http://www.bloggernews.net/115564 High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news. Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:38:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 http://www.bloggernews.net/115564#comment-347505 dasxu Thu, 22 May 2008 09:11:28 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/115564#comment-347505 I have worked for Checksmart for 3 years. At first, I was surprised by the amount of people choosing Payroll Advances for their short term needs. Basically, I had been fortunate enough to not need an advance, so I did not know their reasons to get one. Over time, through established relationships and processing thousands of transactions, I learned that people came to us from all walks of life because we were cheaper than their other options. I believe that banks are fee-based these days, and it is amazing that a bank can charge you $30 for an overdraft of .01 penny and $5 each additional day; or a credit card company can charge a late fee, but we can't charge our "fee" because we have to quote an "APR". Wake up--I get 5 credit card offerings in the mail a day, they show up at sporting events, college campuses(a lot of students don't even have jobs), and I can't buy a shirt without the cashier asking if I would like to sign up for their credit card to "save" an additional 10% while the credit card company banks on the fact that a certain percentage of its consumers won't pay the balance in time and will make them $$$$. So who's the bad guy? My honest opinion is that the American public needs to learn how to not spend money they don't have--budget, budget, budget!!! I drive a crappy car, don't go on vacation, and don't go out much--but guess what: I work my butt off and I'm not in debt. But if my car got a flat tire and I needed to get to work, I sure as hell would choose a payroll advance over giving those credit card companies anything. I don't need people to tell me what I'm capable of understanding. The problem with this country is that we have raised a bunch of breast-feeding babies with rubber corners to protect them and those of us who are privileged to work for the government are afraid to let people think for themselves. I guess if people were allowed to think for themselves and if we focused on educating people, they wouldn't need to borrow so much and probably wouldn't vote for some of you. Imagine not having that job security...kinda scary, huh? My point is: People are smart enough to make their own financial decisions, but if you don't think we're capable of this, then change it across the board. Banks should only be allowed to charge 28% overdraft on their customers, credit cards and other billers should also only be able to charge a fee that is proportionate to the balance owed and credit cards should only be able to allow usage 4 times a year. The customers that came into Checksmart: teachers, police officers, lawyers, business executives, factory workers, secretaries, waitresses, etc.--they came to us because of YOUR business practices with credit. We were an affordable last resort. Please respond--I beg you! By the way, my name is David Schmitz and I live in Cincinnati, Ohio. I have worked for Checksmart for 3 years. At first, I was surprised by the amount of people choosing Payroll Advances for their short term needs. Basically, I had been fortunate enough to not need an advance, so I did not know their reasons to get one. Over time, through established relationships and processing thousands of transactions, I learned that people came to us from all walks of life because we were cheaper than their other options. I believe that banks are fee-based these days, and it is amazing that a bank can charge you $30 for an overdraft of .01 penny and $5 each additional day; or a credit card company can charge a late fee, but we can’t charge our “fee” because we have to quote an “APR”. Wake up–I get 5 credit card offerings in the mail a day, they show up at sporting events, college campuses(a lot of students don’t even have jobs), and I can’t buy a shirt without the cashier asking if I would like to sign up for their credit card to “save” an additional 10% while the credit card company banks on the fact that a certain percentage of its consumers won’t pay the balance in time and will make them $$$$. So who’s the bad guy? My honest opinion is that the American public needs to learn how to not spend money they don’t have–budget, budget, budget!!! I drive a crappy car, don’t go on vacation, and don’t go out much–but guess what: I work my butt off and I’m not in debt. But if my car got a flat tire and I needed to get to work, I sure as hell would choose a payroll advance over giving those credit card companies anything. I don’t need people to tell me what I’m capable of understanding. The problem with this country is that we have raised a bunch of breast-feeding babies with rubber corners to protect them and those of us who are privileged to work for the government are afraid to let people think for themselves. I guess if people were allowed to think for themselves and if we focused on educating people, they wouldn’t need to borrow so much and probably wouldn’t vote for some of you. Imagine not having that job security…kinda scary, huh? My point is: People are smart enough to make their own financial decisions, but if you don’t think we’re capable of this, then change it across the board. Banks should only be allowed to charge 28% overdraft on their customers, credit cards and other billers should also only be able to charge a fee that is proportionate to the balance owed and credit cards should only be able to allow usage 4 times a year. The customers that came into Checksmart: teachers, police officers, lawyers, business executives, factory workers, secretaries, waitresses, etc.–they came to us because of YOUR business practices with credit. We were an affordable last resort. Please respond–I beg you! By the way, my name is David Schmitz and I live in Cincinnati, Ohio.

]]> http://www.bloggernews.net/115564#comment-343089 delongdrive Mon, 19 May 2008 22:42:11 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/115564#comment-343089 It's great to see both sides of the story rather than sensationalizing the issue. Unfortunately, it's unsurprising that no one's chosen to comment on this particular story. The worst part about the internet is that it allows people to simply tune out information and news that they don't want to hear or to omit evidence which doesn't support their claims. Bravo for balance. It’s great to see both sides of the story rather than sensationalizing the issue. Unfortunately, it’s unsurprising that no one’s chosen to comment on this particular story. The worst part about the internet is that it allows people to simply tune out information and news that they don’t want to hear or to omit evidence which doesn’t support their claims. Bravo for balance.

]]>