It's said that a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. And that's probably quite true. But, if knowing only a little is dangerous, what category of peril should be assigned to those who have no knowledge at all, yet are in positions to have influence over folks who are dumber than they are?
I'm reasonably certain that anyone who has ears, or who can read, is aware that there are very few people on the planet with a lower IQ than Chuck Schumer's. Nonetheless, he somehow or other attained public office. And fortunately for us, he either seems to maintain a low profile, or the media doesn't quote him very much. But, when his words do become public, they consistently confirm that he's useless.
This morning I read that he's now up in arms because stores don't clearly present their layaway fees to customers. According to him, "The ultimate cost of a layaway with a $5 fee can equal 40 percent interest over a month or two for many common purchases compared to the annual rates of most credit cards."
Now, I don't think you need a PHD in finance to realize that in order to figure out a rate of interest, you first need to know how much an item costs. Because if the purchase price is $12.50, the "interest rate" would indeed be 40% were you to be charged $5.00. However, if the item cost $150.00 the so-called "rate" would be .0333333%. On one costing $1000.00, a five dollar fee amounts to .005% and so on.
Consequently, the fees charged by retailers for layaways have nothing to do with interest at all. According to Brian A. Dodge of the Retail Industry Leaders Association, "It is a leap to suggest that $5 on a $100 purchase is twice the going rate on credit cards, which today averages 14.99 percent nationwide. Layaway is not credit, period. Layaway programs provide consumers with a responsible, low-cost alternative to credit cards that allow customers to buy an item that they want but the flexibility to pay for it over time without accumulating debt."
He went on to say, "These programs typically accommodate a segment of consumers who are either unable to or unwilling to access credit. They are remarkably simple and transparent. And unlike credit cards, the fees and terms never change."
Furthermore, the fees often cover the cost of handling layaway accounts, costs of keeping workers available to provide items when the layaway is paid off, and the cost of storing items for weeks and disrupting what could be a faster turnover. It can also become a legitimate "restocking fee," covering costs of items returned to the shelves if layaways aren't completed. Retailers also say the fees help reduce losses if uncompleted layaway items can't be immediately resold.
In other words, retailers view holiday layaway plans as an additional service, not as an income generating aspect of their businesses.
In closing, Schumer's words reflected, I think, the typical perspective of Democrat politicians unscathed by any experience whatsoever in any way related to any kind of business endeavor. He said, "The holiday season is supposed to be about giving and not taking, but these layaway programs are taking advantage of people and charging them outrageous interest rates, under the guise of making it easier and more affordable to shop."
And I guess that's exactly what you'd expect from a parasitic cypher who lives off the efforts of others. He want's to spread Christmas joy and happiness around by giving away retailer's hard-earned money and decreasing their chances of profits.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment