just git ‘er done montana
by problembear
for most of us there is no need to go into long explanations about why we need to vote for capping the interest rate for payday lenders. it is kind of a natural gut reaction for most people to hate sharks. but if you feel that it’s ok to charge 300 to 650% interest to dangle easy money in front of folks who can barely scrape by and then trap them in a cycle of debt that reaps huge profits for predominately out of state loan sharks then by all means support the payday lenders.
payday lenders have reached out to touch family members and friends of most of us here in montana. we know from experience that these loans rarely help anyone in chronic poverty and they are even more destructive for people struggling to survive a recession. in many cases payday lenders make a desperate situation for our most vulnerable low wage workers much more difficult.
only three more days to git ‘er done montana. let’s stop rewarding bad behavior and make these slimy merchants work within a reasonable regulated market place. please vote yes on I-164 and cap the payday lending rate to 36%
montana is just too good to allow this feeding frenzy on our poor anymore.
-
Recent Comments
lizard19 on Who Can Can Engstrom? ladybug on Who Can Can Engstrom? Sheryl Small on Who Can Can Engstrom? Binky Griptight on Who Can Can Engstrom? feralcatoffreedom on SCOTUS Hands the Rights to Our… Buzz Feedback on Who Can Can Engstrom? lizard19 on Who Can Can Engstrom?
November 1, 2010 at 7:07 pm
No comments here for two days, so I’m gonna poach the thread a bit.
I voted against the Constitutional Convention because both Joe Balyeat and Rob Natelson were for it.
for the ban on realty transfer tax, no not really a constitutional deal, but a good chance to say no to new taxes.
for the regulation on “post date a check” joints; the financial equivalent of snake oil cures for cancer. Missoulapolis points out that you can usually find the “title loans” places next to casinos. Then there’s the ads, where a guy in a suit behind a fancy desk tells me he needs “choices”.
I went to both Supreme Court candidates’ fundraisers. Thought, in the end, Swandal’s judicial experience made him a stronger candidate, but I saw both R’s and D’s supporting both candidates. Either will be good.
My guess is that truly contested house districts, all two or three of them that are in the state, will go D. The reason being that MT voters will look for a bit of balance and will look for some place they can justify voting for a D. It certainly won’t be the box next to the mob lawyer from California. That result will be Tracy Velazquez v Rehberg redux.
November 1, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Sheriff race looks like both giffin and ibsen are fine choices. Leaning giffen but tough to decide between two good candidates.
Thanks for supporting the cap on interest rates, goof.
Agree also on I-105. Our little house started out @ about 800 bucks a year in prop taxes. Now over 2300. People are fed up.
November 2, 2010 at 8:04 am
PB,
Vote for Ibsen if you are torn. Ive known him and his family for years and they are just great people.
November 3, 2010 at 10:12 am
congratulations to mr ibsen. i ended up voting with my gut and he won. it will be so good to have someone in there to fix the disconnect between missoula county citizens and the county sheriff since mcmeekin has been in there.
looking forward to someone who is positive, responsive and competent. something we haven’t had since sheriff doug chase’s era.