Means of Seeing what the eye brings

July 7, 2010

the real “credit score”

Filed under: learning,rants — osteoderm @ 12:29 pm

There’s the things you know, and then there’s the things you know. You can take something for granted, assuming you know the processes at play, but then there comes that eureka! moment when some knowledge really sticks itself inside your mind. This is a little tale about one of those moments.

Credit: good, bad, or none at all; somewhere along the line a big collective dupe has been played, and many folks have just started accepting the inevitability of having a credit score. And even those, such as myself, who have been generally apathetic or dismissive of such a thing, have been led to the broad assumption. that a credit score is a measure of how much risk a lender would expose themselves to by lending you money.

This last assumption is incorrect. In fact, it’s almost dangerously misleading. Here’s how I came to properly know this:

I recently applied for a credit card. To be clear, this is so that I can rent a car during an upcoming trip; I have never had or wanted a credit card. To be completely honest, my past experiences with other forms of credit have been, um… dismaying. Still, I have a need, so I filled out the forms. Minuted later, here in this lifetime, in this country, at my local bank, I discovered that I have absolutely no credit score at all. The ensuing conversation with my banker provided me with my first big clue.

I have now applied for a “secured card”. This device will enable me to borrow against my own money at 30%. What? Yes, it’s like you give me your own piggy-bank, and I lend you money out of it, while paying myself 30 cents for every dollar you “borrow”. Of course, I have zero desire to use this card, except to slap it on the counter at the rental agency. But just for educational purposes, I asked my friendly banker, “If I use the card, and promptly pay it off, will this create a positive credit score?”

She quickly and decisively answered, “No.” This was my second big clue. Apparently, credit agencies do not award positive scores for safe, prompt, reliable re-payment. While they do penalize for long-term delinquency, what they really “reward” you for is carrying a balance and making the maximum interest payment possible.

This is when it really hit me: a credit score is not a rating of my “safety” as a borrower, or my ability to repay/service a debt. A credit score is a rating of the potential profitability I present to a creditor. Those who are able to borrow and reliably repay large sums may well score lower than those who rack -up their cards to the maximum, never repay the balance, and yet continue to pay the interest.

Another way to look at it: Think of your money as a company, and the credit-card company as an investor. When you carry a balance, it is as if the creditor now owns shares in your company. The interest you pay is like a dividend the company is paying out to an investor. When you pay off your balance, it’s just like an investor selling out their shares in a potentially profitable company. When you carry a large balance and make the required interest payments, it’s like the investor owns a large stake of an excellent dividend-yielding stock. No investor would want to be arbitrarily sold-out of a lucrative dividend-yielding position. So it follows that no credit-card company would actually want to be re-paid any outstanding balance so long as the interest payments keep rolling in. It is the creation and maintenance of precisely this situation that is most highly-“rewarded” with the best credit score.

I used to think that a credit score was a pretty benign thing. If I needed credit, fine, and if I didn’t, it could be ignored. Now I see that a credit score is really less an indicator of my financial fitness, and actually a dehumanizing measure of my value as a commodity.

May 1, 2010

a moral dilemma

Filed under: gadgets,philosophy — osteoderm @ 5:29 pm

Today, this morning, I bought a 350Gb external hard drive at a yard sale for $6. The housing was badly cracked and the power cord was missing. The seller claimed that she didn’t know if it worked or not, but that she had no use for it in any event. I took it home, pulled it from the damaged case, found a compatible power supply from my geeky collection, hooked it to my computer, and had a surprise.

Not only did it work, but buried in the drive’s directory was a complete back-up of 5 year’s worth of detailed financial records: their investment club accounts, Ebay transactions, mortgage paperwork, rental agreements, E-Trade account back-ups, automobile sales transaction records, etc. In short, a complete assessment of their entire financial lives over at least the last five years; a brutal resource for any identity thief.

Of course, my own moral code prevents me from taking criminal advantage of this information. The real dilemma, for me, is how to proceed. Should I wipe the drive and never speak of it? Should I go back to the seller and return it? Should I let them know that I wiped the drive? Should I give them an opportunity to recover the information if it is still valuable to them?

Ignorance is bliss, but if some family member later recalls that there might have been a ridiculous breach of security in that innocent sale, perhaps some communication now might save their sanity later.  Further com pounding the dilemma is the fact that the seller is someone socially acquainted with my ladyfriend; we are not close friends, but neither are we complete strangers.

My ladyfriend seems to feel that communicating with them now might just add unnecessary stress and and worry to a situation that would be easily preempted by an otherwise silent and anonymous deletion of the drive.

What would you do?

April 26, 2010

ruled by huge piles of crap stuff

Filed under: random — osteoderm @ 4:53 pm

“It’s amazing how our lives are ruled by our stuff“… This comment from Butch, as we stood by the dock in South Caicos; we’d been discussing the recent loss of my own boat, along with everything aboard, being everything I owned. Looking back on it, I think a large part of how I was able to deal so well with the loss was that it was accompanied by a great deal of freedom. Indeed, the course of my life had been almost completely dominated by my stuff, at least over the past couple of years. I really had no idea how complete this domination was until after I’d lost everything.

Today, I find myself to be too-easily disturbed by stuff. Yes, I have a few nice things in my life, which I feel I’ve earned, and yes, I like to surround myself in as much comfort as I can reasonably afford. Living simply and sparsely in the boat and the bus taught me just how little I really needed, but only a profound and complete loss of stuff taught me just how much I was being weighed-down by my belongings.

I’ve recently moved out of my apartment. It was my first conventional living arrangement in several years, which afforded me both the advantages and burdens of accumulation. I was very surprised at how much crap I’d picked up in just over a year. It actually took me more than one trip in my little van to empty out my tiny bachelor apartment!

Now this isn’t meant to be a harsh criticism, but by way of comparison, let’s look at my ladyfriend. The one I’ve just moved in with. The one whose seemingly-endless piles of crap stuff are now surrounding me, covering almost the entirety of our new huge 1400-square-foot apartment. Don’t get me wrong; she isn’t a hoarder, some unreasonable collector, or a a sentimental nutjob. She’s not even particularly materialistic in character. It’s just that she’s lived in the same space for 13 years, a space with massive walk-in closets and copious area with which to fill with any and all sorts of memorabilia, art, and furniture.

In the time we’ve been together, I suppose I’ve just always assumed that some large part of that old apartment’s collection belonged to her two room-mates (one of whom most certainly is one of those sorts of inveterate “collectors”). Only when I saw the whole mass of it bagged, boxed, and so thoroughly covering the entirety of our new place did I start to get properly emotional about it all. I’m starting to realize that, as far as the “burden of stuff” goes, the only thing harsher than your own burden is that feeling of having been mantled with someone else’s stuff.

I look around me, and my soul is stunned to think that any one person can actually have so much. Whether fair and reasonable or not, my gut reaction is not to see it as “a person who has stuff”, but as “stuff that owns a human”; it as if the human has become this de-personified accessory to the collection.

Why is it that I react this way? I certainly don’t want to feel so disturbed by it, but neither do I wish to have such strong gut reactions flippantly dismissed. I take another look around, and decide to examine my own little corner of the apartment, and the few things I have here. How do I relate to them? What do my possessions really mean to me? What benefit do they confer that counters their burden?

I start and end with a set of simple questions: which of my belongings have I possessed for the longest time, and how has my relationship with that item changed over that period of time? How has that relationship changed me? How do I react to the notion of discarding that item?

The item in question is a threadbare black nylon daypack. It’s bleached a little purplish from use and exposure. The elasit closures are stretched and dangling. The waist-strap has been raggedly cut off. This is my “haul-bag”; the cheap surplus-store bag I used to haul my groceries home, on foot, when i had the bus parked some ways out of town. I guess I’ve possessed it for 8 years. It replaced a green cotton canvas bag that I’d picked up in Guadalajara 8 years before that. That green bag was discarded in the wastebasket at a local coffeeshop (The Beanstalk, to be precise) after I’d dropped it and broken the small bottle of olive oil it contained; bare and worn, and now soaked in oil, it was an appropriate disposal.

This black bag was one of the very few things I took with me when I stepped up off the boat mid-Atlantic. I’m fairly certain it’s the only object continuously in my possession for longer than 2 years. It’s been on all sorts of cross-country (and cross-ocean!) trips with me. It was the only bag I took with me on my last trip back to BC, my last trip to Mexico, and my only trip to NYC. It’s a lousy bag, and I can’t admit to particularly loving it, but I feel like it has earned the right to burden me.

I look back at all the other piles and piles around me, and can’t begin to fathom how so many items can have ever earned their right to burden anyone else in such a similar fashion. Of course, I shouldn’t extend my values to other people this way, right? Or does sharing a home with someone give me a little leave to indulge in these reactions? It’s hard to say, especially since all this shit stuff has yet to be properly sorted and stowed.

Already, I can tell that my ladyfriend is feeling more burdened than she has in years; she’s being confronted by her stuff in a more full and complete fashion than she can recall. I want to be more supportive through this process… but I can’t shake the feeling that the real solution is to simply step away from it, let it all go, take her hand, and lead her away from it.

April 10, 2010

Kalliroscope

Filed under: gadgets,philosophy — osteoderm @ 8:26 am

JB dragged me to a garage sale this morning. Newport is a fine venue for a garage sale, as it has such a long and colourful history, and is populated by an army of characters and collectors. Despite this, I tend to avoid such sales like the plague; I have had a bad habit of collecting junk myself, and largely try to avoid any added temptations.

Today, however, and of course I find something worth the trip. I found a Kalliroscope “Pocket Viewer” for a dollar. In the original box, with the original paperwork, but sadly missing the small rotating ball-bearing base. This was a neat find for me; I’d had never before seen one in person, or even in colour, but had long wanted to encounter one.

It all started years ago. My mother passed to me a copy of The Last Whole Earth Catalog, the actual “Last” one from 1971, #1160. Like a paper version of a Google search, the Whole Earth Catalog was an incredible inch-thick 11″x14″ tome, primitive, direct, and optimistic, championing “access to tools” within its pages.

In that particular issue, some articles and items were singled out for special mention. This was signified on the page by an image of a Kalliroscope next to the piece in question. The Catalog itself offered two Kalliroscopes for sale; the small hand-held globe version, and the thinner rectangular “Pocket Viewer” that I found today.

It’s hard to describe what a Kalliroscope really looks like, what it does, or how it does it. I’ve tried to find videos on-line, but haven’t found any good ones. Likewise, the website of the original inventor/manufacturer isn’t particularly helpful. Technically, the Kalliroscope is rheoscopic fluid suspension of microscopic crystalline platelets sandwiched between glass sheets. Practically, it’s a ridiculous little gizmo that you just hold and stare at while it does all this swirly cosmic stuff.

The memory of that Catalog and the inspiration I gained from it while I lived in the bus stay with me. It’s a happy little throwback to a time when sentimentality was forefront in my life. Now that I’ve lived through bitter cynicism and am now entering a strongly pragmatic period, it’s probably healthy to hold on to a few of these positive reminders of previous ages.

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress