Judge nixes a Biden rule in order to keep medical debt on credit reports | CNN Business
Judge nixes a Biden rule in order to keep medical debt on credit reports | CNN Business
You're viewing a single thread.
At the risk of being downvoted to hell. I agree. This rule never made sense as medical debt is a real thing and it does impact someone's ability to pay back a loan. The banks were never going to eat this cost, they were going to spread it to everyone else. The real problem is the cost of the medical care and with insurance. This is just something that sounded nice to the dem base.
Medical debt is in no way the same as other debt though. It's not the same as real debt. For one you're dealing with the cartel system that is medical insurance. So it's not a fair Marketplace to begin with. However the real kicker is you don't have a choice on it. Oftentimes you're injured and are brought to a hospital and you don't have time or the ability to call your insurances 24/7 helpline to figure out what the prices are and where what hospital you should go to. Medical debt is often involuntary and a matter of life and death. Not even mentioning the Absurd disgusting costs of it.
You simply can't compare it to someone taking too big of a loan for a car. And frankly saying well the real problem is something else doesn't really help actual living human beings. Because that real problem is not going to be solved and this could have helped people. You can't let this Pie in the Sky idealism stop us from helping actual people right now. Someone shouldn't die on the streets because you think an ideal should be achieved first.
It is real debt in the sense that you have an obligation to pay it back. Sure, you don't have a choice to take it, but that doesn't mean it won't effect your finances.
Should debt to loan sharks and illegal bookies be on your credit report too?
I'm sure if they could get that info it would be on there. Seems like it would be useful for loan decisions.
Yikes.
Of course they would.
The question was "should they" not "would they"
Right I feel like you're all missing my point, I probably didn't explain my thought process well.
The premise is that: giving out loans involves risk. To make the risk worth while, the lender needs more upside(higher rate). The more unknowns, the more risk, thus higher rates. My logic is that if lenders had more information then they would be better positioned to evaluate risk, thus borrowing could become less expensive for people that are less risky. This is due to competition between lenders for customers. On that, based on friends getting mortgages recently, it does actually feel like there is a decent amount of competition that space specifically.
I will admit that in one of the other threads someone linked to a study that proves this wrong for medical debt specifically.
stop simping for capitol
Disgusting
Of course it's real debt, but taking it on is involuntary. It does not have the same behavioral predictive power as debt that exists because of bad financial decisions.
It might affect your ability to pay, but less so if it is not on the credit report to begin with.
Studies by the CFPB say you are wrong. Where is your evidence that you are correct?
Thanks for the link! Yeah it does seem like my understanding is incorrect here "CFPB’s research reveals that a medical bill on a person’s credit report is a poor predictor of whether they will repay a loan,"
My argument is a purely logic based one. Lenders make money by giving out loans, so it's against their interest to deny loans to people which are capable of repaying them.
So the finding is a bit surprising, but willing to admit I'm wrong here :)
I mean I guess it makes sense. You have an accident and suddenly went into debt for 500,000 dollars. You need to replace your car also. You certainly could afford a 400 dollar a month car note. You most likely can't afford the 2000/month to pay it off in 20 years.
There hits a point of so far beyond reasonable that you just start saying fuck it and don't even try.
Their feels