He Was a Middle-School Loan Shark
Enterprising kid. Outrage. Enterprise stopped. Kid shamed. Other kids can't buy the candy they want. Nobody wins.
Jeffrey Tucker writes at FEE of a 17-year-old kid (perhaps his or that of a friend of his) who started loaning other kids money for candy:
He would loan anyone a dollar. However, the next day they had to pay him two dollars. This was great because it weeded out people who were not serious about their candy needs, and got rid of those who had no intention of paying him back. His idea helped to ration his scarce resources. It had the additional advantage of making him some money, which incentivized him to make funds available.Everyone was happy. He made money. They got their candy. Most everyone paid him back. If he began the week with $5, he ended the week with $10. This was nice. No one was hurt.
...My friend was making lots of money. And why? Because many students wanted candy and failed to make the proper financial preparations to purchase it. He was there to facilitate an exchange. They would get candy now, which is what they wanted, and he would be rewarded for anticipating their desires.
...Predictably, there was mass outrage. He was hauled in and accused of "loan sharking." There was a trial. He was declared guilty. He was put on detention and humiliated publicly.
Once he was out of the picture, kids no longer had any means of getting financing for their candy fixes. They just stood in front of the machines staring blankly. It's hard to see how the overall middle-school economy was improved by this crackdown.
The response of the parents and teachers was a typical example of mob behavior against intelligent capitalist practices. It's been going on for hundreds of years, particularly hurting people who make money with their minds through financial savvy.
People spend money because the thing they are spending it on is of greater value to them than what they're trading it for. Nobody was getting duped or swindled here. They all made a choice to pay a premium price to get candy right then and there.
P.S. No, I don't eat sugar -- save for a tiny scoop of ice cream or a mini chocolate bar once a week or so -- and Gary Taubes' new book, The Case Against Sugar, will explain why. Still, other people have yet to make this decision, and if they want to borrow money from a kid to buy candy, well, that should be their business and his.








Consistency alert…
You just argued for payday lenders, considered to have "predatory" interest rates far lower than this example.
Radwaste at January 8, 2017 9:55 PM
Um, leap to conclusions alert.
A blog post I did on how "regulating payday loan stores out of business actually hurts the poor":
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/09/26/protecting_the.html
Amy Alkon at January 8, 2017 10:37 PM
Another post -- linking to a reason.tv video "in defense of payday lending."
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/11/12/poor_people_kno.html
Next, you'll be accusing me of being a pitcher for the New York Yankees.
Amy Alkon at January 8, 2017 10:38 PM
For the record, I throw like a girl -- an 8-year-old girl who's been bedridden for much of her life.
Amy Alkon at January 8, 2017 10:40 PM
I don't eat things like cake, pie, ice cream or cookies, but I haven't excised sugar from my life completely.
And Ben & Jerry's supports Black Lives Matter, if anyone's interested in boycotting them for it.
I still eat natural sugar and things like peanut butter. Apples with peanut butter is my favorite snack.
Patrick at January 9, 2017 4:26 AM
No. I actually have a nuanced via on BLM's so I understand Ben & Jerry's support.
Shocking I know.
Ppen at January 9, 2017 4:49 AM
*view not via
It's weird to me how people paint BLM as racist then turn around and get super offended when the left also has the exact same view of trump supporters as racist.
Most of us know that the racists on either side are just a very vocal minority. BLM has legitimate reasons to exists their execution is just off.
Ppen at January 9, 2017 4:55 AM
Absolutely agree with you Ppen on this: "BLM has legitimate reasons to exists their execution is just off."
The world is not as black and white as each side of so many issues, including this one, would have us believe. (And the black and white reference is not intended to be "clever" in any way.)
Ben & Jerry's tiny one-serve cup of ice cream is exactly what Gregg brings me when it's ice cream time, and I'm good with them supporting Black Lives Matter and causes in general -- though I may not agree with them on all of the others; I really haven't checked. I think the people behind B&J are good people trying to do good, and I like that.
Amy Alkon at January 9, 2017 5:27 AM
Ppen:
No, it doesn't.
They claim that there is a war on blacks, yet research by Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at John Jay University Peter Moskos shows that cops are actually more likely to shoot white suspects than black ones.
And FBI crime statistics consistently reveal that blacks kill over twice as many whites as whites kill blacks. If the black population were as large as the white population, that figure would be over ten times.
Any basically, everything Black Lives Matter protests (with rare exceptions) is based on a lie.
Contrary to what you would read on the Black Lives Matter website, Trayvon Martin was not murdered. He was killed in a justifiable act of self-defense. And Mike Brown was not murdered either. He was killed for the same reasons. And these were the soi-disant murders that gave impetus to the movement.
"Their execution is just off"? That's a massive understatement. Their execution is criminal. You don't have the right to block traffic, preventing people from attending to their duties, and possibly blocking first responders who need to use those roads to save lives.
You do not have the right to disrupt lawful assembly, prevent people from listening to or attending lectures, or shopping at the stores of their choice.
Rioting and looting are not legitimate forms of protest. They are crimes.
Their demands will never be met. You cannot enact laws that will give things like free post-secondary education or a guaranteed minimum income only to a certain race. I'm not the expert that JD and Isab are, but based on my layman's knowledge of the law, I would say that would be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Blacks Lives Matter exists only for one reason: to present blacks as the victims of injustice (not true) to distract from the fact that the black community is the least productive, least educated, most violent, most criminal, and most dependent on government handouts in the United States.
It is simply DARVO on a grand scale.
And I'm fully aware that there are most definitely productive and successful black people in this country. I'm addressing only the demographic. Not each individual that makes up the demographic.
Patrick at January 9, 2017 5:32 AM
BLM is a loose organization of different groups of people with vastly different beliefs all coming together advocating to move the black community forward and enact change.
It isn't a monolithic entity that is organized in any meaningful way with any type of leadership. Any loose organization like that is going to attract super disruptive loud crazies, but they are not representative of the majority of the group.
"to present blacks as the victims of injustice (not true) to distract from the fact that the black community is the least productive, least educated, most violent, most criminal, and most dependent on government handouts in the United States."
And with statements like that is it any wonder BLM exists? I mean you're making me want to take out my credit card and send them a donation right now.
Ppen at January 9, 2017 6:13 AM
Oh, you object to my statement about Black Lives Matter and the black community?
And which of those points in that statement is inaccurate?
Go ahead and send them your donation. I couldn't care less what you do with your own money. Or in this case, your credit card company's money, which you will be compelled to repay with interest.
Patrick at January 9, 2017 6:19 AM
"Or in this case, your credit card company's money, which you will be compelled to repay with interest."
Hahahahaha. I get why Crid insults you in such a hilarious fashion.
Ppen at January 9, 2017 6:22 AM
Still waiting for you to rebut a single one of those points that you found so objectionable.
And did you send your donation, yet? I'm curious because I want to know if they at least send out gracious thank you emails.
Patrick at January 9, 2017 6:32 AM
And an LL Bean board (and family) member donated $60,000 to Donald Trump. So, of course, the anti-Trump group, Grab Your Wallet, is advocating a boycott of LL Bean. All three of LL Bean's black customers are very upset.
Conan the Grammarian at January 9, 2017 7:20 AM
So...is this the perp? https://youtu.be/TruXhuAO4IY
I found a link to a credit card company charging a 79.9% rate. http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/first-premier-79-rate-fees-credit-card-1265.php
The ghost of Al Capone just reached out and asked wait, that's legal? I wuz in the wrong business!
I R A Darth Aggie at January 9, 2017 7:26 AM
It's weird to me how people paint BLM as racist then turn around and get super offended when the left also has the exact same view of trump supporters as racist.
The difference, of course, is that the left doesn't see BLM as racist in the least, but will hold Trump and all of his supporters liable if a single Klan member shows up to a Trump rally.
Shit like that is how you got Trump. In case you forgot:
What do we want? Dead cops.
When do we want them? Now.
That plays in Peoria...poorly. As Alinsky said, make them live up to their own rules.
I R A Darth Aggie at January 9, 2017 7:51 AM
BLM is based on a lie.
Hands up, don't shoot.
Didn't happen.
I R A Darth Aggie at January 9, 2017 7:53 AM
Sorry. I did not remember that you defended payday lenders.
What are we saying is a legal means for this student to collect what he is "owed"?
Radwaste at January 9, 2017 10:08 AM
Radwaste: What are we saying is a legal means for this student to collect what he is "owed"?
If only two out of three of his borrowers paid him back he'd still be making a pretty good profit.
Ken R at January 9, 2017 10:30 AM
And one more distinction that the black community enjoys that I forgot to mention. They are the leading perpetrators of hate crimes, per capita.
According to the latest hate crime stats compiled by the FBI in 2015 (still waiting for the FBI to cough up the 2016 stats),
White people did surprisingly well on the hate crime stats. According to the Census Bureau, whites (including white Hispanics) account for 77.1% of the population. Yet, they committed only 48.4% of the hate crimes. Blacks (including black Hispanics or Blatinos) account for 13.3% of the population, but committed 24.3% of the population.
In fact, blacks were the only racial demographic that committed hate crimes at a rate higher than their population.
Asians make us all look bad. 5.6% of the population but only 1% of the hate crimes.
Frankly, after what happened with the Chicago Four, I suspect the number of hate crimes committed by blacks is even higher. Look at the reluctance of the Chicago Police Department to classify an obvious hate crime as such.
Four black young adults assaulted a white mentally-challenged eighteen-year-old, saying "Fuck white people" and forcing him to say the same, and Chicago Police Department is all like, "Uh, gee, we don't know if this is a hate crime. Hmmmm..."
How much proof did they need?
With this in mind, I refuse to pretend that police brutality is an issue for the black community. If they want to focus on real solutions, I'd be happy to give my support.
How about encouraging black women not to have children out of wedlock? 72% of all black children are born to single parents. That's a disgrace! Is it any wonder, with the absence of two-parent families in the black community, that these kids turn to gangs? I really think that increasing the number of two parent families would be a huge help in addressing the problems that infest the black community.
I'll support Black Lives Matter when they start addressing real problems. Not before.
Patrick at January 9, 2017 10:43 AM
It's amazing what people will do to maintain a politically-correct view of the world - which is entirely a fantasy.
One report on police shootings...
...and here's one about the myth of racism in criminal justice.
"The most dangerous misconception about our criminal justice system is that it is pervaded by racial bias. For decades, criminologists have tried to find evidence proving that the overrepresentation of blacks in prison is due to systemic racial inequity. That effort has always come up short. In fact, racial differences in offending account for the disproportionate representation of blacks in prison." (emphasis mine)
Such people who have an idea otherwise have a completely twisted idea of cause and effect.
Radwaste at January 9, 2017 11:16 AM
While there is much to admire in a young entrepreneur, loan-sharking at school is, and should be, prohibited.
A) Is he sharing his profits with the school or the vending machine company? If not, why not? They provide him with facilities to ply his trade.
B) Would collection of bad debts be disruptive to the learning environment?
C) Describe the limit to which this enterprise should be allowed to grow until adults need to intervene. Why just candy? Could he loan on shoes, phones, and cosmetics?
Canvasback at January 9, 2017 1:18 PM
Don't loan sharks generally inflict grievous bodily injury if they aren't paid?
I mean, I just heard that.
I don't actually know.
Patrick at January 9, 2017 3:29 PM
Canvasback: Is he sharing his profits with the school or the vending machine company?
Maybe the vending machine company should share some its profits with the young entrepreneur/loan shark since it would probably sell less of its merchandise if he wasn't lending money to its customers.
Ken R at January 9, 2017 10:56 PM
Yet BLM doesn't have a nuanced view of cracka-ass crackas, Ppen.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/16/black-lives-matter-protesters-berate-white-student/
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at January 10, 2017 5:03 PM
Depends on the lender Patrick. Some do, some don't. Same with bookies. Also depends on how much you owe. If your lender is looking at getting his legs broken he is probably happy to outsource the opportunity to you.
Ben at January 11, 2017 2:50 PM
Leave a comment