OT - Bank of America Credit

Posted by Andrew DeFaria on March 1, 2007, 11:11 pm

Please log in for more thread options

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050209010003010709080206
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Steve Scott wrote:

> On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:56:24 -0600, Andrew DeFaria

>> Steve Scott wrote:

>>>> Not being "likely to be able to pay their debts" is no excuse!

>>>> People need to be responsible for their own actions! And we need to

>>>> stop making excuses for people who refused to own up to their own

>>>> obligations. Unless it can be shown that a) the CC company violated

>>>> a law, in which case the CC company should bear the responsibility

>>>> or b) the consumer was mentally unfit (i.e. mentally challenged

>>>> (AKA a retard)) the debt should be honored and not thrust upon

>>>> other innocent people.

>>> Agreed. I'm pleased to see you agree with me that the companies, not

>>> their cardholders, should suffer when they actively solicit

>>> individuals whose past credit histories show them to be a poor risk

>>> and those individuals default on the payments.

>> Not necessarily so. If not a and not b then guess who gets the

>> responsibility? The stupid, non mentally challenged consumer, which I

>> suspect is the case 90% of the time.

Did you mean to say something?
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
If work is so terrific, why do they have to pay you to do it?

--------------050209010003010709080206
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Steve Scott wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid2n2fu2h439liuuutnr0r0ml8k4egs3eiha@4ax.com"
type="cite">On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:56:24 -0600, Andrew DeFaria 
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
 
<blockquote type="cite">Steve Scott wrote: 
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">Not being "likely to be able to pay their
debts" is no excuse! People need to be responsible for their own
actions! And we need to stop making excuses for people who refused to
own up to their own obligations. Unless it can be shown that a) the CC
company violated a law, in which case the CC company should bear the
responsibility or b) the consumer was mentally unfit (i.e. mentally
challenged (AKA a retard)) the debt should be honored and not thrust
upon other innocent people. 
</blockquote>
Agreed. I'm pleased to see you agree with me that the companies, not
their cardholders, should suffer when they actively solicit individuals
whose past credit histories show them to be a poor risk  and those
individuals default on the payments. 
</blockquote>
Not necessarily so. If not a and not b then guess who gets the
responsibility? The stupid, non mentally challenged consumer, which I
suspect is the case 90% of the time. 
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Did you mean to say something? 
<div class="moz-signature">-- 
<a href="http://defaria.com">Andrew DeFaria</a> 
If work is so terrific, why do they have
to pay you to do it?
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------050209010003010709080206--

Posted by Steve Scott on March 1, 2007, 9:35 pm

Please log in for more thread options

When the poor credit risk consumer defaults on the CC bill and has no
assets to speak of, who do you think foots the bill? You do. I don't
think it's really all that hard to understand for the "non mentally
challenged" person.

When companies actively pursue poor risk consumers, some of the debt
those consumers build is going to be non-recoverable. The rest of the
CC company's consumers are going to pay for that. I think that is
wrong. That should come from company profits and ultimately the
shareholders.

Is that plain enough for you?

On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:56:24 -0600, Andrew DeFaria

>Steve Scott wrote:

>>> Not being "likely to be able to pay their debts" is no excuse! People

>>> need to be responsible for their own actions! And we need to stop

>>> making excuses for people who refused to own up to their own

>>> obligations. Unless it can be shown that a) the CC company violated a

>>> law, in which case the CC company should bear the responsibility or

>>> b) the consumer was mentally unfit (i.e. mentally challenged (AKA a

>>> retard)) the debt should be honored and not thrust upon other

>>> innocent people.

>> Agreed. I'm pleased to see you agree with me that the companies, not

>> their cardholders, should suffer when they actively solicit

>> individuals whose past credit histories show them to be a poor risk

>> and those individuals default on the payments.

>Not necessarily so. If not a and not b then guess who gets the

>responsibility? The stupid, non mentally challenged consumer, which I

>suspect is the case 90% of the time.

--
Brain: The apparatus with which we
think that we think.

Posted by Andrew DeFaria on March 1, 2007, 11:29 pm

Please log in for more thread options

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000407030909030305050302
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Steve Scott wrote:

> When the poor credit risk consumer defaults on the CC bill and has no

> assets to speak of, who do you think foots the bill? You do.

Actually we all do and I said that already.

> I don't think it's really all that hard to understand for the "non

> mentally challenged" person.

The real question is whether or not that person really doesn't have any
assets to speak of. Very often they do.

> When companies actively pursue poor risk consumers, some of the debt

> those consumers build is going to be non-recoverable.

Yes we are talking a matter of degree here. Exactly how many of those
people are actually unable to pay.

> The rest of the CC company's consumers are going to pay for that.

Which kinda kills your "you do" claim...

> I think that is wrong.

So do I.

> That should come from company profits and ultimately the shareholders.

No it should, when at all possible, come from the deadbeats who refuse
to pay their bills first.

> Is that plain enough for you?'

It is plain enough for you?

Or are you trying to say that 100% of those who claim they can't pay
really can't pay?
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
(A)bort, (R)etry, (T)ake down entire network?

--------------000407030909030305050302
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Steve Scott wrote:
<blockquote cite="midoa3fu29mnn4mjomj69dopvq90vfn7co080@4ax.com"
type="cite">When the poor credit risk consumer defaults on the CC bill
and has no assets to speak of, who do you think foots the bill? You
do.</blockquote>
Actually we all do and I said that already. 
<blockquote cite="midoa3fu29mnn4mjomj69dopvq90vfn7co080@4ax.com"
type="cite"> I don't think it's really all that hard to understand for
the "non mentally challenged" person. 
</blockquote>
The real question is whether or not that person really doesn't have any
assets to speak of. Very often they do. 
<blockquote cite="midoa3fu29mnn4mjomj69dopvq90vfn7co080@4ax.com"
type="cite">When companies actively pursue poor risk consumers, some
of the debt those consumers build is going to be non-recoverable.</blockquote>
Yes we are talking a matter of degree here. Exactly how many of those
people are actually unable to pay. 
<blockquote cite="midoa3fu29mnn4mjomj69dopvq90vfn7co080@4ax.com"
type="cite"> The rest of the CC company's consumers are going to pay
for that. </blockquote>
Which kinda kills your "you do" claim... 
<blockquote cite="midoa3fu29mnn4mjomj69dopvq90vfn7co080@4ax.com"
type="cite"> I think that is wrong.</blockquote>
So do I. 
<blockquote cite="midoa3fu29mnn4mjomj69dopvq90vfn7co080@4ax.com"
type="cite"> That should come from company profits and ultimately the
shareholders. 
</blockquote>
No it should, when at all possible, come from the deadbeats who refuse
to pay their bills first. 
<blockquote cite="midoa3fu29mnn4mjomj69dopvq90vfn7co080@4ax.com"
type="cite">Is that plain enough for you?' 
</blockquote>
It is plain enough for you? 
 
Or are you trying to say that 100% of those who claim they can't pay
really can't pay? 
<div class="moz-signature">-- 
<a href="http://defaria.com">Andrew DeFaria</a> 
(A)bort, (R)etry, (T)ake down entire
network?
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------000407030909030305050302--

Posted by lanman on March 2, 2007, 2:27 pm

Please log in for more thread options

wrote:

>When the poor credit risk consumer defaults on the CC bill and has no

>assets to speak of, who do you think foots the bill? You do. I don't

>think it's really all that hard to understand for the "non mentally

>challenged" person.

Defaults are viewed as just another cost of doing business in the
credit card industry. That risk is managed and built into the lending
institution's rates and fees structure. People who get this card will
be in a separate category and will no doubt pay much higher rates and
fees because they are undocumented and here illegally.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Posted by Andrew DeFaria on March 2, 2007, 11:58 am

Please log in for more thread options

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040202090602020601030405
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

lanman wrote:

> Defaults are viewed as just another cost of doing business in the

> credit card industry. That risk is managed and built into the lending

> institution's rates and fees structure.

While defaults are inevitable, companies do seek to minimize them.

> People who get this card will be in a separate category and will no

> doubt pay much higher rates and

> fees because they are undocumented and here illegally.

WHAT?!? Well that was out of left field and uncalled for. You bigot! Now
I'm as totally against illegal immigrants as the next guy but that was
really odd.
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
REALITY.SYS corrupted: Reboot universe? (Y/N/Q)

--------------040202090602020601030405
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
lanman wrote: 
<blockquote cite="midhbugu2ptckhdbj6bpltni2h8723br4nosr@4ax.com"
type="cite">Defaults are viewed as just another cost of doing business
in the credit card industry. That risk is managed and built into the
lending institution's rates and fees structure.</blockquote>
While defaults are inevitable, companies do seek to minimize them. 
<blockquote cite="midhbugu2ptckhdbj6bpltni2h8723br4nosr@4ax.com"
type="cite"> People who get this card will be in a separate category
and will no doubt pay much higher rates and 
fees because they are undocumented and here illegally. 
</blockquote>
WHAT?!? Well that was out of left field and uncalled for. You bigot!
Now I'm as totally against illegal immigrants as the next guy but that
was really odd. 
<div class="moz-signature">-- 
<a href="http://defaria.com">Andrew DeFaria</a> 
REALITY.SYS corrupted: Reboot universe?
(Y/N/Q)
</div>
</body>
</html>

--------------040202090602020601030405--