I want to tell you about something else that's going to be coming down the pipeline from the Left in probably about 15 or 20 years. They are pushing to create a credit rating agency run by the federal government. Ostensibly this will be to protect consumers from unfair practices and the huge influence that individual's credit ratings can have on their lives. But it will not be too much longer until businesses are forced not to discriminate against consumers based on credit ratings from private companies. They will only be allowed to use the credit rating from the government. The ultimate end game is that landlords may be prohibited from discriminating against renters who have failed to pay rent in the past. They will only be allowed to treat new applicants differently based on what the applicant's rating from the federal government credit agency is. This may sound very difficult for most of you to believe, but consider all the "anti-discrimination" laws in place in some states right now, the strange things business owners are not allowed to discriminate against. Also consider the eviction moratorium that has been going on, and what the fate of all those people will eventually be once the eviction moratorium finally comes to an end and these people's credit ratings are completely tattered from not paying the rent they owe. It will be very hard for these people to find another landlord who will rent to them. Think about insider trader laws, where even conducting an otherwise normal business activity based on prohibited information is illegal. In this case the prohibited information would be information about your customer's or renter's history. Or ObamaCare (The "Affordable" Care Act), that made it illegal for insurance companies to discriminate based on gender. Even though women end up using more medical treatment and costing insurance companies more, the insurance companies were not allowed to charge women more than men for the premiums. There is already tons of precedent for something like this. The Biden Administration has already presented a proposal for credit reporting to be performed by the government and eliminate credit reporting by private companies. https://www.americanactionforum.org...-agency-evaluating-a-biden-campaign-proposal/ Of course what this will do is ultimately push up prices for everyone else, everyone one else who doesn't have a damaged personal history. Whether you are borrowing money, buying something on credit, taking out a loan, or trying to rent. Those who have been irresponsible will not be held responsible for their actions. They will be allowed to continue to conduct business the same as everyone else and will "poison" the pool. "Equality" in this case will mean treating those who have been responsible in their past business dealings the same as those who have been irresponsible and screwed over the last business.
Remember, several states and then the federal government were imposing an "eviction moratorium", prohibiting landlords from evicting non-paying tenants during the 2-year long coronavirus pandemic. In the aftermath of that, the Democrats were trying to come up with a policy to prevent all those tenants' credit histories from being ruined. "If you make an agreement for payment relief before you fall behind and your landlord qualifies as a "furnisher" of information to the credit reporting bureaus, the CARES Act prohibits the addition of negative information to your credit reports. (A "furnisher" is an entity that provides information to one or more bureaus for inclusion in a credit report.) Under the CARES Act, which amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act, if a furnisher agrees to let you make partial payments or forbear any amounts (called an "accommodation" under the law) because you were affected by the coronavirus pandemic during the covered period, that furnisher must report your account as current to the bureaus--so long as you weren't already delinquent on payments." After CARES, Lenders Are Implementing Stronger Credit Requirements Lenders are having trouble determining if consumers are creditworthy because of the CARES Act requirement to report accommodated accounts as current. Because lenders aren't getting the full picture of people's ability to pay their debts, some creditors are pulling back on credit. If the landlord agrees to renegotiate the deal and tell the renter they can pay a smaller amount instead, then they are not allowed to report that renter as delinquent on their debt. This might happen if the landlord decides it's better to at least get some money than no money at all while they are not allowed to evict the tenant. The cost of that is the tenant will be able to later walk away with any damage on their rental history. Let's say the renter should be paying $1200 a month, but they get the landlord to agree to a temporary $400 a month. Then they can later walk away from that and rent somewhere else and the new landlord will never know. The first landlord is kind of coerced into that. He can either take $400 a month, or not get any money if he wants to make sure it will go on that tenants record to punish them. It seems like a very interesting a setup. The tenant is practically bribing the landlord with part of the rent money to not damage their record. Or viewed another way, the tenant is able to hold hostage some of the money owed to the landlord to get (coerce) the landlord to agree not to damage the tenant's credit history, even though the landlord may only get a fraction of the money owed.
