I always assumed credit scores were an integral and historic part of the American financial system.
They were not, they are very recent，most of your parents didn’t have credit scores growing up, and as you can probably tell or at least intuit, it’s mostly just a b******* scheme for those with capital to accrue more capital by invading your privacy.
There are numerous other ways to determine that like eviction records, references, or reported income. A poor score doesn’t mean that you aren’t going to pay rent and most rentals require a first and last month’s rent to begin with.
Do you think someone who pays all their bills but was the victim of identity theft should be unable to access housing?
If you’re homeless without a job, why would I take a risk? You’re not thinking about it from the perspective of a creditor.
No. But if I were a creditor why would I take a risk on you just because there is a possibility you’re a victim of identify theft?
If the world was ran with your expectations all businesses would be broke because they would be exploited into oblivion.
For every victim of identify theft out there there’s 10 other people happy to take advantage of the situation and never pay a dime.
You’re purely thinking from the perspective of a victim and clearly don’t see that all of this is a liability. It’s not up to a bank or landlord to provide charity.
Do you invest in anything? Would you invest into a stock, a company, or anything if there is information that clearly indicates a small chance on a return of investment? The answer is no. Instead you’ll invest in something else that is proven to be a good return. It’s simply risk management vs opportunity cost.
Statements like this make me think you’ve never actually had to rent an apartment/home before or you’d have realized there’s an application process involved before you’re accepted. This is basic knowledge.
Nobody is talking about charity, stocks, creditors, or any of the other strawman b/s you’re spouting. Somehow, people managed to rent homes/apartments long before credit scores or the internet existed, but for some reason, you don’t seem to think that’s possible while also lacking basic information on the process like mentioned above or standard first and last month deposits as mentioned in my previous comment.
Restricting someone from credit due to poor financial decisions makes sense. Restricting someone from housing because of some score that comes out of a black box is abhorrent.
Part of the application process generally entails a credit score check. This is also basic knowledge.
You can argue all day long but in the end landlords and creditors look at a poor credit score as a risk to their investment. Nothing more.
Statements like this show me you’ve never owned a business, never been a landlord, or otherwise been in a position where risk management is at play.
There is no grand evil conspiracy here, you just don’t understand risk management and how it relates to credit scores.
This right here shows me you know virtually nothing about what a credit score is or how it’s calculated.
Ah so you’re making strawman arguments while accusing me of making strawman arguments.
Clearly I am talking to someone that has zero ability to understand basic finances while simultaneously lacking basic communication skills. Obviously I am wasting my time responding to you.
Good bye.
You’re just exemplifying the inherent problem.
People need housing. People without a house are a risk. People with houses won’t let people that need housing rent a house because of said risk. Thus we are back at the start where people need housing but can’t get it because of the broken system.
You can talk about risk management until you’re blue in the face but it doesn’t change the fact that landlords are participating in a broken system that leaves real people in one of the worst situations you can be in.