Just to let you all know, Mary Tomkins has updated info about this issue in the articles, have a look at it:
https://www.financeglobe.com/Finance/Articles/articles/390/0/CARD-Act-Rules-go-into-Effect-Today/Page0.html

cce - point taken. This is like the old economic argument of "guns or butter". My parents and going back believed that a good war put people to work and afterwords you had pent up consumer demands for consumer products. Real or not? It seemed to work but what a way to solve economic challenges. In my eyes we as consumers satisfied many of our needs for awhile so consumer demand could take a rest. "Baby Boomers" could always be counted on to spend (myself) who has what he needs and no longer am going to drive the economic machine. Jobs are gone due to changes in our world and globilization. I studied economics years back and I can't remember a time when we lost our manufacturing sector to elsewhere in the world. My concern today is where is employment going to come from (jobs)? We need to put people back to work and maintain controls so people don't get exploited by the rich at the banks, financial centers and investment types (they seem to do ok!) hmm! Yes, I question government being the answer too. I get your thoughts. However, over time we play between business and government to obtain balances and controls to right the economy. Business would NOT control itself so the government is doing it. Then Congress can come in and say everything is great let's eliminate controls and go voluntary... In one of my other online posts I referred to the "...game the game the game...". Why repeal (1998) the "Glass-Seagull" Act (1932 passed I think) when it worked for all those years? Why we are in business we can handle it...??? Yeah right and look at the mess. I also agree we will be at least five to ten years getting on the roll again. A market adjustment will take place as the baby boomers will be gone and I think the Gen "X" and "Y" will see life different. A new world if you will.

I agree with most of your remarks Wanderer, and agree that change is needed. However, the government isn't issuing these cards, as a matter of fact the government uses Bank of America to issue government credit cards for their employees. It seems to me that most things the government regulates fails. I look at everything as supply and demand in finance. If there is no demand, there will be no supply, and the banks will either change or go bankrupt due to competitiveness. If there is high demand and low supply, banks will get over on us. That is what is seems to be going on now. :

Now - we are still in the middle of the great credit crunch. Most of the card issuers withdrew from issuing cards from the beginning of this recession. Without a friendly government, an anti-credit government that is... Obtaining credit, or holding onto the credit we already have will not be as easy as we were used to. In the short term, I don't think this will help anybody at all. However, in the longer term (5+ years) I can see how weaning off the credit addiction will help Americans prosper and become a savings oriented nation. Will this help our economy pick up the pace? In my opinion, not at all.

A reality check here... American consumers were on a long run of too much easy credit and businesses were blind (???) to the reality of life. Whether the government changed the rules or NOT... the banking industry had loans that were going delinquent and a crash took place anyway. Some form of restructuring credit would take place anyhow. Good or bad. Those of us (probably few on this site - my first credit card was 1972) can relate to the ups and downs of economic cycles and shake outs. They happen. Usually parts of the economy adjust every three to five years except this last unreal long run (over 10 years). When economic cycles adjust the banking and investment communities always run and remake themselves adjusting whatever. I have seen the credit APR's for years starting at 18+% (normal) and AF's were normal (1970's to the early 1990's). The credit community almost always used to verify income, employment and established credit limits relative to the applicant's ability to pay. That was normal. It has only been the last fifteen years (more or less) that all reality went way. Credit lines were often based on the minimum payment requirements (which again used to be up to 5% a month). Why... because lenders wanted to ensure that the credit user had the capacity to repay and the lenders were interested in NOT seeing people getting in over their financial capabilites. This is the world of reality. Like it or NOT we will return to it. Frankly, it is long over do! In the old world lenders of all types referred to the 3 "C"s of credit when they considered one's ability to take on some form of debt!!!

capital one dropped my rates from 24.90% to 4.40% without me even asking..

bad thing about the entire thing, if the government wouldn't of screwed with these laws no one would be getting rate jacked now.

x 1,000,000

Amen to that! Gone and preach Colo!

WOW...! Yeah...

Well Colo, only in America! I have to admit that we are credit dependents, and tend to turn toward credit for wants and needs that we currently have the cash for. I caught myself in several incidents where I said, "I do have $200 in the bank, but I would rather use my credit card and pay it off at a later date". I am a heavy debit card user but, in my mind (at the time), I tell myself that I am saving money by not using my cash in the bank. What can I say? I am an American....lolz!

And there is nothing wrong with that (using credit). And believe me, I understand that sometimes using the card is the only way to make it for a few weeks or months in between paychecks/jobs. But what gets me hot under the collar is how so many Americans blame the banks! "The bank held a gun to my head and made me charge." Or the people who say, "yeah, I missed a payment (or two) and they increased my interest rate-those loan sharks!" I mean, really? Of course they are going to raise your rate, you have become a credit risk! Like I said, all of my cards were perfect before all of this mess because I was responsible. The credit card companies never messed with me because I followed the terms and conditions. Plain and simple! American's seem to lack taking responsibilities for their own actions and it kills me. And I am not totally siding with the banks-I know they are not angels, and a lot of the credit line decreases and account closures were the result of the economy-but this CARD Act only amplified the recent actions of the banks. LOL okay, I am done

Well Colo, only in America! I have to admit that we are credit dependents, and tend to turn toward credit for wants and needs that we currently have the cash for. I caught myself in several incidents where I said, "I do have $200 in the bank, but I would rather use my credit card and pay it off at a later date". I am a heavy debit card user but, in my mind (at the time), I tell myself that I am saving money by not using my cash in the bank. What can I say? I am an American....lolz!

This is exactly what I was hoping not to hear.

I work with the issuers, and I am expecting prolonged pushing of the prime/superprime cards like Chase, Citi, Discover and AMEX with higher rates and less competitive features. I think you may see a few other issuers come into the on-line market.

Now you have sub-prime. That is what bothers me. Recently, we've seen Orchard / HSBC come back with their classic card, but Metabank has only been out with their secured cards. First Premier Bank has totally changed their approach, and are offering either secured cards, or cards with 59.9% interest (I didn't miss a decimal point)! That's what the credit card reform bill has caused so far, nothing but havvoc. Loan sharks and payday loan companies are probably going to see really good times ahead, unfortunately. By the way, Finance Globe owns loansharks.com if you guys have any ideas of how we can put this name to better use.

So, in the end, card issuers will raise their rates, and I think it can be a take it or leave it kind of deal. This will allow them to make of for the laws that are coming into effect, or have already. The card market always prices in risk, just like any financial product. Unfortunately, customers as a whole (even the good ones) will be affected by this mess.

Isn't it great? Our fellow American's cannot handle their own finances so they blame the big old bad banks and cry to Congress. I do not know anybody who has not already been affected by the upcoming law. Higher interest rates, credit line drecreases and closed accounts. No wonder other countries dislike us so much.

I work with the issuers, and I am expecting prolonged pushing of the prime/superprime cards like Chase, Citi, Discover and AMEX with higher rates and less competitive features. I think you may see a few other issuers come into the on-line market.

Now you have sub-prime. That is what bothers me. Recently, we've seen Orchard / HSBC come back with their classic card, but Metabank has only been out with their secured cards. First Premier Bank has totally changed their approach, and are offering either secured cards, or cards with 59.9% interest (I didn't miss a decimal point)! That's what the credit card reform bill has caused so far, nothing but havvoc. Loan sharks and payday loan companies are probably going to see really good times ahead, unfortunately. By the way, Finance Globe owns loansharks.com if you guys have any ideas of how we can put this name to better use.

So, in the end, card issuers will raise their rates, and I think it can be a take it or leave it kind of deal. This will allow them to make of for the laws that are coming into effect, or have already. The card market always prices in risk, just like any financial product. Unfortunately, customers as a whole (even the good ones) will be affected by this mess.

I know...if anybody is thinking about applying for new credit, best to do it before Monday.....

Well here it is fresh from the Wall Street Journal February 15, 2010. Big brother is even more in your life:

By KAREN BLUMENTHAL

You may think your income is private information. But the credit bureaus may have your number. And starting in February, your income—as estimated by the bureaus—may be used to help determine whether you get a new credit card.

Tuesday, the Federal Reserve issued its final rules related to last year's Credit Card Act, which, among other things, will require credit-card companies to consider an applicant's income or assets and current debts before approving credit. To provide flexibility, however, the Fed said that issuers can use "a reasonable estimate" of income or assets based on "statistically sound models."

In hopes of such a decision, the three big credit bureaus have been updating or rolling out products that seek to estimate consumers' incomes, based on information in their credit reports, such as the size and age of their mortgages or the size of their credit limits.

The products also are responding to banks' efforts to tighten credit standards in order to reduce losses and risk. "We look to fill in the blanks where they need the blanks filled in," says John Cullerton, vice president, product management, for Equifax Inc., an Atlanta-based credit bureau.

Credit-card companies can then double-check what we have long reported ourselves against these estimates—which often don't require consumer consent and aren't available to consumers for review.

Indeed, lenders of all kinds are starting to collect ever more financial information from us and about us. Last summer, Fannie Mae began requiring mortgage lenders to verify borrowers' incomes by checking income-tax filings. Instead of simply providing pay stubs and bank and brokerage account statements, home buyers now are being asked to provide copies of their tax returns and are also required to fill out an Internal Revenue Service form known as 4506-T that allows the IRS to release their tax filings to lenders.

Credit scores, which have been long a key factor in whether you get a loan or a credit card, may not be sufficient for many future credit decisions. With the new credit-card law requiring credit-card issuers to consider a customer's ability to pay before opening new accounts, the Fed had proposed requiring people to report their own income or assets when applying for credit.

But retailers feared the proposed rules would squelch their ability to instantly open credit accounts at the cash register because shoppers wouldn't want to disclose such personal information in the middle of a store.

Both retailers and the credit bureaus asked the Fed to allow them use alternatives such as the credit bureaus' income estimations instead.

Card companies already are asking for more detailed information in their online applications.

GADS! :white-flag:Good luck and happy credit hunting...!