves.   We're here talking about <Charleton Heston voice> Big Bad Corporations <end voice> here, but what happens when you or I go to sell our car without getting fleeced by Car Max.  Do we have to walk through the mechanics of a gas-combustion engine, the pros-and-cons of an automatic transmission, and confirm understanding of the current state of the emissions control program on the car?   Or can we say "look, here's the offer, here's the car.  I can tell you what service records I have, I can arrange to have your mechanic look at it, but bro, as-is sale."    Getting a mechanic to look at a prospective car is the thing as getting a lawyer to look at a deal you're about to do.
I think you're looking for the fix in the wrong place, amigo. Instead of trying to square away the rules about who can be fleeced legally, maybe we should be deciding that nobody should be getting fleeced at all.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #82 on: May 15, 2020, 02:18:07 PM »
Why though?  And that's not rhetorical, but pragmatic.  To me, the value judgment of "who can be fleeced and when" is a minor one in the context of the value judgement of "what is fleeced".   If my life goal is to own an "obelisk" from the Presence album cover, and I see one online line for $10,000 (they can go for anywhere from $2K to $5K), why is it anyone's business whether I do that deal or not?  And if I do that deal, why should I get any consolation if I regret it a week later? 

And at where do we draw the line on the other side;  if my credit is shot, am I getting "fleeced" with a 15% car loan?   An acquaintance spent a little time paying for his sins, and when he got out, the only legit loan he could get was a car loan at closer to 18%.  He took it, and worked to get that paid off to reestablish his presence.  Did he get "fleeced"?  Why should that lender be forced to take a flier on that guy?

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #83 on: May 15, 2020, 02:27:30 PM »
Why though?  And that's not rhetorical, but pragmatic.  To me, the value judgment of "who can be fleeced and when" is a minor one in the context of the value judgement of "what is fleeced".   If my life goal is to own an "obelisk" from the Presence album cover, and I see one online line for $10,000 (they can go for anywhere from $2K to $5K), why is it anyone's business whether I do that deal or not?  And if I do that deal, why should I get any consolation if I regret it a week later? 

And at where do we draw the line on the other side;  if my credit is shot, am I getting "fleeced" with a 15% car loan?   An acquaintance spent a little time paying for his sins, and when he got out, the only legit loan he could get was a car loan at closer to 18%.  He took it, and worked to get that paid off to reestablish his presence.  Did he get "fleeced"?  Why should that lender be forced to take a flier on that guy?
In the end, isn't it easier to define a fleecing than a person's ability to read the fine print?

And I get that I'm being a hopeless idealist right now (Christ, never thought I'd be typing that sentence fragment), but it just strikes me that something is wrong when we pick and choose who got gets sympathy and who gets scorn when they get screwed over based on our own subjective valuation of their understandings.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28826
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #84 on: May 18, 2020, 10:40:24 AM »
Haha, time out over.  :)  It was 75 and beautiful up here, so I spent most of the weekend outside doing work around the yard/house.  Felt good.

But - respectful of your idealism - it might be "easier", but it's still a value judgment.  If the problem is that we're picking and choosing, I'm fine with resorting back to bare bones "if you're a competent adult, it's on you to know what you're getting into".  I was just trying to be sensitive to circumstances I wasn't part of.

Online Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 12638
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: College Debt, Car Loans, etc...
« Reply #85 on: May 18, 2020, 03:53:47 PM »
In the car during lunch today I was listening to a history professor talking about her book on cheating. She mentioned numerous letters Thomas Jefferson wrote to comrades about how to rip off the Red Man and take his land. Basically, Tom was encouraging the people running trading outposts, governmentally owned at the time, to encourage overspending. Since Tonto barely got the concept of a barter system, or ownership of land, and understood credit even less, it'd be a simple matter to get him massively into debt and seize his land as repayment. Is this acceptable? Is it the White Man's fault that the Indians don't really understand the terms of their agreements? It seems to me that pert near everybody would describe this as fucking disgraceful, but only because we're sympathetic to the Indians. Do it to a white guy and sympathy is replaced by "next time read the contract, dumbass." What's the difference?

I don't think there's any 'good' way to look at what was done to the Native American Indians. It's pretty horrific actually. Absolutely nothing to be 'proud' of. I think it's just chalked up in history as in the age of conquest the Indians just 'lost'. 'Our' tactics were unfair and predatory and brutal but at the same time in that period of history it was still 'acceptable' to obtain land by all means necessary. It's a simplistic and brutal way to look at it and I in no way thing that what we did to 'win' was right....but, it happened and here we are.

We haven't "Lost" nor have We given up. That thought of us being the losers of conquest is why we are struggling to regain what we have lost. It's an automatic assumption of us submitting to Outside influences.

Example is the current situation with South Dakotas Governor.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I