The Instigator
melcharaz
Con (against)
The Contender
MrMaestro
Pro (for)

does credit score determine accountability or character?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
melcharaz has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/20/2019 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 553 times Debate No: 120919
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

melcharaz

Con

Obviously the notion of credit scores has to do more with economy, But I want to question the philosophical side in its interpretation towards human behavior and its attempt to identify or correlate accountability, Moral character, And over all accuracy in determining if a person should be able to purchase/obtain loans based on it.

Again, I want to stress it in a philosophical manner, Not an economic manner, But I will understand if figures are introduced due its nature and impact.

basically, Should we use credit scores to determine who gets loans.
MrMaestro

Pro

This is one of those questions that I'd be happy to argue from either side. Great topic choice!


Let's start by stating the obvious. Loans are given our based on a banks confidence that they will receive the money back (with interest). The most universal and efficient method of determining this is to look at your credit history. Loans are not dispersed based on lofty ideals and good intentions, They're given out based on math. I therefore put it to my opponent to ensure that any proposed alternatives to our current system are fully quantifiable if they are to be taken as serious alternatives.

It is my opinion that credit scores determine your accountability, But not necessarily your character. By "accountability" I mean the likelihood that you will pay back the loan. Having bad credit and being an unreliable payor isn't a sign of bad moral character, It's just what happens when you're poor. Since the original questions asked if credit scores could be used to determine accountability OR character, I feel safe defending only one of these premesis.

--

The more interesting (philosophical) side of this argument, Is how do we determine who should get loans? What criteria should we look at? How do we determine the likelihood of repayment without accurate credit history?

Looking forward to your response.
Debate Round No. 1
melcharaz

Con

thank you for the comments. However I'm not going to try to suggest another method or alternative to what we currently have. I'm arguing philosophy, Not trying to defend credit score, Ill let an economist or accountant do that. Some dictionaries state accountability as responsibility, In which case there are many things that happen to people that they are not responsible for and cannot give an account. There are errors on the credit checker's side and there is the possibility of mistakes that are caused simply by someone stealing an identity and mucking up the credit.

back in 2010 a senator asked Eric Rosenberg the director of government relations at trans union as ask about such a link and he quoted "at this point we don't have any research to show any statistical correlation between what's in some bodies credit report and their job performance or their likely hood to commit fraud"
https:(slash slash)civilrights. Org(slash) resource (Slash) become-an-original-cosponsor-of-the-equal-employment-for-all-act(Slash)

a blog at experian shows evidence of people with higher wages are more likely to have a higher credit score. (No correlation between character or accountability, Just making more money)

accountability in the understanding of "likely hood to pay back your loan" the only correlation you could argue is if they have the money to pay it, Then I imagine their credit score is fine, If you want to argue wage/credit score then we have no need to debate further, I agree that people with higher wages will more likely have higher credit as is shown at experian. Com.
MrMaestro

Pro

Alright, You've made some good points, Although I'm worried that we are agreeing too much and won't have anything left to argue about :)

"Some dictionaries state accountability as responsibility"

Accountability is loosely related to responsibility. I would argue that accountablity is a specific type of responsibility. Being accountable for your actions is someting responsible people do, But it's not the only responsible thing they do.

--
"In which case there are many things that happen to people that they are not responsible for and cannot give an account. There are errors on the credit checker's side and there is the possibility of mistakes that are caused simply by someone stealing an identity and mucking up the credit"

Yes, Bad things happen to good people. Every system is prone to errors. Since we're both too lazy to think of alternative solutions to this problem let's just move on to the next point.

--
"[Eric Rosenberg]: At this point we don't have any research to show any statistical correlation between what's in some bodies credit report and their job performance or their likely hood to commit fraud"

Eric gave the politically correct answer. Businesses don't normally publisize credit score research, Because it can be misconstrued as a form of wealth discrimination. Make no mistake though, That research is definitely happening.

I used to work for a property insurance firm. We gave out home insurance discounts to customers with good credit scores. Most North American insurance companies are doing this now. The idea is that people with better credit are more likely to pay their bills on time, And less likely to submit a claim. Insurance companies don't do things like that unless they are very sure that it is profitable, So I'm inclined to believe they did their research on the topic.

----

Do you believe that companies should be allowed to discount or surcharge customers based on their credit history? Why or why not?


Debate Round No. 2
melcharaz

Con

so, Do we agree on the philosophy? Im not understanding your position.
MrMaestro

Pro

So i've given this some thought.

I think we had different ideas on what this debate would be about. That's my fault. In my field the words "OR/AND" have a very strict logic-based definition, So I assumed that I could defend either "Accountability" or "Character", But I understand that you didn't mean it like that. I was also hoping to figure out alternatives to the current crappy credit history system, But that would involve economics, Which you clearly stated was not part of the debate.

After I realized this I decided that I would try to debate the character side of it, Just for the literalal sake of argument. I spent about an hour typing and deleting stuff. Honestly, I couldn't find a convincing argument.

I'm sorry for wasting your time. I'm not the correct opponent for this debate. This is an excellent topic choice, And you should repost it.

I resign. Please vote con.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by MrMaestro 3 years ago
MrMaestro
The fault was mine.
Posted by melcharaz 3 years ago
melcharaz
i apologize for not being clearer.
Posted by K_Michael_Tolman 3 years ago
K_Michael_Tolman
Accountability is circumstantial.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.