Regulating caps on credit card interest rates is a price control; it is a price cap on the cost of money.

When have price controls ever worked out in the long run?
I suspect Trump's cap on the credit card interest rates will work out about as well as Mamdani's housing plan and California minimum wages for fast food workers.

The only way in which price controls "work" is in getting politicians elected by naive voters.

All that would happen is the same people would have to take HIGHER interest loans from other sources. Like usual, it screws the same people it pretends to "help".

Honestly, it's probably right that trying to regulate it and fine tune it would backfire. Either ban them or allow them. My vote would be ban them.

Remember, credit cards started in the 60s. We all got along fine before them. Rule of thumb, if it started in the 60s, it was bad

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Honestly, it's probably right that trying to regulate it and fine tune it would backfire. Either ban them or allow them. My vote would be ban them.

---

Then your vote would be to screw the people who use these credit cards.

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

74OA said:

---

Credit cards are essentially loan instruments with the borrower providing zero collateral to the lender who assumes all the risk.

Of course such unsecured loans carry a much higher interest rate, but simply paying off the balance each month avoids paying any interest at all.

This is more about too many people not living within their means than it is rapacious banking.

---

Yes. It is their fault.

But 50 years ago, we didn't have almost half of our population carrying credit card debt. That's not because they were fiscally smarter than our population today (although our population today IS dumber). It's because predatory interest credit wasn't available to them.

No one would count on the free market to replace basic regulations regarding food safety. This is similar.

The free market is good. But we need bumpers to keep us in the lane.

---

50 years ago the Mafia used to charge 25% to 40%, until ease of credit made them moot. Coincidence?

I wouldn't say I agree with this move, but in the current economic climate where the avg household has too much CC debt? These companies would look to us again if this all collapses. I'm on the fence, since I see both sides.

Quote:

---

Remember, credit cards started in the 60s. We all got along fine before them. Rule of thumb, if it started in the 60s, it was bad

---

Credit didn't start with credit cards. The idea of borrowing and repayment predates written history across cultures. A card just made it more convenient and broadened the user base.

aTmAg said:

---

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Honestly, it's probably right that trying to regulate it and fine tune it would backfire. Either ban them or allow them. My vote would be ban them.

---

Then your vote would be to screw the people who use these credit cards.

---

People "misuse" HELOCs, checking account overdraft lines, margin loans, and student debt. I assume the poster would want tighter controls on all of those products as well.

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

You used the word "society" three times in that brief statement. I am tired of people forcing laws down my throat because they're "good for society." That is socialism and I reject it.

Here's an idea… I'll take care of me, you take care of you, and others can take care of themselves. No more socialism.

---

You're used socialism the way the left uses the word racism. It's not applicable here.

Sounds like you're a libertarian. Ok then. I'm a conservative. So I'm ok with government stepping in to conserve the social order, if free market or the population fails to do so. Half of our country having credit card debt is not good for the social order.

I don't want their debt forgiven though, as they borrowed that money and need to pay it back now. I'm talking about how to improve that situation moving forward.

---

Governments "stepping in" to conserve the social order isn't conservative. It is socialism. Conservatives embrace free markets and individual responsibility.

And this conservative says no thanks to government dictating the interest rate on credit card agreements between private entities.

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Honestly, it's probably right that trying to regulate it and fine tune it would backfire. Either ban them or allow them. My vote would be ban them.

Remember, credit cards started in the 60s. We all got along fine before them. Rule of thumb, if it started in the 60s, it was bad

---

Your idea would single-handedly tank the economy overnight. But congrats on sharing your economic philosophy with Elizabeth Warren and AOC I guess.

A lot of Democratic voters will loose their high interest credit cards.

I'd venture to say that many paying a ridiculous amount in credit card interest also have a secured car note with an interest rate exceeding 10%. The idea is insanity.

doubledog said:

---

A lot of Democratic voters will loose their high interest credit cards.

---

A lot of private companies will lose their democratic customers using those credit cards to buy their goods and services.

I'm sure no conservatives have those kinds of credit cards, so that's one less worry.

Be wary before trusting someone from the Terrible Trifecta.

They are angry they won't be able to scam Uncle Jim and Aunt Martha anymore.

And yes, they are unhappy their bonuses won't be as large.

Big banks push back on Trump's credit card cap, warning of 'significant' economic slowdown
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-banks-push-back-on-trumps-credit-card-cap-warning-of-significant-economic-slowdown-165046195.html

Quote:

---

Some of America's top bankers are warning that the president's cap on credit card interest rates would prove disastrous for lower-income consumers and the US economy not to mention their profits.
Faced with President Trump's proposal to slash their credit card interest rate fee income days before reporting fourth quarter earnings, senior executives for the nation's four largest banks JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC), and Wells Fargo (WFC) all said they agree that affordability is an issue, but that limiting credit card interest rates isn't the right approach to solve it.

"An interest rate cap is not something that we would or could support, frankly," Citigroup's outgoing CFO Mark Mason said Wednesday during a call with reporters.
Such a move would "likely result in a significant slowdown in the economy," Mason said, adding that "affordability is clearly an important issue and one that we look forward to collaborating with the administration on."

---

You can see it in his eyes. He just looks like a crook.

Quote:

---

Chairman and CEO of Bank of America Brian Moynihan visits Fox Business' "The Claman Countdown" at Fox Business Network Studios on March 27, 2025, in New York City. (John Lamparski/Getty Images)

---

I would expect and hope that banks would help fight for the rights of their customers against tyrants who demand infringing on those rights.

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Credit cards are fundamentally based off predatory interest rates. It's wrong to give an 85 IQ 20-year-old a credit card, then blame him when he runs up a balance. Yes it's his fault. But why set him up for failure?

Who cares if you don't get as many points and free flights?

Capitalism is great. It also needs guidelines. For example, it's illegal to make false claims in advertising. The free market doesn't solve for that on its own.

Predatory interest should be illegal.

---

This.

Many here think capitalism/free market solves all problems and has no flaws. It does. It needs guard rails. That doesn't mean we move into socialism, it just means we need checks and balances and not make it a free for all.

aTmAg said:

---

I would expect and hope that banks would help fight for the rights of their customers against tyrants who demand infringing on those rights.

---

And for those that lose their credit cards, they will instead resort to payday loans, title loans, loan sharks, pawn shops, etc which are a lot higher interest rates than credit cards.

YouBet said:

---

This topic does remind me of my first credit card. Back in the early '90s, banks gave out CC's like candy regardless of your ability to pay. I received my first CC in college (with no job at the time I received it) and it had a $30k limit. Didn't even ask for it. Just given to me. I had zero means to pay it back.

I've actually forgotten the original issuer, but it was ultimately taken over by Bank of America along the way.

Just last year they closed the account on me because I hadn't used it in years. End of an era.

---

I got my free credit card report from the 3 bureaus. My oldest credit card was Discover Card which I got in A&M in May 1996. Looks like they closed it, it was open until recently. Maybe when they got bought. Had not used it in years.

infinity ag said:

---

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Credit cards are fundamentally based off predatory interest rates. It's wrong to give an 85 IQ 20-year-old a credit card, then blame him when he runs up a balance. Yes it's his fault. But why set him up for failure?

Who cares if you don't get as many points and free flights?

Capitalism is great. It also needs guidelines. For example, it's illegal to make false claims in advertising. The free market doesn't solve for that on its own.

Predatory interest should be illegal.

---

Many here think capitalism/free market solves all problems and has no flaws. It does. It needs guard rails. That doesn't mean we move into socialism, it just means we need checks and balances and not make it a free for all.

---

That sounds cute and all, but if you think the government intruding into a contractual relationship between two private entities to cap interest rates is simply an example of "checks and balances"... then you have been hoodwinked by the bleeding hearts into embracing socialism and you don't even recognize it.

Trump's on the same page with Elizabeth Warren on this... that should be a huge red flag.

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Honestly, it's probably right that trying to regulate it and fine tune it would backfire. Either ban them or allow them. My vote would be ban them.

Remember, credit cards started in the 60s. We all got along fine before them. Rule of thumb, if it started in the 60s, it was bad

---

Outright eliminating CCs is insane. You would annihilate the economy overnight. There are also untold unintended consequences and negative halo effects of doing that. If we were going to do that, there would need to be a wind down over time of many different aspects of the economy.

You can't just eliminate CCs in a bubble, have everyone pay off their remaining debt they own, and just move on with a new normal. This is a complete lack of knowledge of how things work.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Credit cards are fundamentally based off predatory interest rates. It's wrong to give an 85 IQ 20-year-old a credit card, then blame him when he runs up a balance. Yes it's his fault. But why set him up for failure?

Who cares if you don't get as many points and free flights?

Capitalism is great. It also needs guidelines. For example, it's illegal to make false claims in advertising. The free market doesn't solve for that on its own.

Predatory interest should be illegal.

---

Many here think capitalism/free market solves all problems and has no flaws. It does. It needs guard rails. That doesn't mean we move into socialism, it just means we need checks and balances and not make it a free for all.

---

That sounds cute and all, but if you think the government intruding into a contractual relationship between two private entities to cap interest rates is simply an example of "checks and balances"... then you have been hoodwinked by the bleeding hearts into embracing socialism and you don't even recognize it.

Trump's on the same page with Elizabeth Warren on this... that should be a huge red flag.

---

You can give it whatever name you want - socialism, capitalism, whatever-ism. Does not matter.

I like to solve problems using common sense. If an idea doesn't work, I discard it. Blindly going by some "ism" is a reason why things don't work.

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Credit cards are fundamentally based off predatory interest rates. It's wrong to give an 85 IQ 20-year-old a credit card, then blame him when he runs up a balance. Yes it's his fault. But why set him up for failure?

Who cares if you don't get as many points and free flights?

Capitalism is great. It also needs guidelines. For example, it's illegal to make false claims in advertising. The free market doesn't solve for that on its own.

Predatory interest should be illegal.

---

Many here think capitalism/free market solves all problems and has no flaws. It does. It needs guard rails. That doesn't mean we move into socialism, it just means we need checks and balances and not make it a free for all.

---

That sounds cute and all, but if you think the government intruding into a contractual relationship between two private entities to cap interest rates is simply an example of "checks and balances"... then you have been hoodwinked by the bleeding hearts into embracing socialism and you don't even recognize it.

Trump's on the same page with Elizabeth Warren on this... that should be a huge red flag.

---

You can give it whatever name you want - socialism, capitalism, whatever-ism. Does not matter.

I like to solve problems using common sense. If an idea doesn't work, I discard it. Blindly going by some "ism" is a reason why things don't work.

---

Names don't matter to me either. But the government setting the terms for private transactions is a step too far. And no thanks for using "common sense" as a barometer if it restricts my freedom.

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Credit cards are fundamentally based off predatory interest rates. It's wrong to give an 85 IQ 20-year-old a credit card, then blame him when he runs up a balance. Yes it's his fault. But why set him up for failure?

Who cares if you don't get as many points and free flights?

Capitalism is great. It also needs guidelines. For example, it's illegal to make false claims in advertising. The free market doesn't solve for that on its own.

Predatory interest should be illegal.

---

Many here think capitalism/free market solves all problems and has no flaws. It does. It needs guard rails. That doesn't mean we move into socialism, it just means we need checks and balances and not make it a free for all.

---

That sounds cute and all, but if you think the government intruding into a contractual relationship between two private entities to cap interest rates is simply an example of "checks and balances"... then you have been hoodwinked by the bleeding hearts into embracing socialism and you don't even recognize it.

Trump's on the same page with Elizabeth Warren on this... that should be a huge red flag.

---

You can give it whatever name you want - socialism, capitalism, whatever-ism. Does not matter.

I like to solve problems using common sense. If an idea doesn't work, I discard it. Blindly going by some "ism" is a reason why things don't work.

---

Your idea has been tried, and it has proven to not work. It is what deserves to be discarded.

Lol, the free market is responding to Trump's dumb demand for a 10% cap with just that as a teaser rate.... only to then jump to roughly 30% after twelve months.

In some ways, this will just raise the cost of interest for some cardholders, as a number of cards historically offered zero interest for twelve months before reverting to higher rates.

Government needs to stay out of private business. Glad to see the big banks and some R's pushing back on Trump.

Quote:

---

Bilt on Wednesday unveiled three new tiered credit cards that offer a 10% APR for all customers over the next 12 months after President Trump called for a cap on credit card interest rates.

The APR for all three of the new Bilt cards which offer perks on rent and mortgage payments will jump to 26.74% to 34.74% after 12 months.

---

https://nypost.com/2026/01/14/business/bilt-launches-three-credit-cards-with-10-apr-for-12-months-after-president-trump-calls-for-a-cap/

MemphisAg1 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Credit cards are fundamentally based off predatory interest rates. It's wrong to give an 85 IQ 20-year-old a credit card, then blame him when he runs up a balance. Yes it's his fault. But why set him up for failure?

Who cares if you don't get as many points and free flights?

Capitalism is great. It also needs guidelines. For example, it's illegal to make false claims in advertising. The free market doesn't solve for that on its own.

Predatory interest should be illegal.

---

Many here think capitalism/free market solves all problems and has no flaws. It does. It needs guard rails. That doesn't mean we move into socialism, it just means we need checks and balances and not make it a free for all.

---

That sounds cute and all, but if you think the government intruding into a contractual relationship between two private entities to cap interest rates is simply an example of "checks and balances"... then you have been hoodwinked by the bleeding hearts into embracing socialism and you don't even recognize it.

Trump's on the same page with Elizabeth Warren on this... that should be a huge red flag.

---

You can give it whatever name you want - socialism, capitalism, whatever-ism. Does not matter.

I like to solve problems using common sense. If an idea doesn't work, I discard it. Blindly going by some "ism" is a reason why things don't work.

---

Names don't matter to me either. But the government setting the terms for private transactions is a step too far. And no thanks for using "common sense" as a barometer if it restricts my freedom.

---

If you want complete freedom, buy yourself an island somewhere.
In America, there is freedom with restrictions. And the government decides what those are and those change with time.

I wish I didn't have to pay tax to fund filthy Venezuelans and Somalians but I do. That is just life.

aTmAg said:

---

I would expect and hope that banks would help fight for the rights of their customers against tyrants who demand infringing on those rights.

---

hahahahhahahha.


Oh man. We have a loooong way to go here.

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Good Bull Jones 17 said:

---

Credit cards are fundamentally based off predatory interest rates. It's wrong to give an 85 IQ 20-year-old a credit card, then blame him when he runs up a balance. Yes it's his fault. But why set him up for failure?

Who cares if you don't get as many points and free flights?

Capitalism is great. It also needs guidelines. For example, it's illegal to make false claims in advertising. The free market doesn't solve for that on its own.

Predatory interest should be illegal.

---

Many here think capitalism/free market solves all problems and has no flaws. It does. It needs guard rails. That doesn't mean we move into socialism, it just means we need checks and balances and not make it a free for all.

---

That sounds cute and all, but if you think the government intruding into a contractual relationship between two private entities to cap interest rates is simply an example of "checks and balances"... then you have been hoodwinked by the bleeding hearts into embracing socialism and you don't even recognize it.

Trump's on the same page with Elizabeth Warren on this... that should be a huge red flag.

---

You can give it whatever name you want - socialism, capitalism, whatever-ism. Does not matter.

I like to solve problems using common sense. If an idea doesn't work, I discard it. Blindly going by some "ism" is a reason why things don't work.

---

Names don't matter to me either. But the government setting the terms for private transactions is a step too far. And no thanks for using "common sense" as a barometer if it restricts my freedom.

---

If you want complete freedom, buy yourself an island somewhere.
In America, there is freedom with restrictions. And the government decides what those are and those change with time.

I wish I didn't have to pay tax to fund filthy Venezuelans and Somalians but I do. That is just life.

---

No sir. I'll keep fighting for freedom. You know, America... the home of the free and the brave. If you want the government nanny-state, move to Europe or other socialist havens. They will welcome you, especially your wealth as they redistribute it to voters who want to be protected from the rough-and-tumble world of free markets.

infinity ag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

I would expect and hope that banks would help fight for the rights of their customers against tyrants who demand infringing on those rights.

---

hahahahhahahha.


Oh man. We have a loooong way to go here.

---

Yes, you do indeed have a long way to go.

I noticed you totally ignored my post about how your idea has been tried and failed. What happened to "discarding ideas that don't work"?

aTmAg said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

I would expect and hope that banks would help fight for the rights of their customers against tyrants who demand infringing on those rights.

---

hahahahhahahha.


Oh man. We have a loooong way to go here.

---

Yes, you do indeed have a long way to go.

I noticed you totally ignored my post about how your idea has been tried and failed. What happened to "discarding ideas that don't work"?

---

When was a credit card cap been applied in the US? Post details.

infinity ag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

I would expect and hope that banks would help fight for the rights of their customers against tyrants who demand infringing on those rights.

---

hahahahhahahha.


Oh man. We have a loooong way to go here.

---

Yes, you do indeed have a long way to go.

I noticed you totally ignored my post about how your idea has been tried and failed. What happened to "discarding ideas that don't work"?

---

When was a credit card cap been applied in the US? Post details.

---

These states did it:

Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois,
Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia

Interest rate caps, especially strict ones like 36% or below, aim to curb predatory lending but have mixed economic impacts, often leading to unintended negative effects on credit access and consumer welfare. Here's a summary based on empirical studies:

• Reduced Credit Availability: Caps significantly decrease the supply of small-dollar loans, particularly for subprime (low-credit-score) borrowers. In Illinois, after the 2021 36% cap, loans to subprime borrowers dropped 38%, while prime borrowers saw a 16% increase. Overall loan volume fell 8%. In Arkansas, the 17% cap created a "credit desert" in interior counties, with nonprime consumers 46% less likely to have consumer finance loans compared to neighboring states. Residents in border areas drive to other states for loans, increasing search costs.
• Changes in Loan Terms: Surviving loans tend to be larger. Illinois saw a 35% increase in average subprime loan sizes. Lenders shift to bigger, longer-term loans to remain profitable under caps.
• Shift to Alternatives: Borrowers often turn to riskier or costlier options, such as overdrafts, pawn shops, unregulated online lenders, or loan sharks. In Arkansas, nonprime consumers relied more on retail credit with hidden costs via higher prices. Studies show caps raise overall costs rather than lower them, reducing price transparency and increasing non-interest fees.
• Impact on Consumer Well-Being: Many affected borrowers report worse financial situations. In Illinois, 39% of surveyed subprime borrowers said their well-being declined, 79% wanted to return to prior lenders, and 60% couldn't borrow needed funds. Arkansas nonprime consumers held less debt overall but faced rationing, limiting their ability to manage emergencies. Broader effects include potential GDP slowdowns from reduced consumer spending if credit contracts sharply.