Published July 23rd, 2007
in Politics - South Carolina.
My recent post lamenting my vote for Tommy Moore (I Can’t Believe I Voted For Tommy Moore!), hit a sore spot with folks friendly with the payday lending business. After reading their comments, I did more research on both sides of the issue. Maybe I was too harsh. Maybe there is some legitimate value in payday lending services. I’m all for more consumer choices, so long as the consumer is presented with all the facts and consequences in plain language up front.
I believe that lenders of all types have a moral, if not legal, obligation to prevent (or not facilitate) borrowers from getting indebted beyond their ability to pay off debts in a reasonable amount of time without incurring further debt. If they’re in a hole, throw them a rope, not a shovel.
Payday borrowers get themselves in trouble by borrowing from multiple payday lenders at one time or using one loan to pay off another. A bill (H 3831) in the SC Legislature would create a statewide database of all check advance-type loans and limit borrowers to a maximum of $300 in such loans in a 60 day period and 6 such loans in a year. This system would go a long way to curbing the abuses that trap South Carolinians in debt.
So, have I been too harsh? You decide. Below are some links to sites on both sides of the payday lending issue. I would love to hear from South Carolinians who have had positive or negative experiences dealing with payday lenders.
LINKS:
SC State House bill H 3294 would cap loan fees, SC Legislature bill H 3831 would establish a statewide short-term loan database.
Check Advance/Payday Lending Industry Sites:
CheckIntoCash.com FAQ
Community Financial Services Association (CFSA)
Consumer Advocate & Competing Credit Union Sites:
Center for Responsible Lending
AARP report The Facts On Payday Lending in South Carolina
NEFE Report: “THE DEBT CYCLE: USING PAYDAY LOANS TO MAKE ENDS MEET”
NC Attorney General: Payday lending on the way out of NC
Industry “watchdog” pliwatch.org
Anderson Independent re: State Rep. Michael Thompson’s bill H 3831
Self-Help Credit Union
Published July 22nd, 2007
in Politics - National.
In an editorial for the Washington Post, “Why Do They Hate Us?”, Mohsin Hamid, a Pakistani Muslim who spent some of his formative years in the U.S., wrote,
“The challenge that the United States faces today boils down to a choice. It can insist on its primacy as a superpower, or it can accept the universality of its values. If it chooses the former, it will heighten the resentment of foreigners and increase the likelihood of visiting disaster upon distant populations — and vice versa. If it chooses the latter, it will discover something it appears to have forgotten: that the world is full of potential allies.”
As if you needed further confirmation that I am an Idiot, I’ll admit that I voted for Tommy Moore in the last gubernatorial election.
Now we hear that Moore has resigned his office in the state senate to take the lead post at Community Financial Services Association of America, the lobbying association for the payday lending racket. It’s a fair bet that the CFSA didn’t hire Moore in order to invite the intense regulation and public scrutiny that the payday lending industry deserves.
Continue reading ‘Can’t Believe I Voted for Tommy Moore!’
Published July 18th, 2007
in Politics - National.
So why are we staying the surge? According to a report by Richard A. Oppel Jr. in the New York Times July 15, 2007,
Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki declared Saturday that Iraqi forces could secure the country on their own “any time” American troops decided to withdraw, his first response to the White House report this week that found his government falling well short of many political reforms and military goals sought by Congress.
Continue reading ‘Iraqi Prime Minister Says We Can Leave’
I’ve neglected posting because I’m engaged in a raging universal health care debate over at Not Very Bright. I say “raging” because there is a lot of meat in the comments on both sides, but the debate has been refreshingly civil. Check it out here.
I promise I’ll be back at it here soon.
Published July 10th, 2007
in Health Care and Politics - National.
Never mind that every other develop nation is already doing it in some form and delivering better health care results at half the cost of the twisted, broken American system, the Washington Post thinks that Obama’s and Edwards’ plans to open a Medicare-like healthcare option to all Americans is “radical.”
In his July 10 report on Democratic candidates’ health care proposals, Perry Bacon Jr. of the Washington Post writes,
Edwards and Obama have embraced one potentially radical idea: Their plans each include an option for people to buy the kind of health coverage that is offered by Medicare for older Americans. If most Americans chose that option, it essentially would create a government-run health-care system.
I tend to think of “radical” as something hasn’t been proven in the real world. Yet every developed nation - with the exception of the United States - has proven that a government directed universal health care systems can and do deliver better care for much less that a “free market” American style system.
Hardly radical. I’d call it learning from others’ successes.
Over at Not Very Bright I just posted a piece about the lopsided justice that lingers in South Carolina. Rich, white, connected Thomas Ravenel and middle-class, black, unconnected Michael Miller face charges of conspiracy to distribute cocaine. Neither defendant has a prior criminal record, though Miller does face charges for a separate drug arrest.
Three days after Miller and Ravenel were indicted, Big Daddy Authur Ravenel whisked young Thomas away to a posh rehab center in Arizona.
Miller - who coincidently doesn’t have a million dollars, nor a million dollar dad, nor a team of million dollar lawyers, nor a friend in the Governor’s mansion, nor a friend running for President, and who’s skin just happens to be black - Miller appeared in shackles before a judge and rattled off to the Charleston pokey.
T-Rav, poster child of the New Generation Good Ol’ Boys, was chillin’ at Club Rehab.
I seriously hope both of defendants get a fair and speedy trial and that they get long lasting treatment for their addictions.
But Sweet Jesus, this Jim Crow justice is making me sick!
Published July 9th, 2007
in Politics - National.
While the New York Times has printed many anti-war articles by regular and guest writers, the editors themselves have maintained a Lieberman-like stay-the-course position on the war in Iraq. Until now.
In a Sunday Times editorial (7/8/07), the NYT editors conceded that there is nothing to be gained by staying in Iraq.
Like most Americans, the NYT editors believe that we have a responsibility to clean up the mess that the Bush Administration created by invading Iraq. But most Americans concluded months, if not years, ago that in the midst of the civil war in Iraq that we unwittingly ignited, the presence of our military - no matter how bravely they fight - is doing more harm than good.
The NYT editors, again months behind most Americans, has lost any confidence in the power-grabbing, revenge-bent Iraqi “government.” They seem incapable of settling their differences and reaching a power-sharing consensus by any means other than escalating civil war. Our troops are stuck in the middle.
As for the “they’ll follow us home” fear mongers, it seems that the majority of Americans have decided either: A) invading and occupying countries under false pretense (and maybe even under legitimate pretense, as in Afghanistan) is a wasteful and ineffective way to fight terrorists, or B) we’d rather risk a few terrorists “following us home” than contribute any further to the carnage in Iraq.
The NYT editorial offers suggests a plan for withdrawal that will minimize American and Iraqi casualties and might limit the chaos and meddling of neighboring that are certain to fill the void our troops leave behind. This article is a must-read for anyone still riding the fence on this issue.
Sadly, there is no credible evidence that anyone in the Executive Branch nor the Cheney Branch (other than their legal departments) reads the New York Times.
Published July 8th, 2007
in Politics - National.
OK, I think that Cheney was wrong to commute Scooter’s jail time. Consistent with the Bush Administration’s and the Cheney Whatchamacallit’s utter contempt for the rule of law, but wrong.
That said, would Bill Clinton please SHUT UP about it? Given the pack of sleazeballs that Clinton pardoned before leaving office, it’s just embarrassing to hear him or Hillary say anything about the subject.
Of course the media hounds are going to ask. I suggest he deflect the question with a bit of self-deprecating humor.
My wife suggested this line:
“I’m not going to comment on pardons. For awhile there, it looked like I would have to beg one from Al.”
Published July 5th, 2007
in Politics - National.
Al-Qaeda are in Iraq - so what? They’re also in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Pakistan, India, Yemen, Malaysia, and probably a lot of other places, including the U.S.of A. Should we invade and occupy all those countries, so that they won’t “follow us home”?
The Cheney Administration, the conservative media, the (Rush) Limbaughgers, and most of the Republican candidates are all rattling their sabers and muttering “Follow us home!, Follow us home!” at the news that one of the alleged Glasgow bombers is from Iraq. Most of the suspects in the London and Glasgow attacks are of Indian, Saudi, Jordanian, or British nationality.
Continue reading ‘The Alamo of Jihad’
