Nearly free money on the way?

December 15, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The Federal Reserve this week is expected to drop the rate at which banks loan money to each other below 1 percent. That means interest rates on loans for just about everything, from cars to housing, eventually would fall further.

The interest youâ??d pay on a loan would be several percentage points higher than the so-called federal funds rate. But the trend is down, and that means the getting may be as good as itâ??s been in a long time.

If youâ??ve been holding back on a purchase, how much further would rates need to drop before youâ??d pull the trigger? Or are you so worried about the economy, your job or your business that even a â??freeâ?? loan wouldnâ??t draw you into the market?
  • Is it me or do you think credit cards from department stores and gas stations are charging too much interest? (Up to 24.99%)
    If they would come down I would buy more.
  • It's not you. The isssuers would argue that I'm wrong- but I surmise that if you capped credit card interest at 10%, consumer spending would rise and debt would fall. Assuming somebody has $10k on a card, that's anywhere from $500 - $1500 extra in their pocket depending on what rate they have. I'm normally not a person who cries that's not fair!, but credit card issuers have charged usury rates for way too long.
  • Anyone who uses their credit card as a loan deserves to pay those high rates.
  • Even if you try to prove your self-worth with good to excellent credit, they still distrust you with a lower interest. I say, we need to grab our pitch forks and torches and storm these Credit places. Take action now.

    I understand that everyone needs to make a profit, but 25% markup is crazy. Of course, if people knew the markup of varios retail products, they would think twice about buying from the middleman. For Example, a Hard Drive attachment for XBox 360 (when it came out) costs the end user $100 (suggested retail price). Whole Sale price is $33. That is roughly 300% markup. These retail stores have agreed to carry it for atleast $100 if not more to make a profit on it.

    If you put this on your credit card, and not pay it off right away, Credit Cards dip into your pocket as well as retail stores. Granted, There are alot of expenses that are unforseen, but where do we draw the line? Do we get the privlage to have all companies have open (accounting) books for review? Shall we Micromanage companies? To what extent? I am not deffending Retail Stores or Credit Card companies, but when do we draw the line? How do we draw the line without knoledge of what expenses are being paid? I want to call UnFail Practices on credit card companies, but how can we do that without (partial to complete) open books to regulate profits?

    Governmet stepping in to regulate, yet also call for small government. Where to draw the lines? What is politically correct? It is a moving target and a sticky situation. We want to make the most money but spend the least.
  • The best and only way to get back at the credit card companies is to not use them. The old saying, if you cant buy it with cash you cant afford it, is true. If you need to wait a month to get something then wait for crying out loud. If you need to use your credit card to pay a utility bill or food for family, get a part time job. It is such a simple fix, but most people clearly do not use the brain in their skull. I owe nobody, minus a mortgage, but no credit card debt at all and no car payment. I can not tell you how good it feels to have all the extra money in MY pocket and not theirs.
  • I just wish lawmakers would define USURY rates. All interests needs to be X amount or under.

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. How much you wanna bet, that 70% of the jobs created there (after construction) are minimum wage? And Harvey is correct, the vast majority of residents in this project will drive to their jobs, and to think otherwise, is like Harvey says, a pipe dream. Someone working at a restaurant or retail store will not be able to afford living there. What ever happened to people who wanted to build buildings, paying for it themselves? Not a fan of these tax deals.

  2. Uh, no GeorgeP. The project is supposed to bring on 1,000 jobs and those people along with the people that will be living in the new residential will be driving to their jobs. The walkable stuff is a pipe dream. Besides, walkable is defined as having all daily necessities within 1/2 mile. That's not the case here. Never will be.

  3. Brad is on to something there. The merger of the Formula E and IndyCar Series would give IndyCar access to International markets and Formula E access the Indianapolis 500, not to mention some other events in the USA. Maybe after 2016 but before the new Dallara is rolled out for 2018. This give IndyCar two more seasons to run the DW12 and Formula E to get charged up, pun intended. Then shock the racing world, pun intended, but making the 101st Indianapolis 500 a stellar, groundbreaking event: The first all-electric Indy 500, and use that platform to promote the future of the sport.

  4. No, HarveyF, the exact opposite. Greater density and closeness to retail and everyday necessities reduces traffic. When one has to drive miles for necessities, all those cars are on the roads for many miles. When reasonable density is built, low rise in this case, in the middle of a thriving retail area, one has to drive far less, actually reducing the number of cars on the road.

  5. The Indy Star announced today the appointment of a new Beverage Reporter! So instead of insightful reports on Indy pro sports and Indiana college teams, you now get to read stories about the 432nd new brewery open or some obscure Hoosier winery winning a county fair blue ribbon. Yep, that's the coverage we Star readers crave. Not.