Let's take a look at this: Aaron Neumann wrote:
> Predatory Lending is exactly what it says it is - loans, often by huge > companies like Wells Fargo, that are unfair and on abusive terms. These > lenders target (prey on) low income and minority home-buyers, and capitalize > on these buyers’ lack of knowledge of complicated transactions — or use > outright deception — to close loans that lead to a loss of equity or > foreclosure. These practices are often concentrated in poor and minority > neighborhoods where better loans are not readily available, and the > foreclosures and loss of equity can have devastating effects on already > fragile communities. There's a way around this: don't take out the loan. Or better your credit rating/score so you don't have to get a loan at an extravagant interest rate. I'm NOT saying deception is OK......... but if you can't understand the fine print, you shouldn't be signing. Last I checked, that was taught in Common Sense 101. (If Wells Fargo is deceiving loan applicants, I trust you have proof of the prosecutions.) Anyway, for crying out loud, it ain't that tough.......... if the interest rate is too high, don't take out the loan. If a better loan is not available, then do something so that a better loan can eventually be available. I did. It takes work and prudent financial decisions and saving. But forcing businesses to loan money at a government set interest rate (which will be the end result of such an ordinance) because the forms are complicated and the words are big doesn't help anyone. Do we really think that these financial institutions are going to lend money to poor credit risks after such an ordinance is passed? > As you can see, an anti-predatory lending ordinance is not a "another law to > protect people from themselves," but a law to protect our citizens from > unfair lending practices by large financial institutions. Translation: an anti-predatory lending ordinance IS about protecting people from themselves, but we'll just say it isn't. If "large financial institutions" are working within the current law, and people still don't like doing business with them because of the interest rates or the small print or the complicated forms, then people should stop doing business with them. >>>snip the history of anti-predatory lending campaigns and the failure of the ordinance to pass in Minneapolis<<< If an such an ordinance passes in Minneapolis we will, once again, have yet another example of government intrusion into business, government regulation designed to protect people from making decisions that may not be in their best interest. The Nanny-state moves forward and government furthers its stranglehold on knowing what is better for me. Mike Thompson Windom LRT: 2 MPPA: 0 REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
