Why can’t it be BOTH? I mean, obviously these people are stupid. At first, yeah, I felt sorry for them. The company is obviously running a racket and taking advantage of people who don’t have much money, or education. And they obviously were desparate and thought they found a decent sofa. (Yeah, they should’ve gone to Craigslist, or a second-hand place, but many people make dumbass decisions like this. I figured it was a live and learn thing.)
BUT THEN, I saw them buying speakers, and a smartphone, and I’m like, WTF??? This has nothing to do with the company being a bunch of sharks. Buddy’s could be the most ethical in the world – you don’t buy luxuries like that when you already have expenses that need to
On the other hand, even smart people fall for this kind of shit. Being stupid isn’t against the law, but deceptive businesses practices usually are. I think this would fall under that catagory. I don’t feel sorry for the people in the story (well, except for their kids).
This seems pretty naive to me. I teach kids, and while I bust my ass trying to mitigate the effects of generational poverty, it’s not something that can be fixed in the classroom. Kids who live in high-crime, low-wealth neighborhoods tend to suffer from a complex of hurdles that can be overcome by exceptional kids, but are far, far harder to overcome than the hurdles faced by kids in middle-class or wealthy communities.
If you actually want to avoid punishing children, public schools are not enough. You need to support public policy that decreases poverty. One example of such a policy would be eliminating usurious renter businesses.
If you’re not serious about avoiding punishing children, of course, continue pretending that public schools can solve the problem, wipe your hands clean, and then wag your fingers at those kids when they grow up and lack the same fiscal discipline that you have.
Yet most states prey on that specific behavioral flaw as well in the form of the lottery, especially scratch tickets. Before you start work on your grand reform to private businesses, you may want to take a close look at the even worse effect that lottery tickets have on people with poor math skills and little impulse control. I guess that is it is OK though because the money goes to “the schools” even though it really doesn’t.
My family used to own a pawn shop in a very poor town when I was growing. It is an eye-opener when you see just how shortsighted and even brazen some people are about scoring a few extra dollars to get high or take their new girlfriend out to dinner. The typical customer isn’t a single mother looking to feed her kids like the bleeding hearts choose to believe. Instead, it is degenerates that just inherited or won something and just want a little cash as fast as possible so that they can blow it on something that day. You can’t help them in the long-term by giving them money or even goods up to and including houses. They will spend the money, sell the assets or destroy anything that is given to them as fast as humanly possible.
My entire viewpoint is nuanced but it can be summarized as “Fuck 'em”. Stupid is as stupid does. People like that aren’t victims of anyone or anything. They are willfully ignorant and aggressively self-destructive. I honestly don’t care whether they live, die, become homeless or waste away to a debilitated 400 lb mess of medical complications. They deserve whatever they end up with. I already have two real children, I don’t need millions of other abstract ones to worry about that cannot and will not be helped by anything that can be done short of forceably institutionalizing them.
I don’t hate all poor people. Some got there through forces beyond their control and I will be the first to help those. However, if you ever need an example of someone that literally hates these types of chronically poor people that make consistently bad life decisions, I will be in my office to give statements and interviews.
This isn’t just about ignorance, but about impulse control. Studies have shown that children as young as 4 or 5 who have good impulse control tend to be more successful in life. So, it would seem this is a vicious cycle. Poor impulse control leads to a lower socio-economic situation which in turn leads to more temptations to use options like rent-to-own. And if we outlaw rent-to-own practices, we’ll just see out and out rental stores pop up. Want a new TV? Well, you can rent one for just $25/month!!
That is absolutely correct. It isn’t even just poor people and especially not isolated to any particular demographic group. I have had them in my family, my ex-wife has had three in her family (and they are flat-out wealthy) and I have seen it play out among hundreds of people of all socioeconomic groups.
The problem isn’t lack or money or resources - in fact, those can contribute to the problem. It is all about poor impulse control and consistently bad decisions. A vanishingly few learn from their mistakes but most don’t and there is nothing you can do to help them in the long-term. They will spend any money you give them, destroy any material asset that is given freely or screw up hope that someone else provides like free education (it isn’t like they never had the chance at that many times already; every place in the U.S. has free schools and libraries at the very least plus probably much more).
Some people seem to think the of chronically poor as some types of ‘noble savages’ that need to be helped by the more enlightened classes. That isn’t true as a general rule. Some people really are just temporarily down on their luck but there also millions that just plain screw-ups whose only purpose is to screw as many things as possible up for themselves, their families and society at large.
I honestly would not have a problem with the government setting some reasonable limits on exploitation.
However what I worry about is that if you’re not allowed to charge more for groceries in a high crime area for example, the shops just leave. Then what? People without a car have to hire a driver to take them to a cheaper grocery once a month, eating up a whole day a ton of money?
Can’t charge more interest for a car loan with no money down? Screw it, now someone desperate has no option.
In an attempt to protect people it can just make things worse, that is what I worry about.
Theoretically yes, absolutely. How could that not be true? I don’t advocate a genocide campaign against people that make consistently bad life decisions but I don’t think anyone else should enable them either especially through government programs. It won’t help the underlying problem which is hardly ever access to resources.
Don’t get me wrong, the chances are outstanding that I have more personal white trash, black trash and every other forms of trash friends than you do. My Facebook feed seems like a crime blotter sometimes. I grew up in an area with an unusual number of degenerates. I like them as casual acquaintances from far away but they are guaranteed to screw up anything that you give them and most of them have repeatedly in spectacular ways.
This doesn’t apply to all poor people. Some did everything right and still ended up that way because of a medical problem or something else they had no control over. I have no issue with them and will give them anything including cash which I do sometimes anonymously. However, the woman in the OP is an example of someone that cannot be helped by any law or cash gift. If you give her more money, you just gave her more rope to hang herself with.
The less intelligent get some degree of freedom removed in the interest of not letting them do self-destructive and frankly stupid things. Clearly this isn’t ideal; where do we draw that “too stupid to make their own decisions” line, and where do we draw that “you can make these decisions, but not those other ones.” And how do you tell someone they’re too stupid to make their own decisions about buying ridiculously overpriced couches?
We let them suffer the consequences of their own actions, whether the origin of those actions is stupidity or ignorance or anything else is immaterial.
I can’t really see a third option- anything else would seem to be letting them do stupid shit and cleaning up after them, with all the cost and trouble that entails. That’s both fiscally irresponsible- what do WE as society get for bailing these cretins out?, and removes any sort of possible learning moments for the people themselves.
The third option would be closing the loophole on a business model that is only legal due to a technicality. No need to get too philosophical, just enforce the same consumer protections that we have already decided to have.
That is a stupid fucking response. Not being forbidden from buying overpriced furniture on credit which is clearly identified as being overpriced can make it hurt to be stupid, but using drugs can make it hurt to be stupid, and makes you more stupid. That can range from a drunk making themselves stupid enough to start a fistfight to a heroin user making themselves stupid enough to not see “Melt the flesh off my bones” as a deal breaker.
What deception? The brochure posted earlier tells you exactly how much these things really cost, and how much extra you are paying for the privilege of paying on credit.
You grew up in a poor neighborhood. I have an honest question for you. Do you really think that better labeling or outlawing official business practices would would truly help person that uses those types of services? If you say yes, how would it help exactly?
Is rent usury? Should it be illegal for me to rent you a washer and dryer for $20 per week? If not, why should it be illegal for me to rent you a washer and dryer for $20 per week, and throw in a free washer and dryer if you’re still renting in a year and a half?
I can even think of a situation where these rent to own places could be useful, lets say you’re left homeless or have just moved and right now you have no money to buy a bed or appliance and no family to loan you the cash and no credit. It could make very good sense to rent for a month or two until you are back on your feet instead of sleeping on the floor.
I think the real problem is most people don’t examine their life, or what they were taught. If mom and dad only bought from the rent to own place, well that is where they buy, even if Fry’s next door is cheaper.
What would actually help is better alternatives. Apparently the rent-to-own business really hit its stride after the economic crash, when a lot of high-risk lending dried up.
Of course, buying a ton of stuff on credit isn’t ideal. But of people are going to buy stuff anyway-- and they are-- I think it’s better that they buy things from the same shops you and I buy from, at an interest rate based on actual risk rather than level of desperation, and with the protections and balances we have built in to our credit system.
Maybe we need to look at microfinance or group lending. I’m not sure. The poor having limited access to financial services is a global problem that we are just working out solutions for.