Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If someone walked up to me and said "Wouldn't you like $292 cash right now so you can buy your kids a Christmas present?", I'd say "No". A lot of other people would say "Yes", though.

I have some distant acquaintances that are horrible with money. In the last year they have been behind on their car and mortgage payments, the woman has been steadily employed but the man doesn't work any more than he absolutely has to. That said, on payday they buy PS2/PS3s and games, and are at the pawn shop on a monthly basis hocking them again (this cycle has happened 2-3x that I'm aware of, and I hear things third-hand). It's cultural for them to not trust banks, so they "keep" cash. These people place no value whatsoever on their credit score, and they seem totally unconcerned about using the tools at their disposal, despite the financial implications.

The husband went out of town a while back with a shady family member "to work". The shady family member had been in recent trouble (kept within the neighborhood -- they don't call the police) for home burglary and assault/robbery. There wasn't any hard evidence but there was the unstated concern that the "work" might not have been on the up-and-up.

Is it wrong to offer a paycheck loan service to people like this? There's certainly no way to draw causation here, but there's non-zero correlation. For people that choose to live this way how is it even ethically wrong? It's what they want and they're not concerned about the downside (living a little tighter next week), and they'd blow right past the boarded up paycheck loan shop to get to the neighborhood loan shark if that was the next best option.

Personally I'm of the mind that safe, legal, regulated access to loans for people who otherwise could not get them are a valuable service. Even if they're as unpleasant as needle programs for druggies.



That's an interesting view. Thanks for posting it.

I would agree with this, if it wasn't for the aforementioned shady tactics...

Taking your needle program analogy, it would be extremely unethical if the needle program was paid for by the dealers and they used that opportunity to sell you more drugs, chat with you to find out if you're thinking of quitting, and offer you some free heroin if you are.

Similarly, short-term loan shops often employ strong-arm tactics to ensure they do receive payment. I.e., if you don't pay back, they'll send a couple of burly men to stand in your doorway until you do (as far as I know there's no evidence of them actually using violence, but the message is fairly clear).

So, to me, it seems payday loan shops are closer to the mafia/drug dealer side of things than to the needle program side.


I understand that to mean "increase regulation of payday loan companies" rather than "outlaw payday loan companies", on the grounds that unregulated outlaws are still a worse option.

However, regulating these companies to death puts you right back at the start again...


Yep, that's what I meant.

And yes, from the sound of it, it is a complex, multi-faceted problem.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: