A lot of people think social credit scores are something society can’t function without, but they only started in 1989.
I certainly have problems with the way current financial institutions operate, but prior to the credit score there wasn’t a standardized, scientific way to assess lending risk. It was left to a good ol’ boy process rife with racism, classism, and sexism. Sadly, we’re better off with what we have now, as flawed as it is.
There still isn’t a standardized and scientific way to assess credit risk. There are three major companies, several minor ones, and all of them offer multiple products.
IT’S ALL A FUCKING SCAM. We just blindly accept random institutions compiling all of our data and telling a bank whether or not we should be given a loan regardless of our ability to pay it back. It has little to do with income anymore, which should be the only allowable metric. Don’t want the risk? Get the fuck out of the mortgage business.
It was so much better before! When being a woman, or god forbid, being black, counted as serious criteria. Oh, and you best be friends with the banker. (Read the part, again, about being a white man, who was well accepted in the community.)
It’s not a scam, it’s a step forward. Time to take the next step.
deleted by creator
Because there are standard metrics for where the score comes from. Each of the big three has slightly different weighting, but it all broadly comes out the same.
The numbers aren’t made up. You can look at your credit report and see what is affecting it.
No you can’t. When you look at your credit report you see a lot of “MAY” and “COULD” and “MIGHT.”
This is horseshit.
Yep it’s not a mystery at all if you care enough to read about it. All these “capitalist dystopia” complainers sound like what I probably thought about credit scores when I was in my early 20s and had terrible credit from being irresponsible with credit cards. My credit score is 800 now because I simply pay my bills on time and have an established history of doing so.
Yeah, it’s not a perfect system and I would welcome increased federal oversight and greater transparency because it does have the potential for abuse.
That said, it’s not numbers made up to keep the little guy down. Lenders want to lend money because they make money off it. The whole point is to determine whether or not you’re a safe investment.
We could have a discussion on the merits of modern usury, which can be deeply predatory and abusive. It’s not the credit score that’s the problem.
The numbers are made up, unless you can actually prove your original statement.
Edit: oh, and since proving a negative is essentially impossible, you can’t actually prove your original statement, so I would recommend not making statements like that, and try to rephrase.
You think the people that scream about credit scores have ever looked at and analyzed their credit report lol
Yes, you brown-nosing corpo-slurping bootlicking twit, I do in fact keep a pretty damn close watch on my credit score because suckups like you will fellate and propagate any capitalist horseshit you can so I have to rather than just NOT WORRYING ABOUT IT and only applying for lines of credit in line with my income levels.
Instead it becomes this stupid game of laddering where you can apply for an increase now, but you can’t apply for new credit, but also you need a new loan to maximize your score, no not that kind of loan, no also don’t pay off the loan that’s bad too, why did you need more credit again?
Anyone ignorant enough to support this needs their own separate financial system that caters to their intrinsic need to be a sub.
Just because it was worse before, doesn’t mean we can’t also make the NOW better, again.
i dont see the problem with improving your credit score by sacrificing a virgin to the volcano every year, at least anyone can do it instead of just the well accepted white men
im being unfair of course, unlike modern credit scores tossing a virgin into the volcano doesnt still put minorities at a disadvantage
which should be the only allowable metric.
Why? Income is a terrible metric. Regardless of how much money I’ve made, I’ve always spent within my means. I’ve never carried debt, but always has my cc to build the credit score.
The idea that some bozo who spends more than he earns has a better credit score than me just because he makes more money makes absolutely zero sense to me.
Income is a terrible metric.
I suggest you lie on a few credit applications (not really). You’ll be amazed at how readily you get approved just because your income crosses a certain threshold, even with the same score.
Several years ago I was looking to add a couple of cards, primarily for emergency reasons. I apply for a card and get rejected. Six months later I get a new job that’s promising me a significantly higher income but I haven’t started receiving more money yet (contract work is fun). I apply for the same card, same information, knowing my credit score had not changed, the only difference in my applications was my income (that required no verification) and that time I got approved.
So apparently the banks have a different thought process than you.
And what the fuck is wrong with you that you even think about someone else’s credit score? Are you also mad that your neighbor is gay?
Don’t answer that…
I never said it wasn’t a factor, only a terrible one that shouldnt be the only one. Also try improving your credit score and see the better rates and cards with better benefits open up to you.
And what the fuck is wrong with you that you even think about someone else’s credit score?
Considering you think I spend time thinking about people’s credit score because I think it’s better metric for getting credit, this question is all but a straight up admission that you spend a lot of mental energy thinking about the income of other people.
Are you mad that your neighbor is straight too?
What about those that have sufficient income, but don’t pay their bills and have defaulted on previous loans?
Mortgages were, prior to assholes screwing the whole thing up with mortgage-backed securities, seen as one of the lowest risk things banks could handle.
If you default on a mortgage the bank forecloses and auctions the home. This was QUITE rare before the housing crash. The problem was that the banking industry became so lax that they were giving loans to people that actually did NOT have the money to pay for them, figuring that they could just seize and sell the home as they always had. The problem THEN is that mortgage-backed securities were a thing by that point and every foreclosure caused another domino to fall over.
It became a shitshow because banks fucked themselves over being greedy pieces of shit.
Found the 550 guy lol
About 780 last I looked. Utilization went up when I decided to do some travel this year. But go on thinking that the only people that want a system reformed are the ones that don’t know how to work it.
I’m sure that’ll get you far in life. All the way to brown-nosing middle management.
This is the internet. I, along with everyone else here, don’t give two shits about your score or opinion bud.
And yet your cunt ass cares enough to post.
So you’re a hypocritical cunt, not just a normal cunt.
If it was a publicly available algorithim, then Id believe you. But it ain’t, so I’m suspicious.
We don’t know the algorithms specifically, but we have enough information to have a pretty good idea how it works.
It’s better than what it was. High time to take another look, but it’s far, far better.
It seems to me it doesn’t count risk. It counts profitability. It’s why it drops when people pay their loans early.
there wasn’t a standardized, scientific way to assess lending risk.
Neither is it now. You forgot the ‘hidden from public’ part.
They tell u what affects your score right on the credit report! Hahaha What the fuck are u clowns talking about.
And now it’s time to nix what we have for something better, just like we did before.
Why would you be better off? In the rest of the world you just have to provide proof of income and proof of savings and debt and banks can calculate how much they are willing to loan you for the purchase of a house. Seems to work fine, and I don’t have to have pay interest on meaningless loans just to prove that I can.
The problem is that just having the income and savings doesn’t necessarily guarantee that you’ll be as good about paying back a loan as someone of your same income and savings.
That’s supposed to be where the credit score helps, but the current system is so shady that it basically just reads as the ol’ boys club system but asking pretty please to pretend there’s a formula and method being used.
I think there are plenty of failsafe mechanisms. But most importantly, if you fail to pay your mortgage, the bank has the right to take possession of your house. Those forces the bank to do it’s due diligence with regards to the value of the house. Also, if a bank has been too lenient with its mortgages, it can get into serious trouble - the government here enforces pretty strict rules to prevent people from getting in over their heads.
If you don’t take credit facilities but pay for your expenses in cash, you are considered a risk. Credit scoring based on credit card purchases is akin to being required to be spied on every step of the way just so you can access what you practically can without the credit in the first place. I don’t have a problem with people who are fine with that kind of behavior. But there should be a way of fair assessment even if you pay in cash.
Yeah. It’s really changed a lot…
At one time you walked into a bank, showed how much money you made, and got a home loan.
But that allowed too many Black people to buy homes, so credit scores were invented as a way to discriminate against people using a black box with no real published metric.
Yay for redlining under a different name!
It’s funny how the other person who replied to me said credit scores are actually the solution to racism. I think you’re the one who’s right it’s just funny. I’d like to take this opportunity to say it’s retarded that you can pay rent for years but not be approved for a mortgage with equal or lesser payments.
Nobody said credit scores were the solution. They were merely a step forward.
Young liberals: “It’s not good enough or fast enough! NOW!!!”
I’ll take what I can get, even if it takes some time.
“Young liberals” are why we got the fucking civil rights act, ya fuckin’ dink.
It’s you who has held us back, with your obsession with capitalism as a just and fair ruler.
You’re showing way too much faith in the institutions that invented the red lining in the first place to imply that the ol’ boys club system wasn’t waaaaay more rife with systemic racism.
The post war recovery laws were literally lobbied to specifically exclude black folks, but sure, home buying was easier for them then than it was post credit scores.
My dude, you’re missing about thirty years of history.
Redlining was made illegal by the Fair Housing Act in the late 60’s. It may have still existed in some fucked up form but it was no longer the standard by which lending was done. There’s a reason the rate of home ownership among Black people has steadily risen ever since, and yet it still isn’t close to any other group of people.
The whole system is fucked and it’s largely set up to fuck Black people because some mayo motherfuckers still want to own humans.
It might have been “illegal” but lenders were still basically doing it anyways, just calling it everything else imaginable. Shit they still do it when they think they’ll get away with it, folks have actually tested it, real estate brokers list houses shown by white “owners” at higher values than those shown by black “owners”
Don’t forget about Homeowners Associations! Redlining in another form.
Nobody fucking cares how many black people buy houses. They only care about making the most profit.
Idiots like you are why systemic racism persists.
Fuck off.
I don’t think you know what social credit score means.
This thread is full of people who don’t know what they’re talking about. I mean the whole thread is based on the implication that the credit bureaus are a government program.
deleted by creator
tell me you’re ignoring how the adult personal financial world works in the west since 1989, without you, know telling me
deleted by creator
What I hate the most is how your score goes down for paying off a loan early. Getting penalized for actually being financially responsible is infuriating. I paid off my car less than 2 years into a 5 year loan and my score went down a couple dozen points. Just because they couldn’t get more money from interest.
Interestingly our poster here has put the reason, I hadn’t thought about it that way, but how valuable you are to creditors is what the score is. Paying off early losses then some money, so score goes down. Hilarious. What an amazing system! ☹️
The system isn’t for seeing how responsible you are, it’s for seeing how reliable you are.
They seem like similar ideas but they are quite different.
Responsibility is something capitalism can’t afford.
Fair enough!
That’s not why it went down. It probably went down because they had less credit extended to them after paying off the loan. How much credit you’re using affects your score.
They don’t care that u paid it off early. They care that your loan to income ratio just took a hit.
That doesn’t really make sense either. Why would a high amount of debt relative to income be a good thing? How does it indicate a person is more likely or capable of paying off a loan? If anything it means the opposite.
Because it’s a racket
A high amount of debt to income is absolutely a bad thing, both in life and for your credit score
Lol 5hey want u to carry a higher balance. It’s not that hard.
Sounds good!
Oh goody. Just thought of another amazing use for ai! You could use it to figure out the maximum length and interest a single borrower would be expected to pay and set the terms on that! Wunderbar!
You know there are people in bank and credit institutions that have been doing this for centuries? Probably millennia… EU explicitly requires that some of this is done by what you call AI (i.e. mathematical models) because they are fairer than humans and safer for customers and society
Check basel III for an intro on the topic
Just a small correction because I worked around that area (not for loans but for investment), it’s all Algorithms rather than AI.
Algorithms are basically mathematical formulas turned into code, whilst AI is a totally different beast that can produce quite different results on slightly different inputs and it’s not really made by turning mathematical models into code but rather it’s trained with real world data containing inputs and outputs and “somehow” finds the patterns in that data and can predict the correct outputs if given fresh, never seen before inputs.
AI is probably used for fraud detection (and I expect nowadays it’s likely used in algorithmic trading to try and predict market movements) but unless a lot has changed since I was in the business, it’s not used for valuations.
It was just to give an idea that what OP mentioned is already an established thing, fairer than alternatives.
Most of the time trivial linear logistic regression is used in this context. Nowadays decision tree ensambles are pretty heavily used, which are ML. Simply they perform better with fewer data than neural networks on structured tabular data.
What you refer to as AI is probably methods based on deep learning. The truth is that they work exactly as any other algorithm that you are referring to. They are used for regression and classification, same way as a standard linear regression. The difference is that the models are non linear, and their complexity is so that a lot of data are needed to train them.
But conceptually one can absolutely create a credit score with deep neural networks. It is just an overkill, for performances that are likely worst than a random forest on relatively small training datasets
Neural networks-based methods are indeed used in fraud detection
Well, I learn something every day!
Cheers!
No probs :)
Ummm… no. Not in tune with that, so interesting to know that I’m not the first! Haha, thanks!
We don’t need more discrimination in loan approval. A few years ago, Amazon built an AI that would look at resumes and rate how likely the candidate would be hired. The AI trained itself to recognize female sounding resumes (went to women’s only college, is involved in women’s organizations, does not use manly enough language) and flag those as undesirables.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-com-jobs-automation-insight-idUSKCN1MK08G
We don’t need but we’re going to get!!!
Jesus christ that’s dystopian
It’s not so much dystopian as it is just buggy software
Ah ok. I don’t know much about it, but I’ve heard that AI could sometimes be negative toward commonly discriminated against groups because the data that it’s trained with is. (Side note: is that true? someone pls correct me if it’s not). I jumped to the conclusion that this was the same thing. My bad
what it did it expose just how much inherent bias there is in hiring. even just name and gender alone.
That is both true and pivotal to this story
It’s a major hurdle in some uses of AI
An AI is only as good as its training data. If the data is biased, then the AI will have the same bias. The fact that going to a women’s college was considered a negative (and not simply marked down as an education of unknown quality) is proof against the idea that many in the STEM field hold (myself included) that there is a lack of qualified female candidates but not an active bias against them.
When buggy software is used by unreasonably powerful entities to practise (and defend) discrimination that’s dystopian…
Except it wasn’t actually launched, and they didn’t defend its discrimination but rather ended the project.
Damn that’s really dystopian. It’s a credit score that directly measures how profitable you are to others as a human.
Since all money has switched to credit, “credit score” is the same as “money score”, and “worth” is the same as “con artist ability”.
The specific rule you point out is stupid but easy to hack. Your score didn’t go down because they lost the interest you’d have paid. When you pay off a secured debt, the loaned amount is deducted from your total credit potential, which increases your utilized credit percentage. The hack is to open a line of credit against the secured asset before it’s paid off or another line of unsecured credit. Your credit utilization will drop, thus increasing your score.
My score is over 800 and has been for over a decade. I have like 12 credit cards but only use 2 and pay them off every month… Costco for the store and gas and a high cash back card for everything else. The others I keep open with 1 small purchase each year. Every store wants you to have one, so they’re easy to get. I have added and paid off multiple small to medium (10-60k) secured loans over the years and my score only fluctuates a little for a few weeks then goes back because my total credit with the dozen credit cards is so large.
I like video games, and the challenges they provide.
The game you’re playing is stupid, and no one should have to install that shit.
Good on you got doing it I guess, but it continues to persist, which is problematic.
It’s not really a game, more of an exploit.
But most people won’t need to do that any way, it’s overkill for like 99% of people.
If you have a credit card that you use and pay off regularly, a couple of paid off car loans or something like that and no overdue bills on your history, you’ll be absolutely fine.
Eh.
Exploits A) often benefit the player by letting them skip a lot of work with big rewards, and B) usually get fixed real fast.
Now if doing this meant you never had to work a job in your life again and you could get actually make significant income, sure, I’d consider it an exploit.
I can’t agree with you on this.
It’s not a game u fucking moron it is a measure of responsibility.
Just admit you’re irresponsible and can’t hack the most simple math required to determine risk.
Fucking assholes blaming the ruler cuz they can’t measure. Lmfao.
No, it’s a game.
And thanks for making it personal. Even tho it was entirely unnecessary.
Dick face.
Where would one look to find a high cash back card? I’ve been wanting to improve my score by switching to using a credit card for primary shopping that I pay off, but I can’t seem to find any good offers/deals/contracts/whatever term you’d use for a credit card. Probably my score though.
Nerdwallet has a ranking of credit cards based on categories (travel, cash back, etc.). You can try checking it out.
For simple cashback without yearly fees, 2% on everything or 5% on some things is about as good as it gets. I do everything on chase for simplicity and I’ve been reasonably happy with them. Twice now they have detected someone trying to use my credit card number (not sure how they got it), stopped it, and alerted me instantly. I mostly use the freedom unlimited card which was one of the better cards when I got it a few years ago.
Discover and Amex pay most statistically but some.places don’t accept them for that reason
That’s only on the VantageScore - the free score most places show. It isn’t actually used by more than a handful of institutions.
FICO, the system used by the vast majority of lenders, considers closed accounts just the same as open.
I see where you’re coming from.
Credit scores aren’t about how responsible you are, they’re about how well you can stick to an agreement.
paying off the loan early is a part of any agreement, otherwise it wouldnt be an option
credit scores are entirely and exclusively about how good of a debt slave you are
deleted by creator
Not just paying a loan off early, even having the loan eventually drop off the credit report completely. This month the only change was an old, paid-off mortgage and line of credit dropped off my credit report. My credit score dropped substantially.
That’s not why it went down…lol.
Tell me u don’t understand how credit works…
Enlighten us
I did below
usually I love to shit on muricans, But Germany has something similar. A private company called “Schufa”. This private company secretly calculates your credit score (no one knows realy how they calculate it) which determines if you get an apartment (for rent) or not. Living in the wrong street already kills your credit score here.
If the Schufa doesnt have information about you, it counts as negative.
As someone, who loves dunking on the Schufa, as any good German should. The Schufa-Score isn’t nearly as insane as some American credit score systems. Having an registered checkingsaccount & no outstanding bills or debt payments is enough data to have a high score.
You don’t need to repay debt to show, that you are able to.
Credit scores are the West’s social credit system.
If we value our freedom from a controlling, oppressive system, then we should penalize the creation, selling, buying and usage of credit score data. And we should keep on top of it to include any emerging attempts to re-establish an equivalent system.
I wish we Americans had more backbone to push back on corporate enshitification in general.
Living on the wrong street? What does that entail?
Drug dealing, wrong skin colored neighbors, rabid squirrels stealing food from your kitchen… you know “the wrong street”.
TIL there are streets in Germany one can be homeless in, and it doesn’t affect your credit score.
(I’m joking about your usage of “in” as opposed to “on”, immediately following talking about not getting a place to live)
Huh?
I was saying that renting an apartment in the wrong street is a factor for a bad credit score here in Germany.
Edit: you can’t move into another apartment with a bad creditscore
I think they were making a grammatische joke.
So instead of being racist to just Americans, you’re being racist to both Americans and Germans?
deleted by creator
Let me guess, you are a murican?
Why yes, I am a proud american. Why do you ask?
For 25 years I’ve only carried a debt on my credit card one time, and that was for a few months under special circumstances. I have a top credit score.
It’s a stupid game, but it’s easy to play.
Why do Americans think you need to carry a debt to build credit? That is the opposite.
I put EVERYTHING on credit card, and pay everything off on time. Never missed a payment. My credit score was the highest it can be by the time I turned 21. I’ve never paid a penny in fees or interest.
That’s not what they said, and Americans, in general, do not think that.
Holy hell they sure do. A lot of Americans don’t even understand you don’t immediately start accruing interest. You clearly have not witnessed the absolute insanity of Americans saying that they use a debit card because they “don’t want to pay interest” or they “only spend money they have”.
Also the comment you’re replying to was likely in agreement with the premise established by the person they were replying to.
The ignorance is astounding but to be expected. 12 years of mandatory schooling and not one class on personal finance. These are not difficult concepts. They’re just never conveyed.
The 12 years of mandatory schooling that they already get is wasted on most of them anyway. Mention President McKinley, and most Americans will respond with “who?”
Education in the US sucks in a lot of ways for a lot of people for a lot of reasons, and most “students” don’t end up retaining much of anything as a result of those forces. We’re trained to get grades based on attendance and participation, from material that is taught to the test. Very little of your grade has anything to do with whether you actually learned, digested, and retained anything…
We were all taught about the Whiskey Rebellion in high school. But bring it up in any conversation about taxes, and 99% of the time you’ll get a blank stare, or “the what?”
So we can pile “financial literacy” on top of all the other things that are jammed into American curricula, and it won’t make a damn bit of difference in the end. Because it doesn’t matter what is taught - it’s not going to be learned anyway. Payday lenders will still make bank, buy-here-pay-here dealerships will keep recycling the same cars at a huge profit, the poor will still play the lottery, and Santander will keep making car loans to under-qualified applicants at extortionate interest rates. People will still buy $70k pickup trucks on a $50k salary, and roll their negative equity into the next overpriced consumer wealth/masculinity signaling device.
I arrived to the US less than 5 years ago and I have top credit score. I never carry a balance, open credit cards that offer a lot of credit, benefits and bonus to increase my available credit (I have about 6 or 7 cards at the moment) and just wait. In less than a year I already had 740 which was enough to get a car loan with 1.9% apr (lowest offered was 1.85%)
I’m the same as you, and I think we kinda had an advantage because we started with a blank slate. No student loans (if you arrived as a working adult), no prior debts, and hitting the ground running (if you arrived with a job waiting for you).
Survivorship bias!!
Not survivorship bias.
Care to elaborate on why not?
Just so I know. I’m not saying you’re wrong.
For it to be survivorship bias you would need to address a failure based only off successful cases (survivors). But in this particular case, the premise is that one can attain a good score with or without accruing debt. That’s just a factually accurate statement about reality; it has nothing to do with addressing issues.
I think (and I’m really not trying to put words in your mouth here so correct me if I’m wrong) that the premise you are arguing for is that most Americans will, at some point, rely on borrowed money to make ends meet. In that case it would make more sense to claim survivorship bias because a well-off individual claiming that they don’t need loans is not evidence that there is no problem with our general reliance on loans. They are just a success case or a “survivor”.
I understand what survivorship bias is, I just don’t see how it applies here. Could you explain?
That just because you managed to do that doesn’t make it the norm.
You could argue that that simply isn’t an option for many people. If you can live life without using a credit card implies you have not struggled for that extra cash, whereas some people simply don’t make enough to not use it.
I still don’t see how this makes it survivorship bias.
But that being said, if you’re not going to be able to pay off something in a few months, then you can’t afford it with or without a card, because buying it with the card just makes it more expensive. Sometimes you need to tide yourself over, I did that when my wife was switching jobs and we were moving so there were extra expenses. But I quickly paid it all off when we returned to normal income.
I believe it’s SB just for the fact that having a line of credit available and not using it simply isn’t an option for some people.
Imagine you have a line of credit and you lose your job, but you still need to feed your family. Then that person is going to do what they need to provide food.
The bias come from you commenting in the vain of I did this, ergo everybody else should be the same, when in fact we are not all the same.
Similar to how someone from a council estate can make it as a politician, which neglects to consider that 99% of people from council estates with that dream didn’t make it.
I hope that makes more sense. I suck at explaining things.
deleted by creator
Better credit scores will definitely net you a lower interest rate, though. Zero credit history is a major liability for lenders, so even small banks or credit unions with private investors will want some kind of benefit or incentive for taking on an increased risk of default.
The real fucked up part about credit scores is that it seems like it should be something the federal government regulates, but they don’t. For-profit companies do. And when they get hacked and expose all of your data so scammers can assume your identity for eternity, they can’t be held liable or responsible. All of that just so lenders can feel safer about who they give money to.
I’m actually part of a credit union and would recommend it to many people. The credit union didn’t get interest rates as low as what the big banks did a few years ago, but they’re also not as high as the big banks are currently.
One thing I really liked about the credit union was that they didn’t use my credit score when deciding my interest rate, they only checked it to make sure it didn’t have any glaring issues. Also I like that the credit union doesn’t sell my mortgage to a third party.
I also would recommend credit unions over banks. I have a local one that I use but I also have an account with PenFed, which is open to the whole nation and is one of the few places that offers a 2% unlimited cashback on everything no-fees card.
deleted by creator
Regulate how? It’s a tool for lenders to decide if they want to lend or not, and on what terms.
And also a tool for landlords to decide whether or not to rent to you, for insurers to decide what your rates should be, and employers to decide whether or not to hire you. It isn’t just about bank loans.
What about transparency? Sure, you can request a free copy of your credit report… once per year. Any more often than that and you have to pay. How do I dispute errors or inaccuracies on my report? How do the big three calculate my credit score? Why do each of them come up with a different number for the same individual despite sharing a similar set of parameters, and which one is used against me if I am denied for something on the basis of poor credit? What happens when they mishandle my sensitive data like my Social Security number, and what kind of legal options do I have to seek recompense?
You might be surprised to learn that the government does in fact regulate consumer reporting agencies. Ever heard of the Fair Credit Reporting Act? A lot of those rules came about from the systemic abuse of the clients of these credit reporting firms, including institutional racism.
The question is, why are these firms still allowed to operate as independent agencies and not as an apparatus of the state? What is the value of having these entities be private?
I don’t disagree that these services are necessary for our economy to function, and we can’t just tell people that they can’t come up with a system to determine loan risk for their clients, but there are some serious problems with the way credit scores work and how they are used in making certain decisions that should, in my opinion, be handled by an entity not concerned with making a profit off of their mostly unwilling clientele.
deleted by creator
They may do that for an extra percentage point of interest.
I was just considering this the other day.
Taking this logic to the extreme, wouldn’t someone with liquidity but no credit score face serious issues towards accessing housing and services, as per the post?
I’m in this boat and it kind of sucks. I have a lot of savings after a few decades being a programmer, but my credit history consists of nothing but a few late bill payments over the years - never had a credit card or a house or car loan. To rent an apartment I always had to get my brother or father to co-sign the lease, or else I would just rent a room from somebody (which usually never required a credit check). I can’t get a credit card from a bank or even cards from stores.
On the other hand, it kind of doesn’t suck since I have no debt whatsoever, and I just bought the house I’ll spend the rest of my life in for cash. For the last fifteen years I’ve driven cars I bought for cash on eBay or Autotrader. There were times in my life when if I’d had access to easy credit I would have dug a big hole for myself, and the (very rational) unwillingness of anybody to lend me money saved from financial disaster.
If you’re good with your money, you should at least consider cards with cash back rewards. You can get cards that give you 2% back on everything. BCP will give you 6% on groceries but comes with a $95 annual fee.
I always pay my cards the moment a charge posts. No point in carrying debt and risking paying any interest.
Nicely done, this is not easy to do!
Dude if you didn’t spend most of ur life taking out credit cards and just paying them off to build credit youre a complete moron!
You’re a programmer and this isn’t rocket science. Lol. Talk about failing at life.
For the most part, it depends on the liquidity.
10k in reserves, you’ll get a few chances.
10 mil in reserves, they’ll let you fuck them. Rawdog.
owe the bank 1million, the bank owns you
owe the bank 100million, you own the bank
That was not a pleasant image!
My mortgage company didn’t even look at my credit score once they saw my savings and income, which were REALLY not that much, just OK. But apparently good enough. So, I think credit score is only one thing they look at, and other positive things can outweigh a negative score.
What were your savings, if you don’t mind? I managed to get a house priced at 274k this year with only 20k saved, but a really good credit score, and about 100k income between me and my partner.
I don’t remember exactly, but it was probably not far off 20k saved with more like 50k income. House price was quite a bit lower than that, no equity from any previous homes owned.
Credit score usually just determines what your interest rate is. Not whether you get the loan or not. Your cash flow (direct deposits) are more indicative of whether u can pay the loan vs credit score.
FREE TO PLAY
(*Includes
Microtransactions)Life is literally just IRL 2007Scape
Life is IRL
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
has that affected you at all?
deleted by creator
I’m still fucking pissed about that. All of their equipment should have been confiscated, securely erased, and melted down. Then we should have sent them a bill for disposing of that data securely, and a massive (like billion dollar) fine for fucking up that badly.
Abolish currency, revert to trading sheep and goats.
But I have noting of value to barter, except this ass…
And you’ll go to jail for it. Slavery for you!
Based
I refuse to participate in this and I have no idea what my credit score is.
I bought my land and house through owner finance, my debt was to a single individual. No banks involved, no credit check. Obviously this isn’t always an option, but it still is an option in some cases, and it’s a damn valuable option when it does present itself.
I buy used cars only, either through owner finance or paid in full. No banks.
I have never had a loan from a bank.
I bought my land and house through owner finance, my debt was to a single individual.
That’s cool and all, but it isn’t practical if the person selling you the house also has a mortgage they need to pay off before moving. Shy of paying in cash, there’s not a home in my city of Houston I could have managed that with.
I buy used cars only, either through owner finance or paid in full. No banks.
I mean, that’s totally cool. But, again, it requires you to have a significant amount of cash on-hand and someone willing to sell a decent vehicle at a reasonable price. Possible, but certainly not trivial. And with the sheer number of dealerships and resellers and outright scammers in the business, its a minefield.
I have never had a loan from a bank.
Its certainly nice to have enough cash on hand to manage this trick. But good luck going to college without a parent’s savings. Even city colleges charge you far more than a part-time high school diploma job brings in.
I did know a couple of people who were born into relative poverty and managed to be totally unbanked while having a relatively easy time of it. But they were both sex workers. Not a career for the faint of heart.
I mean, again, obviously it’s not an option all the time. Just use common sense
As for the other points, I don’t think this comment really required someone to come through and cite it and break it down like I was some sort of Jordan Peterson esque life advice coach. I was giving my personal experience on not using the credit system, simply explaining how I personally have avoided the subject, and making the claim that there are other avenues. It’s not an essay, my dude. I’m not trying to sell anything to you. Again, just use common sense.
I just proved its possible, not that it’s feasible for YOU. Again, not trying to sell you anything
Just use common sense
I don’t think the issue is an absence of sense. What we’ve got is a massive asset bubble that benefits the financial sector. Very often, there simply isn’t a good choice to make. You’re either living in a slum at inflated costs or you’re stuck living way out in the exurbs (where you’ll be burning through your expensive car) or even potentially homeless.
You can be up to your eyeballs in debt despite making the “savvy” move at every turn.
Okay? Again, I’m not trying to sell you anything, dude.
Kinda sounds like you live in a high cost of living area and are mad about it, and aren’t smart enough not to go into debt trivially.
Also, my just use common sense comment was about you and your reading comprehension, it’s a bit off today.
Your “score” is only there to sell you more score. This is the side effect of being able to access your own credit history (how very generous of them)
Every lender has their own criteria, and uses your credit history to generate their own score.
By “arbitrarily take on debt for years”, are they referring to myth that you need to carry a balance on a credit card to help your credit score?
If you aren’t aware, that is very much incorrect. All you’re doing is lining the pockets of the credit card company. Pay your credit card statement in full each month and don’t carry a balance to avoid paying interest.
There are certain exceptions, but I’m considering them out of scope for this case.
You need to have a form of credit, like a credit card. Even if you pay it in full every month, that’s still debt. In my native country almost nobody owns credit cards, just debit cards. I’ve been living in the US for 12 years now, building credit wasn’t that hard, but it took several years, I have almost perfect score now and own a house, but the whole idea was dumb to me too when I started. And I still need to remind my wife that the money in our bank accounts is not really how much we have, because we need to subtract credit card balances out of it.
Are we from the same country? Debt is something I don’t understand unless for a home or a car. If I have money to buy a tv, I pay in advance, or I wait until I have the money. I am not judging different points of view, just this is how I was raised
If you have $500 for a few TV, and you want a positive credit score, buy the TV with a credit card. Then, before the interest kicks in, pay off the credit card.
Rinse and repeat.
It’s a stupid fucking game, tho.
I live in a place where I don’t need credit score, luckily…
That’s fair. It absolutely is a debt.
I just wanted to make sure that the 4chan OP wasn’t referring to debt as carrying a balance and paying interest. I know two people who were previously under this incorrect assumption and basically giving away money for free to their credit card companies.
But it’s free debt. You’re losing money by not using a credit card. Points
Well, this it ignores the external costs. Companies are charged by the credit processors and those fees get passed to customers. Some vendors will explicitly charge more for credit, but most vendors just raise prices for everyone. The amount of money you get in points doesn’t cover the added costs.
You’re not wrong… but as you said, those are external costs. While it’s fine to wish for a simpler, more equitable system, given that the prices are mostly the same no matter how you pay, wouldn’t you rather be part of the group receiving the benefits? Paying with cash or check or a non-reward card is leaving money on the table. The cost of handling cash and checks isn’t necessarily any lower than credit card processing fees and people don’t have much tolerance for strange new forms of payment, which leaves merchants without much leverage to push back against rules which prevent them from passing on the higher costs of the reward cards to those using them.
I’d rather see all companies pass their fees only to those using credit cards. Then there are no external costs and everyone is in the clear about what’s going on. I like the convenience of credit cards, and sometimes I’d be happy to pay the extra fee. Other times I don’t. I suspect many people are the same eay.
In the US it was ruled that card companies cannot stop vendors from passing on costs, so you see a lot more of that now. By raising awareness of the issue, it will continue to progress toward that system. It will also foster competition, where card processors will be inclined to lower fees because customers will see the charges, whereas before they were invisible.
I’ve seen “cash discounts” in many places but that’s a bit of a false economy as cash can cost just as much to handle as an average credit card in the form of security and “shrinkage”. I’ve never seen a business charge a higher rate based on what kind of card you use, which is what it would take to have an impact on the rewards system.
Carrying more debt (with the ability to pay it ) does in fact raise your score.
Are you confusing debt with credit line/limit, or am I misunderstanding your comment?
If you are referring to debt, could you provide me with a source for your claim?
I linked to myfico.com in my previous comment which is run by FICO - the company behind the FICO score. I think they would know a thing or two about what affects your credit score.
read your credit report for proof
Unpopular opinion, not really opinion but…
Credit score system is designed for the people with money to allow you to borrow that money. It’s based on a curve system so… If your at the bottom of the list is because 99% of the population is better than you at learning how to play the score system. Tldr: the score system was not designed with me in mind.
I don’t know if it works differently in the US but the best way to build your credit score is to not take on debt.
Keeping your credit utilization low and not missing any payments is the key. It’s an indication of how likely you are to meet the payments.
If you max your credit cards out and just pay the minimum amount, carrying thousands of dollars of debt and as a result can’t get a mortgage or a car loan because your credit score is shit then the system is working as expected.
Yeah I want to emphasize this too. It doesn’t “require you to take debt”, it checks to see if you pay your debts on time. If you carry a $5 credit card bill and pay it next month that has a positive effect. If you don’t pay that it doesn’t matter how much it is, you missed a payment, that’s a negative. You don’t have to have a bunch of loans to have a good credit score, you have to pay your bills.
Thats why having a credit card can be good for your credit score because you are effectively borrowing money until the end of the month, then paying it back. That signals on your credit score “hey this person borrows $1000 a month, and pays it back every time. They’re a reliable borrower”
I don’t know if it works differently in the US but the best way to build your credit score is to not take on debt.
The best way to build a score is to take out small amounts of debt and repay them in a timely fashion. But you’re still better off with a car note than without. You’re still better off with a credit card than without. You want an optimal number of data points for the system to track. And you want a history clear of missed payments.
Without that data history, it becomes very difficult to secure apartment space or access anything other than student credit. And, because you absolutely need a car and an apartment if you want to exist in America in anything close to comfort, that means you functionally need a credit score.
Unpopular but very truthful.
Idk, doesn’t seem like magic to me. Just pay your bills. Grow your existing credit cards. Spend responsibly. Keep below 30% utilization of credit limit of each card and overall.
Start early (when you are 18) and by the time you actually need to use it (car or mortgage products). Then you will be gucci.
It’s a shame basic financial literacy is not taught in schools.
yeah but if you’re responsible enough to only spend money you actually have, you’re fucked
My dad told me to never use credit, never even get credit cards, pay for everything in cash. If I didn’t do my own research and start building my credit score when I moved out at 21, I would probably not be living in my own house at the moment
deleted by creator
not much different than china’s “social credit” it seems
