"too high for my liking" is doing a lot of work there.
Some of these loans are outright predatory, with multi-thousand-percent interest rates. These aren't loans that people who have better options are taking, and moreover I think a lot of people really don't understand how horrible that can be. Call your congressperson to get more funding for math education, and then maybe we can argue we should get rid of usury laws.
I guess I feel like the term "consent" is weaponized; did people opt into these loans? Sure, I suppose in a sense, but these are extremely desperate people and it is hard to say that what they opted into is "consent" in the classic sense of the term. They only take these loans because they feel like they don't have other options, not because they were able to compare rates across different banks and choose the best, and upon accepting these loans they can very easily get into situations where paying off the debt is functionally impossible.
Not sure how I feel about selling organs so I won't touch that one.
How much my food costs is quite consequential, and I think it's very important to understand whether or not a business has some hackneyed algorithm that tells them to charge me 50% more than the man standing next to me.
It's only good for the man. It's not good for me. If you think I'm selfish, then you have no guarantee that it's the other man who would pay more and only I would get the discount.
> Banning a pricing model should be unconstitutional
"Unconscionable contracts" and "Usury" called--you're behind on your debt and your kidney is being seized. :p
There's also some not-so-fun history there when it comes to charging people based on their skin-color.
[flagged]
"too high for my liking" is doing a lot of work there.
Some of these loans are outright predatory, with multi-thousand-percent interest rates. These aren't loans that people who have better options are taking, and moreover I think a lot of people really don't understand how horrible that can be. Call your congressperson to get more funding for math education, and then maybe we can argue we should get rid of usury laws.
I guess I feel like the term "consent" is weaponized; did people opt into these loans? Sure, I suppose in a sense, but these are extremely desperate people and it is hard to say that what they opted into is "consent" in the classic sense of the term. They only take these loans because they feel like they don't have other options, not because they were able to compare rates across different banks and choose the best, and upon accepting these loans they can very easily get into situations where paying off the debt is functionally impossible.
Not sure how I feel about selling organs so I won't touch that one.
2 replies →
No they shouldn’t be.
3 replies →
How much my food costs is quite consequential, and I think it's very important to understand whether or not a business has some hackneyed algorithm that tells them to charge me 50% more than the man standing next to me.
Why is it a bad thing that the man next to you pays 50% less?
It's only good for the man. It's not good for me. If you think I'm selfish, then you have no guarantee that it's the other man who would pay more and only I would get the discount.
7 replies →
It's so embarrassing that we banned forcing employees to work sixteen hour days without lunch breaks. Just go to another employer.
Banning an employment model should be unconstitutional.
You're not even allowed to pay them in company scrip anymore!
For now. There are some of the billionaires wanting to bring back company towns and company scrip.
[flagged]
Many people do not have more than 1 grocery store as an option.
Good point, we should regulate pricing models in service of the 0.000001 percent of people that live in places like Kingman, Arizona.
Please go look up what a Food Desert is.
7 replies →