Del. Glen Oder (R-NN) has introduced a bill calling for a 36% cap on interest rates for payday lenders. I’m not going to rehash all I’ve written about payday lending; suffice it to say that putting these lenders under the same regulation as other lenders is a step in the right direction.
Contact your legislators, ask them to sign on as a patron of this bill and ask them to support it.
Vivian,
You have certainly divined my beliefs aon usury laws. I suppose that my direct question for you would reflect what Dr. Tabor mentioned above. Why not let adults have the freedom to take out whichever sorts of loans they wish? Are the potential bad outcomes such that the paternalistic state should preempt them?
Posted by Brian | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 2:12 pmThat has got to be one of your stupidest posts to date, BM, and that’s saying something.
What relevance does selling one’s children into slavery have to payday lending and usury?
Posted by Anon E. Mouse | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 2:13 pmBrian – it really isn’t a matter of diving, it’s trying to get to the nitty gritty. If you and Donald really believe in letting the market decide, then the only answer is to do away with the usury laws. That way, all lenders are on equal footing and have the same ability to offer the same loans.
If you support payday lending, then you must also support the end of usury laws. Otherwise, you are supporting government allowing one type of lender to get preferential treatment, no?
Mouse – as usual, you’re playing a semantics game.
Posted by vjp | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 2:56 pmQuiet, Mouse, the adults are talking.
Posted by MB | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 3:22 pmAs Jefferson put it: “No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.”
The government has no role in the terms of contracts between adults so long as they do not commit aggression against the rights of others.
So, of course I am opposed to usury laws, along with any other law that interferes in my choices when I am not doing harm to anyone else. If had had my way, we would repeal so many of our existing laws that law school would be a Community College Associate Degree.
Posted by W. Donald Tabor Jr., DDS | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 4:06 pmSo you’re saying that it would be perfectly acceptable to sell yourself into slavery, then? Presumably you’re going to say no, but then you’ve restrained the right to contract. It’s a bit of silliness that doesn’t really hold up, I think. But I know better than to get into arguments with a libertarian. I’m liable to get shot with one of those guns they’re always going on about
(Neverminding, of course, how the entire house of cards falls down when you start taking into account having to actually bear the costs of all your actions.)
~
And if I had my way, dentists wouldn’t seem like ambassadors from medieval torture chambers.
Posted by MB | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 4:20 pmVivian,
I wholeheartedly support dumping usury laws. Now will you answer my question?
Posted by Brian | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 4:54 pmMB,
You might be quiet and let the adults speak as well.
Posted by Brian | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 5:00 pmBrian – I think I’ve answered the question over and over, which is why I linked in the post to all of my posts on the subject. I’m not convinced that allowing people to make bad decisions, particularly at a time when they are vulnerable, is the answer.
There is a presumption, not only in this case but in many others, that everyone has the information to make an informed decision. I know from experience that is a dangerous presumption.
Posted by vjp | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 5:07 pmBrian, that’s a little amusing, coming from someone who’s essentially advocating a Lord of the Flies approach to society.
Posted by MB | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 5:24 pm“Mouse – as usual, you’re playing a semantics game.”
Yes, I am using words for their proper meaning.
So what do you propose, Vivian? There is a market for these loans because people have to pay rent, electricity, water, etc. They have already made the bad financial decisions that got them to the point of eviction or service cutoff. Now what? Do they go to a legal payday lender, do they go to a loan shark, or do they get evicted?
Posted by Anon E. Mouse | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 5:39 pmGood grief! Talk about beating a dead horse. Y’all don’t want a conversation – you want an argument.
No amount of browbeating is going to change my position on this. Payday lending as approved by the legislature of Virginia was wrong from the start.
Look – if you don’t want the payday lending to go away, contact your legislators. If you want it to go away, contact your legislators.
Posted by vjp | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 5:58 pmIts funny Vivian, if someone disagrees with your position you consider that browbeating. How hypocritical of you.
Posted by rlewis | Tuesday, December 4, 2007, 7:34 pmI DO want a conversation, Vivian, which is why I asked the questions I asked.
You want payday lending to be illegal (so only criminals will offer them), but will not consider the potential consequences of making such loans illegal. Those consequences are that people will go to loan-sharks or face foreclosure and termination of services.
Posted by Anon E. Mouse | Wednesday, December 5, 2007, 9:37 amMB,
Please. Your slavery query was beyond silly.
As for my “Lord of the Flies approach to society,” why are you so afraid of freedom?
Posted by Brian | Wednesday, December 5, 2007, 4:43 pm