It's time to bring back usury laws.

[notyoueither]

dp

[notyoueither]

People should be free to work for $1 an hour.

People should be free to borrow from loan sharks.

People should be free to sell body parts.

People should be free to make commitments for houses they cannot afford... oops. Scratch that last one.

[KrazyHorse]

All of those sound pretty good to me.

[KrazyHorse]

Also, I find it hilarious that you're attempting to conflate credit card companies charging high rates with loan sharks who pursue extralegal tactics to extract their money.

[notyoueither]

You are rapidly becoming the poster child of the math geek who has zero clue about the world beyond your numbers.

You've found a likely lucrative use of the talent with numbers if you make good on your threats to join the ranks of the geeks who run calculators for bankers. Good for you.

You'll still be a sad excuse for a human being and a waste of the investment made by society to get you to the point you went very, very wrong.

The sad part is that not only do I know more about quantitative subjects than you do, I also express myself more clearly, and in general can show you to be the bloviating fool that you are across half a continent.

Speaking of blow hards.

When someone disagrees with you, all you have is insults.

You bring less than David Floyd. At least he can argue for his positions, whether I agree with them or not.

[KrazyHorse]

So far this discussion appears to be:

"Nobody would ever need a loan at that rate"

"I came close to being in that situation, and don't think the deal would have been too bad for me"

"Yeah, but we mean for other people; you know, all those stupid people who can't be trusted with their own money"

" "

[ShaneWalter]

Regardless, I agree with NYE. Organ transplants should not be done based on who has the most money. I find the idea of international trade in organs abhorrent.

I find the idea that your squeamishness would prevent somebody from earning enough money to save his child from an easily treatable disease or sending that child to a better school to be pretty abhorrent myself.

You just want to keep the horror as far from your mind as possible by dribbling out development aid and allowing the darkies to continue to live short, brutish, nasty lives.

Frankly, that is more than a little offensive.

My opposition to any form of international trade in organs has nothing to do with squeamishness.

You talk about dribbling out development aid? Why don't we talk about the hundreds of billions of dollars of debt that has crippled many developing countries and left them unable to provide even basic government service. The debt that was often used to build palaces for dictators while OECD banks and international institutions turned a blind eye.

Why don't we talk about trade liberalization that was encouraged by OECD countries. Trade liberalization according to the OECD nations of course means that developing countries open their borders, while OECD nations of course leave their borders closed to anything that developing countries are able to export.

Why don't we talk about the countless human rights abuses that governments in developed countries have been willing to condone.

Time and time again, OECD countries have abused and raped developing countries, all the while saying "if only you guys would listen, things would get better." "If only you guys understood the miracles of the market."

So what, now you want to liberalize markets to such an extent that those in developing countries can sell their kidneys? And you say you want to do this for the benefit of the people in developing countries? **** that. You want a cheap supply of fresh organs for you and your friends. This has nothing to do with benefiting developing countries.

I want to ignore how people in poverty live, KH? Seriously? Have you ever been outside of the developed world?

[KrazyHorse]

Speaking of blow hards.

When someone disagrees with you, all you have is insults.

You bring less than David Floyd. At least he can argue for his positions, whether I agree with them or not.

I've already provided plenty of arguments for my positions here. All you're left with is some sort of vague nonsense about how the people need to be protected from themselves.

If somebody like yourself manages to avoid falling prey to loan sharks I'm sure we can trust even the most simpleminded individuals to do the same.

[notyoueither]

Also, I find it hilarious that you're attempting to conflate credit card companies charging high rates with loan sharks who pursue extralegal tactics to extract their money.

What about when credit card companies get the rules changed so you cannot get away from them?

It's better than loan-sharking. The law is with them.

[Thoth]

There is no way in the hell they would have gotten the right bankers. I'm not sure anybody knows who those are.

Hanging bankers is like hanging lawyers. It's always a good idea.

[notyoueither]

So far this discussion appears to be:

"Nobody would ever need a loan at that rate"

"I came close to being in that situation, and don't think the deal would have been too bad for me"

"Yeah, but we mean for other people; you know, all those stupid people who can't be trusted with their own money"

" "

If you think you needed a loan at 80% for $500 in your situation, you are either a liar or very stupid.

Which is it?

[notyoueither]

I've already provided plenty of arguments for my positions here. All you're left with is some sort of vague nonsense about how the people need to be protected from themselves.

If somebody like yourself manages to avoid falling prey to loan sharks I'm sure we can trust even the most simpleminded individuals to do the same.

You have provided nothing. You are a criminal. You should be thrown from a helicopter!

[ShaneWalter]

Frankly, KH is a smart enough guy, I'm sure there's lots he could do to help people in the developing world. Instead, he sits in his office in Baltimore (or is it Boston?) and proposes international organ trade.

Then, while living in the state that probably has done the most to ensure that children are unable to go to school (by insisting developing countries charge user fees) and has also done the most to prevent medical care to children (again by insisting on user fees for healthcare, and further by pushing for international intellectual property agreements) he accuses me of being responsible for those crimes.

If the debt that developing countries owed to developed countries was wiped out, it would do much much more than any international organ trade. Oh, but that would hurt KH's buddies. We can't do that. Instead let's have an international organ trade. That'll help the developing world! Yeah thats the ticket!

Going by KH's MO, I've probably labeled myself a "****" and he's ignored me.

[ShaneWalter]

So far this discussion appears to be:

"Nobody would ever need a loan at that rate"

"I came close to being in that situation, and don't think the deal would have been too bad for me"

"Yeah, but we mean for other people; you know, all those stupid people who can't be trusted with their own money"

" "

The thing is, you weren't even close to being in that situation. You've proven nothing.

Not only did you manage to find an alternative, but even if that alternative had not existed, you would have been able to get a credit card at an APR of 12 - 30%.

The only people that would want a credit card with 80% APR are those who already have trashed their credit rating.

[KrazyHorse]

Frankly, that is more than a little offensive.

Good.

My opposition to any form of international trade in organs has nothing to do with squeamishness.

Then explain it in terms which do not reduce to "4 legs good, 2 legs bad"

You talk about dribbling out development aid? Why don't we talk about the hundreds of billions of dollars of debt that has crippled many developing countries and left them unable to provide even basic government service. The debt that was often used to build palaces for dictators while OECD banks and international institutions turned a blind eye.

I have no idea why you think this is relevant to the discussion at hand. The question of which sovereign debts a country's people should be held responsible for is an extremely difficult one, and I'm certainly not going to give you a glib answer about it.

Why don't we talk about trade liberalization that was encouraged by OECD countries. Trade liberalization according to the OECD nations of course means that developing countries open their borders, while OECD nations of course leave their borders closed to anything that developing countries are able to export.

First off, I'm in favour of unilateral elimination of all trade barriers not in place for geopolitical reasons.

Secondly, your characterization is nonsense. OECD countries allow importation of a great number of goods which they had previously been producing themselves.

Thirdly, if you're going to play the international trade as competitive advantage game I'm simply going to start ignoring you. The gains from trade are two sided, in EACH DIRECTION.

Why don't we talk about the countless human rights abuses that governments in developed countries have been willing to condone.

Sorry to tell you this, but it's become increasingly obvious to me as time's gone on that even devastating international sanctions don't actually cause repressive governments to capitulate on human rights issues. If anything, the opposite. We do not have to condone the abuses in order to allow trade with these countries.

Time and time again, OECD countries have abused and raped developing countries, all the while saying "if only you guys would listen, things would get better." "If only you guys understood the miracles of the market."

at this tripe. "Abused and raped"?

Let me guess, you think that forcing international companies to pay their workers the minimum wage in Canada to people in Bolivia somehow helps Bolivians?

So what, now you want to liberalize markets to such an extent that those in developing countries can sell their kidneys? And you say you want to do this for the benefit of the people in developing countries? **** that. You want a cheap supply of fresh organs for you and your friends. This has nothing to do with benefiting developing countries.

Yes, because my friends and I snack on human kidneys.

I want to help BOTH SIDES of the trade. But I care more about the person in the developing country because his situation is, generally, more desperate than that of a person in the first world who has in all likelihood already lived longer than people in the developing world can hope to. Try to wrap your head around this: people DIE every day in the 3rd world for lack of a few hundred dollars for food or medicine. They live their lives in drudgery and poverty because their parents couldn't afford to teach them adequately. They work themselves to death to stave off starvation for a few more months. Now you're going to tell me that IN THAT SITUATION it's for THEIR good that you tell them they can't sell one of their kidneys to a willing buyer?

Please. Your objection serves nobody other than yourself and your false indignation.