Erica

Because, you know, you're not worth the risk.

if you're the type of person that was carrying a credit card balance and not really paying back or keeping up with your payments, that the credit card companies might say, it's not going to be profitable for me to do this.

Because that's, I think, one of the reasons why you have these 20% interest rates is that they need to charge that much in order for the whole portfolio of customers to make sense.

You have a whole bunch of people like me that pay off their bill every month and they never get any interest.

they get a whole bunch of other stuff like the transaction fees and stuff for me, but they, you know, they don't get interest, but then you have some people who carry a balance, but they make their minimum payments.

And then you have other people who struggle to make their minimum payments and may never pay it back.

And they have to look at that as a whole portfolio and say, okay, what do I need to charge for people who aren't paying their full balance every month?

So that even if some people never pay it back, I still get more than I,

loaned out to people.

And so my concern would be that this would have a retraction sort of effect on the economy where credit card companies would say, well, if I can't charge any more than 10%, then I'm only going to charge, I'm only going to allow credit for the highest credit rating people that I know are going to pay me back and I'm going to cut it off for everybody else.

And that may end up hurting the very people that Trump is trying to help.

And I think some of that might be true with some of this housing market stuff too, that if you restrict things and say you're not allowed to do certain things, then that may just have an effect of pulling back on the market.

You won't have as many buyers, you won't have as many sellers, and there may just not be as many transactions.

On the housing front, in terms of not letting big corporations buy houses, to me, that might be a little bit of a red herring sort of thing.

I don't know that there really were that many big corporations that were snapping up houses.

I know there was a lot of news about that, especially on the right.

But I remember seeing that that was kind of debunked and that it really wasn't happening nearly at the scale that people were saying it was.

And correct me if I'm wrong, if you think there is a lot of that happening and it's a big problem.

But I think, to me, if you restrict the free market and you say, we're not going to allow that anymore, that's just going to take certain buyers off the market, which means maybe there will be some price pressure downward, but it also might just mean that not as many houses get sold.

I would be much more supportive of saying we don't want China to buy up all our real estate, especially if they're going to leave it idle and not even rent it to anybody.