Google’s ad ban for payday lending is a sad day for the working poor. A private business trying to meet the needs of the cash-strapped lower income worker living paycheck to paycheck must be bad if it is not part of the lobbying, ex-regulator hiring system called Banking.
Payday lenders for a few dollars meet the needs of the unbanked who have jobs but have bad or no credit histories and probably no bank accounts. Unfortunately, mathematically converting the cost of a business fee into an annual interest expense makes the fee seem astronomical.
I guess Google thinks a $35 overdrawn bank fee every week or two plus interest on an overdraft loan at a bank is preferable because the US says so. Why aren’t bank overdraft fees treated like Payday loans and banned?
If banks were a competitive alternative to payday lenders, payday lenders would not exist. Without payday lenders to meet short-term cash needs, what else is legally available to the workers who are living paycheck to paycheck?
Thursday, May 12, 2016
My WSJ Posted Comment To Google's Ad Ban For Payday Lenders
Posted By Milton Recht
My posted comment to The Wall Street Journal article, "Google Bans Ads for Payday Lenders: Alphabet’s subsidiary says such loans ‘can result in unaffordable payment and high default rates’" by Yuka Hayashi:
Posted 5/12/2016 03:25:00 AM