←back to thread

277 points cebert | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.528s | source
Show context
PostOnce ◴[] No.44361768[source]
Theoretically, credit should be used for one thing: to make more money. (not less)

However, instead of using it to buy or construct a machine to triple what you can produce in an hour, the average person is using it to delay having to work that hour at all, in exchange for having to work an hour and six minutes sometime later.

At some point, you run out of hours available and the house of cards collapses.

i.e., credit can buy time in the nearly literal sense, you can do an hour's work in half an hour because the money facilitates it, meaning you can now make more money. If instead of investing in work you're spending on play, then you end up with a time deficit.

or, e.g. you can buy 3 franchises in 3 months instead of 3 years (i.e. income from the 1 franchise), trading credit for time to make more money, instead of burning it. It'd have been nice had they taught me this in school.

replies(42): >>44361792 #>>44361861 #>>44361865 #>>44361871 #>>44361931 #>>44361944 #>>44361950 #>>44362065 #>>44362085 #>>44362133 #>>44362148 #>>44362177 #>>44362254 #>>44364104 #>>44364281 #>>44364325 #>>44364438 #>>44364536 #>>44364685 #>>44364877 #>>44365174 #>>44365292 #>>44365599 #>>44365679 #>>44365774 #>>44366064 #>>44366444 #>>44366485 #>>44366511 #>>44366874 #>>44366996 #>>44367040 #>>44367169 #>>44367332 #>>44368257 #>>44368662 #>>44369054 #>>44369100 #>>44369614 #>>44369775 #>>44371322 #>>44371454 #
varjag ◴[] No.44364536[source]
No, an average person uses it to improve liquidity atop overall solid fundamentals. Literally hundreds of million people worldwide do it with no adverse effects and improved quality of life. Irresponsible people are relatively a minority (although they tend to make the news). And aversion to financing is in itself a poverty marker more often than not.
replies(1): >>44364673 #
al_borland ◴[] No.44364673[source]
Of those who carry credit cards in the US, 60% of them carry a balance [0].

There are also all those reports that have come out about how nearly 40% of Americans don't have $400 for an emergency [1], with the median being just $600.

If the rule of thumb for an emergency fund is 3-6 months of expenses, and we can agree that paying interest on a credit card is a bad finical decision, then I'm not sure how the "average" person has solid fundamentals, where credit cards are being used as a strategic tool.

People also tend to spend more when using credit cards [2], which negates most benefits someone may get from using credit card for the points. So even those with solid fundamentals, who are using it as a tool, are probably still losing, just in a less obvious way.

[0] https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2025/03/why-ar...

[1] https://www.empower.com/press-center/37-americans-cant-affor...

[2] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1008196717017

replies(3): >>44365340 #>>44365673 #>>44367464 #
tristor ◴[] No.44367464[source]
> Of those who carry credit cards in the US, 60% of them carry a balance [0].

Carrying a balance is not automatically the worst choice. I have a massively positive net worth (for a working stiff), so could effectively have $0 debt at any point in time, inclusive of my mortgage, but all debt is not equal, nor are all investments. Credit card debt is clearly one of the worst forms of debt with the harshest interest rates, yet even in that case selling investments and paying taxes on them and forgoing future earnings on those investments to pay off a credit card immediately vs over a few months is not necessarily the right decision.

Credit cards are about providing you float so you can smooth out cash flow. As an example, I am about to do some home renovations, I expect to spend ~$40k to do so, I also expect to earn and pay off that $40k over the following 4 months. My options are I can carry a balance on a credit card, I can keep my home in a partially renovated state for longer to pay cash, or I can take our a HELOC which has a high origination cost and acts as a secondary lein on my house. The credit card + carrying a balance for 4 months and having my home back in a finished livable state faster is clearly the best choice, but it means I'm in that 60%.

These choices aren't binary, the problem is that many people are not financially literate enough to consider their options and outcomes and choose the best choice, they either have a default choice with no consideration, or no real choice, both with negative outcomes.

replies(2): >>44368739 #>>44369498 #
1. stephenbez ◴[] No.44369498[source]
Another option is to do margin borrowing on some investment assets that you have. Because it is a secured loan the interest rates are much cheaper than credit cards. Schwab has a good set up, it can be configured to automatically do a loan if you withdraw more funds from your checking account than you have. They currently charge about 12% but there are other options around 6%.

My friend used this set up for his emergency fund since he felt like it would be better to earn an investment return and take a loan in an emergency instead of sitting around having your money earn minimal amounts in a checking account.

replies(1): >>44370548 #
2. tristor ◴[] No.44370548[source]
Yes, borrowing on margin is a really good strategy, although it depends on your broker how that functions. I've had a good experience using this for smaller amounts, but given market volatility I'm concerned about borrowing this large of a sum on margin, as I don't know what clown stuff is going to happen in the next 6 months, a credit card feels lower risk to me, although the interest rate is higher. I actually considered this, using a credit card will cost me $530 in additional interest over taking margin, but has lower risks in my estimation. That $530 is not enough for me to feel it's worth it to do it via a margin loan.

That said, margin is really useful as a tool because it lets you unlock the value of your investments without tax penalties in lower volatility markets.