Now here's some happy news...

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:23:02 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Yeah, cry me a friggin' river. That's what the mother****ers get
for charging 30% interest on cards issued with 10% interest.

Um, no. That's what the mother****ers get for letting other mother****ers...or
in this case, CapitalOne****ers...have credit cards...

I don't know at what point the interest rate jumps, ...

Well, you're getting smarter. Or more intelligent. ;-) At least you
admit you don't know what you're talking about.

Er, wrong as usual. I admitted that I didn't know a specific fact, not that I
don't know what I'm talking about. And, um, in fact, to be picky about it, I
did know exactly what I was talking about and was 100% correct: I said (with
full knowledge that I didn't know a certain fact) that I didn't know that
certain fact, and therefore, was absolutely correct in saying it because I
didn't know that certain fact, thus making my statement an absolutely correct
and accurate statement of the facts as they pertain to the certain fact...

but it's generally due to
some form of default in payment terms by the consumer.

If the consumer makes a late payment on his power bill or his
water bill or another credit card the credit card company can
raise the interest rate even though the consumer has never made
a late payment to that credit card company. Yep, it's true,
right there in the fine print.

Then end of story as to anything "unfair" to the consumer - if it was disclosed,
it was disclosed, and this was a voluntary thing on the part of the consumer
(applying for, getting, and using the card). If the consumer didn't read the
"fine print," that's their fault.

If the consumer ran up
the charges to the point they couldn't pay the bill, that's on them, not the
issuer for raising the rate as per the agreement. OTOH, it's on Capital One,
etc., for having a business model that presumed any of this was sound
business...

Let these ****ers go under - the businesses and the consumers...

I have more sympathy for the consumer,

Why? They were just as greedy as the issuer - they ran up bills they couldn't
pay.

but YMMV.

It not only "may," it does.

HTH,
R

On Apr 15, 11:17*am, wrote:

Er, wrong as usual. *I admitted that I didn't know a specific fact, not that I
don't know what I'm talking about. *And, um, in fact, to be picky about it, I
did know exactly what I was talking about and was 100% correct: I said (with
full knowledge that I didn't know a certain fact) that I didn't know that
certain fact, and therefore, was absolutely correct in saying it because I
didn't know that certain fact, thus making my statement an absolutely correct
and accurate statement of the facts as they pertain to the certain fact....

Jeezus, Richard ... that's as fine a bit of lawyerese doublespeak
as I've read in a long while.

Klinton would be proud.

Sorry for the interruption. Please do carry on.


Chuck Vance

wrote:
On Apr 15, 11:17 am, wrote:

Er, wrong as usual. I admitted that I didn't know a specific fact, not that I
don't know what I'm talking about. And, um, in fact, to be picky about it, I
did know exactly what I was talking about and was 100% correct: I said (with
full knowledge that I didn't know a certain fact) that I didn't know that
certain fact, and therefore, was absolutely correct in saying it because I
didn't know that certain fact, thus making my statement an absolutely correct
and accurate statement of the facts as they pertain to the certain fact...

Jeezus, Richard ... that's as fine a bit of lawyerese doublespeak

hey now...ease up on such talk...unless and until you've paid a proper
fee, one can never really appreciate the true art of lawyerese-ing. g

jeff

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Yeah, cry me a friggin' river. That's what the mother****ers get
for charging 30% interest on cards issued with 10% interest.
Um, no. That's what the mother****ers get for letting other mother****ers...or
in this case, CapitalOne****ers...have credit cards...

I don't know at what point the interest rate jumps, ...
Well, you're getting smarter. Or more intelligent. ;-) At least you
admit you don't know what you're talking about.

Er, wrong as usual. I admitted that I didn't know a specific fact, not that I
don't know what I'm talking about. And, um, in fact, to be picky about it, I
did know exactly what I was talking about and was 100% correct: I said (with
full knowledge that I didn't know a certain fact) that I didn't know that
certain fact, and therefore, was absolutely correct in saying it because I
didn't know that certain fact, thus making my statement an absolutely correct
and accurate statement of the facts as they pertain to the certain fact...

wide-eyed, open-mouthed, silent shaking of the head Uh .... okay.

but it's generally due to
some form of default in payment terms by the consumer.
If the consumer makes a late payment on his power bill or his
water bill or another credit card the credit card company can
raise the interest rate even though the consumer has never made
a late payment to that credit card company. Yep, it's true,
right there in the fine print.

Then end of story as to anything "unfair" to the consumer - if it was disclosed,
it was disclosed, and this was a voluntary thing on the part of the consumer
(applying for, getting, and using the card). If the consumer didn't read the
"fine print," that's their fault.

Yeah, that's right. But I still think it's a sleazy, rotten, scumbag
way to do business. It's low-down, sneaky usury is what it is and if
the sleazeballs go belly up because of it, that's fine by me.

I have more sympathy for the consumer,

Why? They were just as greedy as the issuer - they ran up bills they couldn't
pay.

but YMMV.

It not only "may," it does.

No surprise there.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote in message
...
It's low-down, sneaky usury is what it is and if
the sleazeballs go belly up because of it, that's fine by me.

If you think providing a contracted service at a publicly stated price is
usury, you haven't seen real usury. By the way, in the real deal, the lender
doesn't often go belly up, but they do find a small percentage of borrowers
in that state.
Tom

Tom Littleton wrote:
"Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
It's low-down, sneaky usury is what it is and if
the sleazeballs go belly up because of it, that's fine by me.

If you think providing a contracted service at a publicly stated price is
usury, you haven't seen real usury. By the way, in the real deal, the lender
doesn't often go belly up, but they do find a small percentage of borrowers
in that state.

A 30% interest rate is real usury in my book. Not as bad the 500%
predatory loans of some of these payday operations but still usury
in my book.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote in message
...
Tom Littleton wrote:
"Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
It's low-down, sneaky usury is what it is and if
the sleazeballs go belly up because of it, that's fine by me.

If you think providing a contracted service at a publicly stated price is
usury, you haven't seen real usury. By the way, in the real deal, the
lender doesn't often go belly up, but they do find a small percentage of
borrowers in that state.

A 30% interest rate is real usury in my book. Not as bad the 500%
predatory loans of some of these payday operations but still usury
in my book.

--
Ken Fortenberry

5 or 10 percent a week is what I was thinking......
Tom

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote in message
...
Tom Littleton wrote:
"Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
It's low-down, sneaky usury is what it is and if
the sleazeballs go belly up because of it, that's fine by me.

If you think providing a contracted service at a publicly stated price is
usury, you haven't seen real usury. By the way, in the real deal, the
lender doesn't often go belly up, but they do find a small percentage of
borrowers in that state.

A 30% interest rate is real usury in my book. Not as bad the 500%
predatory loans of some of these payday operations but still usury
in my book.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Then there are the cc users. In class at the local JC a month ago, one of
the young men, probably about 22 said that the CC companies forgave $2500 on
his debt. No 1099 for forgiven amount (what the discussion was originally
about). I asked how a 21 year old junior college student could run up that
kind of debt. His answer actually blew me away. He had gone to Vegas and
said he had to look good, so bought a $1500 suit, and some other stuff. Why
should some deadbeat get to write off 40% of what he owed for unnecessary
spending? And he still has a card, and thought there was nothing wrong with
what he did. People like that should have to pay back the full amount at
very high interest rates. Different if due to medical or other life
circumstances he was in debt over his head. But, most of the stories I hear
of people with $60k-$150k in CC debt on a load of different credit cards,
are for living the good live on credit. Sort of the same problem that
people who used their houses as ATM's to buy boats, luxury cars, expensive
electronics and now are losing the house and want the rest of us who lived
within their means to bail them out. Maybe I am hard hearted, but I grew up
the son of Depression Era parents. And was taught to live within my income
with some savings at the same time.