|
|
|
|
|
|
by kiplkipl
2142 days ago
|
|
|
>The question is, was the policy created with the intent of racism. That's convenient for the people it doesn't affect. Not only do you not have to worry about the policies: by choosing not to be racist, you absolve yourself of blame or privilege for benefiting from them. It also depends on you being able to infer another person's intentions. Intentional racists have always been in favour of covert racism in the form palatable policies that indirectly harm the groups they dislike and have always benefited from the unintentional bias of others. Models are models, not a representation of reality. As long as the model is close enough to the local maximum that the providers keep making money, it keeps existing. And history suggests lenders are not perfect at calculating diversified risk. The only assumption that OP made is that cheap credit makes it easier to make money, and that makes it easier to get cheap credit. That's not especially controversial. |
|
|
It's not convenient because it allows for conspiracy theories like yours to take hold.
Tell me, how do you decide that a policy which makes no reference to race, and is implemented in a regulated environment that makes racist policies illegal, is actually racist?
To me, it seems like the only yard stick you have is if the policy has differential impact on some group. That is as low a bar as you can have and it completely dismisses personal attributes that are actually used to qualify for loan. It's also lazy, and malicious.
>The only assumption that OP made is that cheap credit makes it easier to make money, and that makes it easier to get cheap credit. That's not especially controversial.
Yes it is controversial. It's also idiotic and dangerous. Interest rates are low now, max out your HELOC and go make money with it - see how easy it is ... alternatively, try getting a business loan without collateral and see how fast you're rejected. Nobody is going to care that you are in a 'privileged' class.