[jstanley]

You don't get to decide what levels of interest are "rational" for other people to take on.

[jopsen]

Should you get to exploit people who are desperate?

[jstanley]

If they really want $100 right now, and are happy to pay $110 back next week, I don't see offering that to them as exploitative.

[crankylinuxuser]

Then perhaps you ought to understand underlying motivations rather than seeing everyone 100% logical robots with complete awareness of situation.

Its not the rational and logical who use payday loans with similar interest. Its the single parent families. There's children involved, power threatened to being turned off. There's a car repair needed for they can work. You know, poverty.

And your excuses are just that- rational justification to fuck over poor people trying to make the best of bad answers.

[jstanley]

If someone really needs a loan of $100 to keep the power from being turned off, is denying them a loan for $100 in the best interest of the children? I don't think so.

If you don't give them the loan, the power will definitely be turned off. If you give them the loan, they can pay the power bill.

[jopsen]

You can't help poor people and make money. Or at least that's very hard.

If a family needs a few bucks to make things go round we should help. But trying to make money helping is likely to be counter productive.

Yes, you need the state to step in. And no when you phrase it as people exploiting the system, it won't help either ;)

[jstanley]

If you're not allowed to make money helping poor people, there's very little incentive to do so.

The world didn't grow to the level of abundance that we have today by everybody agreeing to work for each other for free. We grew through voluntary, mutually-beneficial, exchange.

[jopsen]

Sure, if all players are rational.

Parents feeding their kids aren't.