Subnostr

https://x.com/9mm_smg/status/1747712542409933290 bankers are at least capitalists. These trash takes all lead to Marxist solutions. No thanks retards. I’m familiar with your game. Pay your own debts, freeloaders

James A Lewis 2y ago

There's a balance here. We have laws against predatory lending for a reason. I'm not saying that we need to just give away total debt forgiveness, but I also want to make sure I point out that the lending strategies are predatory and the lenders need also to be held responsible for their crimes against the American people.

High interest rates are not the only way that lending can be predatory, but also lending too much. It can lock people into permanent debt, even at "reasonable" interest rates.

Total and complete unregulated markets are almost as wrong as communism. The state has a responsibility to ensure both the freedom of its citizenry to do business and at a minimum some protection against bad actors by hindering their crime.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

mrclownworld 2y ago

Bro this is a retarded take

The extreme amounts of lending for student loans are BECAUSE they are not a free market. They’re backed by the government. That’s not a free market.

If the government didn’t back them, 18 year olds wouldn’t be able to get them any more than they can get business loans, mortgages, or credit cards.

Government intervention CREATED this problem

James A Lewis 2y ago

You misunderstand me. I didn't say we needed more government involvement. I agree that the problem is too much involvement. We need to recognize that the government has subsidized usury in the form of predatory lending, and now we need it to recognize its error and somehow fix it.

mrclownworld 2y ago

The government IS the predator though

Look at how the East German officials used to justify the Berlin Wall

It was unfair when the Soviet Union had paid to educate its citizens for them to take their educations elsewhere

In other words… we own you

James A Lewis 2y ago

The government is many people and can be replaced. I hope, though not completely expect, that we can reverse some of the damages it caused by putting good people in it.

The part of the government that is the predator lender needs to be cut off, and the replacement government come up with plan to repair the situation in like fashion as happens in other predatory lending scenarios.

mrclownworld 2y ago

Every government is predatory. It’s the nature of the beast

James A Lewis 2y ago

I'm not an anarchist. I'm a Thomistic minarchist. The state does have a role to play, regardless of our current tyranny.

mrclownworld 2y ago

It is inevitable, sure, and it’s inevitably a predator

James A Lewis 2y ago

It may be inevitable in nation-sized governments, but I disagree in general. A group of heads of households gathering to enhance the lives of their community can't be called predatory. As it grows the attraction of corrupt individuals does increase, but it doesn't mean inevitable. If our states were only 500k-2M people max, it would be a while lot more manageable. This touches on another one of my principles: localism. Smaller is usually better when it comes to power.

a source familiar with the matter 2y ago

I desire security services (and the freedom to defend myself and my property directly).

I do not desire a monopoly security provider. Do you? And if so, why?

James A Lewis 2y ago

Of course I don't want a monopoly of power, even if those who wield it are chosen legitimately by the people. I do, however, believe the people have a right to organize themselves according to norms they endorse and act against those who oppose them. That is government.

Norms such as "murder is wrong" and "theft is wrong" etc. are obvious, so we can say that the people may Agony someone to make determinations about it and carry out appropriate disincentives. Predatory lending is simply another crime we the people should stand against and appoint someone to disincentivize, including against those others we may have appointed in other roles.

James A Lewis 2y ago

May appoint someone*

a source familiar with the matter 2y ago

"the people have a right to organize themselves according to norms they endorse"

What constitutes endorsing a norm? Can 51% of the population impose a "norm" on 49%?

Does someone need to be appointed in order to justly enforce a norm? Should a non-appointed person be permitted to stop a murderer or a thief?

a source familiar with the matter 2y ago

A monopoly State is inherently rotten at the core

The State is a rejection of common law, subjecting some men to the whims of other codified as "law"

The State is a rejection of property rights in favor of coercive taxation which is in principle unlimited power

mrclownworld 2y ago

I take back “retarded” but do think it all the way through, brother