http://moneyfeatures.blogs.money.cnn...means-for-you/

I reject the notion that U.S. citizens of legal age should be burdened with such nonsense. This is clearly age discrimination. It's bad enough that alcohol laws exist as they do, but now we're going to control your financial lives as well? Where is the logic? At least you can make a decent argument as to the maturity required to consume alcohol, since irresponsible drinking can potentially harm others. But how do we justify the intervention of irresponsible debt?

The government needs to be restrained. This is asinine.
 

Because some people do not view it as protection, they see it as an invasion of their right to conduct private business. I am one of those individuals. I don't like our federal government telling me what I can pay to borrow money. As long as I am not being criminally coerced, I don't see a reason to make these sort of laws.
 

Where is that in the Constitution? The government's advantage as a central body is that it can control and properly distribute public goods, like national security and roads, that normally would be very challenging to fund- things that people individually are unable to take on themselves. I think "Not being an idiot" is something that you should be able to achieve on your own, though.
 

Why does protecting your citizens have to "be in the constitution"?

Why have any laws? If you're "not being an idiot" you won't get hurt, right?
 

Why have laws at all?

Just because VISA doesn't send out goons to break your legs if you can't pay, it does not make their behavior less deceptive and (at times) criminal.
 

I don't have much sympathy for deceptive business practices, but that doesn't mean we need to legislate against them. Deceptive falls short of criminal because they prey on the dumb or ignorant. I'll be the first to admit that I don't read every contract I sign, especially when they appear to be boilerplate. But I also admit that it's my own fault if I sign something in this fashion and end up paying as a result.

That still doesn't account for age discrimination.
 

The government also has an obligation to protect it's citizens from being taken advantage of. Please tell me, is it my fault that my interest rates were jacked up on a whim? I made no stupid decision. I am responsible. I signed on with my card believing they would honor the original terms of the contract. In 20 years I have never missed a payment. I was cheated.

So, that's okay? Credit card companies have the power to screw people and they do it. I am happy the laws are being changed.
 

And the new laws are going to change that, so I'm not sure how that relates to an age limit on credit applications? Besides, don't you also have the right to transfer that balance to another card? Nobody if forcing these customers to pay these rates.

You won't be happy when your interest rate on new purchases skyrockets to 20%. Or when stores begin charging you extra to use credit because their merchant fees just doubled. Like I told Neo, these fees are not going away, they're just being reshuffled.
 

If teenagers are too stupid to make rationale decisions, then the public needs to vote to raise the legal adult age. It is unconscionable to tell a person that they are now an adult, yet they don't get full rights....not just yet. We can conscript you into our military, but you do not have the right to engage in financial transactions with private companies. Sorry, the public has a right to make stupid decisions. The government has no business limiting our rights in this fashion. This nonsense all started with alcohol age restrictions and it seems that there is no end in sight now.
 

Come on Nuts. You know that teenagers are prone to going apeshit with credit cards and credit card companies prey on that. They count on that. I don't think it's too much to ask for proof of employment or to have someone else co-sign it. If anything, it would promote responsible spending if a co-signer's ass is on the line.

Sorry man, but this one is a no-brainer. I LOVE my VISA to death, but those fuckers will skin you any chance they can. Hell, I had MY interest rate jaked up out of the blue for NO APPARENT reason about a month ago, and I have outstanding credit. Fuckers.

Sure, you can argue that I should get rid of my credit card if I am so upset with it, but in this day and age, you really cannot get along without one. You NEED a good credit rating and the only way to get it is to start with a credit card.
 

I have a problem with setting limits on private business, that much is clear. If the practice is not illegal, I see no reason to curtail it. Obviously this bill makes these practices illegal, so it's not something I'm going to get too excited about. But that's not my point. This bill is nothing short of age discrimination. Our government is removing the legal rights of a group of adults based on their age. Once again we are allowing the federal government to place restrictions on our rights as citizens to engage in private business transaction. This is intolerable and I am frankly shocked that you approve. The idea that people are irresponsible should not prohibit those that are responsible from engaging in private business.

These banks are not going to just walk away from profits. They were making money on these policies. There is no provision to limit interest rates in these bills. So where do you think these banks are going to look for additional revenue? One way or another, people will pay. It's just going to change pockets.
 

Neo, are you going to look to the government to solve all your problems? Do you lack the personal responsibility to control your own finances?

As for the rest of the bill, sure, it's wonderful if you're willing to accept 20% interest rates on your cards from here to eternity. Do you think these new regulations are free? Yeah, no.
 

Personally? No. I understand finances, not that I have any, lol...

But others don't. We have rules in place to protect the consumer from bad business practices in other industries or areas or whatever -- why are you opposed to setting rules for credit card companies? The CC industry is relatively "new" considering other areas of industry that have regulations (the food industry for instance, you don't see places selling Grade F claiming it's Grade A or whatever do you?) in place. This was going to happen sooner or later and it's not as if anything being suggested is that outrageous.

I fail to see how requiring them to mail you the fucking bill on time, or set limits on when they can increase your interest rates -- especially the over-limit bullshit -- is something undesirable.

Given the chance, the companies trick, confuse, or outright steal money from their customers. Sorry, but I don't really feel sorry because they're finally be given some clear limits.

Could you explain this statement? Because I'm confused as to the point you're trying to make here.
 

I find it asinine that credit card companies basically give out cards to college-aged students as if it were candy specifically so they'll use them because they are irresponsible with them (because they never learned proper financial stuff from HS or from their parents).

I find nothing wrong with having a parent have to co-sign for a credit card when you're under 21. It only makes sense. By the way, even you're bold'ed portion ends with "...or they can show proof of income" -- so I fail to see how this affects any responsible young adult to the detriment you suggest.

The rest of that bill is pretty interesting, by the way. Out of curiosity to you have issues with any of the other parts of the bill? Or was this simply the only one you thought was the most outrageous? Really the rest of the parts of the bill seem to make sense. Why anyone would advocate for support of credit card's lame tactics is beyond me.

Ever been on a college campus when the credit card people are pushing them? We used to live up near purdue, it was pretty crazy at times.
 

If parents don't teach responsible spending to their teens, how else will they learn it other than experience? If they have half a brain, they will learn from their mistakes and stop spending money they don't have. The first statement they get with interest rates and fees tacked on will be the proverbial big red truck.

Also, if a company decides not to issue a card to a person based upon their risk factors, and yes, age is included in that and proof of income, it should be the company's decision who they lend to, not the governments. If a company goes broke because they lent out money to dumbasses who don't/can't pay their bills, just let them flounder, don't give them a bailout and let the natural order of things take it's course.

If some idiotic young "adult" racks up bills they can't handle, it might take a few years to clear up but they'll learn a valuable lesson in financial responsibility and either A) take those lessons to heart or B) they'll have such fucked up credit for years to come that nobody else will lend them more money, not such a bad thing really.

By simply not letting them have cards, or making them be on their parents accounts, the govt is simply taking away the consequences of their actions by making mommy and daddy utimately responsible for the debt that the kid accrued, and preventing them from learning from their mistakes while they are still young enough to recover from it.
 

The laws of economics don't care if the President blue red or green.
 

The minimum wage doesn't cause inflation, that's not why it's bad. You cause inflation by introducing more funds into the money supply, not by raising the price of a given commodity. The problem with it is that workers have a given marginal production of labor. Competition over labor means that their pay always tends to be equal to their marginal product of labor, and at the same time, a company is not going to be willing to pay a given worker more than his marginal product.

When you raise the minimum wage, you help nobody, since nobody makes more than they would have otherwise, and you hurt many people, since workers with a marginal product of labor below the minimum wage are fired, or never hired in the first place.
 

"socializing healthcare" -- what? when's this happening? the minimum wage is currently like, what, $6 and some change, lol? problem now is that the minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation. inflation usually comes as a result of the federal reserve fucking with shit though, more then "raising the minimum wage" a few cents.

Grog: The thing here is that I don't see America going up in flames around me. I don't see how Obama and team are "fucking everybody over" -- infact all I see are conservatives complaining the same way that, even I, complained about Bush. We didn't asplode during Bush's terms, so I highly suspect the idea we're going to go up in flames during Obama's.
 

I cannot stand all this Republican vs Democrat, Conservative vs Liberal bullshit. For God's sake people, this about the future of us and our country. It's not about winning pissing contests and gloating at your opponent. Nobody's gonna give a shit when our country's in flames and all you can do is point the finger across the aisle.
 

Frankly I don't see how economics could be turned into a bipartisan bickerfest. There's what's good for the economy and there's what's not. Clearly Obama and Co., are doing what's not. I don't care what their political affiliation is, they're fucking everybody over. "Trickle down" may be a lot slower than everybody else likes, but "float it from the bottom" has never worked. Raising minimum wage just increases inflation, socializing health care triples the size of government and destroys the efficiency of health care, and passing out welfare for years so people can live off of it just makes it a poverty support program.

If only I didn't believe in abortion and religion, I would at least have a place in all this mess.
 

Maybe, but I would think it would open up competition for Credit Cards a bit more, don't you think? I mean if you have a card where they just hiked the rate because of this bill, wouldn't you look into to swapping over to a different company that might have a lower rate? I don't know. If you use a credit card responsibly (pay off balance in full) then you really have nothing to worry about -- though from what I understand credit card companies don't like people who do that, rofl. I don't know.

At the least it's a dick move.
 

This is correct. Right now a lot of people are seeing their credit card rates jump, because banks across the nation know that this bill is going to pass, and they are slamming consumers now while they can (which they wouldn't have done otherwise if this bill wasn't coming down the pipeline). Yet another example of unintended consequences from shitty, politically motivated and poorly-thought-out legislation - by the time the bill is passed, there won't be anybody left to raise rates on, we will already all be there.
 

The issue is, the credit card companies are pushing these changes through to people because of the lost money from not being able to increase rates on people that miss payments. If the bill didnt exist, this probably wouldnt have happened. It hurts the responsible people, and helps the irresponsible people (seems like a trend with obama, help the poor hurt the wealthy... even though my parents arent wealthy).
 

I was unaware this bill was legistlating the interest rates, only that they had to give proper notices before raising it and allowing cc customers the ability to move back down to a lower rate if they paid their bill on time after it was raised. Really the only thing that's even similar is that the bill restricts the CC industry from charging you a new higher rate on your total balance after raising it, instead they can only use the new rate for new purchases.

I maybe confused though because I read or heard somewhere that there was another bill that suggested a limit of 25% for interest rates, but I didn't think it was going anywhere?
 

My parents just got hit by the prospect of this bill. They have flawless credit and dont miss any payments and their credit card went from 7.9% to 17.9%. Fuck this bill. They have been a paying customer to them (capital one) for years now, and they have always had that low interest rate, and now out of the blue they have a 17.9% VARIABLE interest rate.

Seriously. What the fuck.
 

HOLY SHIT! I'd be cutting up my card like the motherfucking Fist of the North Star if I ever got hit with that.



They would already be cancelled.
 

Neo, unless they're bullying you with the threat of violence, there is nothing you can say that's going to lend credence to this argument. If teens are so weak in the mind that they can't resist a credit card offer, then I fear they're going to have far more problems in life.

We don't ask that unemployed people provide proof of income, yet they have less chance of repaying debt than a young teenager. Would you like to cede more rights, if only to have them restored with proof of X. Maybe you should not be licensed to drive until 21 unless you can provide proof of employment. Does this sound fair?

The difference being that you look to the government to take care of you, I do not grant them that responsibility willingly.
 

Neo has not yet responded to the original post once in this thread. Instead he has whined about how unfair the credit card companies are and how stupid people are so we need government to control it all for us because we aren't capable of it.

Neo, please answer the question: what right does the government have to restrict our financial freedom in the way it does with this legislation? Why should someone under 21 be restricted by law to one credit card? This is a trampling of our freedom, plain and simple. 'For our own good.'

Honestly Neo I hope liberals keep up with the attitude you project, Obama might not even win re-nomination he'll be so unpopular by 2012. Of course that might be a bad thing, Hillary would be the nominee then...

Ever notice how Neo never, ever directly responds to what anyone else says? Instead, he spews out whatever pro-Obama, anti-capitalist talking points he picked up off of HuffPo or TPM or FireDogLake or MyDD today that are relevant to the topic being discussed in general. His first post in this thread is a classic example. Instead of replying to the issue Nuts raised, namely that this bill restricts personal freedom, he goes off on a rant about the credit card companies. And then he goes off on a rant about people living above their means. The only consistency, the only coherence, to any Neo post are these two things: it will defend Obama no matter what and attack anyone or anything necessary to 'defend' Obama (and socialism in general).
 

Uhhh, this is sorta what this bill is supposed to address -- that is they can't hike up the interest rates without giving a 45-day notice, and if they do increase it because of missed payments, they have to lower it if you make payments ontime for 6 months after the increase.

Sounds shitty though, I'd be dropping that card asap.

This is a weak argument and you know it. "Fuck them if they're so naive" -- is that basically it? You still have yet to answer the question directly -- Yes or No? Because I have. I was on the Purdue campus a few times when they were doing their "drives" or whatever they call them and they're salespeople they don't tell you the fine print, or the consequences.

I was unaware we had the right to credit cards. Care to point me to where we're guaranteed that? Proof of income for a credit card makes sense, and you know it! Don't act like it's some extreme insanity to require a company make sure they're customer can actually pay it off, honestly Lackey. Your driving example is somewhat weak as well -- you don't need an income to drive a car (aside from gas -- besides as a young person around the age of 15-16 you're probably using your parent's car anyway) -- but to responsibly use a credit card, you do need an income.

I've got some bad news for you then, Lackey. What do you think the FDA, FCC, or any other regulating body exists for? That's a nice philosophy, but it's not going to happen. I don't know about you, but I don't think it would be that fun to have to go read up on meat to make sure I wasn't purchasing the bad stuff. I can goto the supermarket and pickup a pound of ground beef and know that it's not Grade F.

I know I've posted this before, but young people act stupidly sometime. It shouldn't be shocking. Besides, nothing really is going to change anyway -- They'll still push CC's on college students, only now their parents will be involved. Which they ought to be. As a parent you should be able to offer advice for your child regarding finances -- instead of just cutting them loose. On the other hand those students who work won't have any trouble getting a card either.

This has nothing to do with "ceding" rights. This is about setting limits for an industry that's been pushing the limits currently in place for years now, and deceiving -- or outright cheating -- their customers. "Age discrimination" what a joke! Do you also consider it discrimination when people under the age of 18/21 have to show IDs to get cigarettes, alcohol, or other such items? At my wal-mart I've had to show an ID to buy super-glue.

I maybe biased in this regard, because I've seen too many family members -- even my own brother -- get sucked into the "credit card circus" and get fucked over. One of my cousin had wracked a significant debt because he didn't understand the consequences (then promptly graduated college and got a 6-figure job or something).

Lackey this seems basically pointless to argue about -- seeing as Obama just signed it into law. I'll will agree that more government regulation is undesirable, but I would put forward that not all regulation is inherently bad. This law, aside from the restrictions it place on young people and the ability for them to get cards, features other parts that even you stated you weren't opposed to -- I believe you even stated you didn't support deceptive business practices. I'm sorry that I can't see your point of view on this issue. I've just never considered credit cards that important in the grand scheme of things. I feel people rely on them too much, and a young person sees a card as "free money" -- yes they're being stupid, but they're young. I fail to see how offering them a little bit more protection from CC Companies is such a breech of "financial rights" or whatever.

Surely there's something else that the government's done you'd like to bitch about? I was never really that into credit cards or finances anyway. Did anyone catch that the CC Companies dropped at closing when the bill was signed?

Hmm. For some reason I didn't see the one card limit. That does seem a bit extreme, then again too many young people get trapped in shitty credit cards with even shittier terms. Trampling of our freedom though -- my ass. It's only a fucking credit card. Love the tacked on thing that allows people to carry concealed weapons into national parks. Makes total sense in a credit card bill, lol.

You seem so focused on Obama you fail to notice that the country is rather pissed off at Republicans at the moment. If Obama is voted out of office, chances are we're not going to see another republican. Fuck even the republicans don't consider themselves republicans anymore, lol. What is it now? One in five?

Wow. Out of any of those abbreviations I only know what HuffPo is, and only then as a site to avoid for their rabid bias (not as bad a Koz, but still out there) rofl. What's TPM or MyDD stand for? I've never heard of them before.* Rambling on about my response -- really? Lackey didn't seem to have any trouble understanding them. I mean, I thought I was responding to his post where he bolded a part he didn't like and then go on to cry foul over the government overstepping their bounds or whatever. By the way, what the fuck does Obama have to do with anything in this thread? Are you so bitter about losing the election to him that you feel the need to bitch about him any chance you get? Get over it. Move on. I did when Bush won in '04. I didn't like it but I sit around bitching about it forever.

Do you have like a quota to reach or something? You seem awfully interested in trying to instigate bitchfest lately. Really I've just been trying to ignore you, but I find when people lie about me I can't really ignore it.

*The god's honest truth here is that I just enjoy debate/discussion. I don't feel so strongly about conservatism or liberalism to participate, join, or even read through such websites online. My interests lean far more towards computer stuff. I just read 3-4 different pages about new Windows 7 features. I'm also a gamer. However in discussions such as these I tend to learn something or other that I didn't know before. If you find the need to brand me as a liberal just because I argue with you, so be it. But don't lie about me. Don't pretend you know what I do with my time, because the truth is I couldn't really give a shit one way or another regarding politics. However, on BF, discussion such as these give me a chance to see both sides of the spectrum -- and to read articles and stories that I would otherwise have ignored.

I don't feel Obama is my savior. I don't think he's a messiah. I don't think he's going to bring america "hope and change" to any significant degree. I think he's just another politician who... well lost an election for all intents and purposes. He campaigned and won only to have a mess dumped on his lap. The only group of conservatives I actively oppose are the far-right religious extremists, and possibly the neo-cons. I actually like McCain when he's not being made a puppet by the GOP (anyone catch his comments on water-boarding?) ...

Ah well, whatever. I'm rambling, sorry about that. I just would appreciate if you would stop labeling me. It's something you excel at and it's bullshit and needs to stop. People can form their own opinions of me, they're not so stupid as to require you to explain to them "who Neo is" -- So knock it the fuck off, thanks.
 

Nuts you never answered me when I asked you if you'd ever been on campus when the CC Agencies are pushing cards on students.

Your continued cries of age discrimination is invalid -- no one is being banned from acquiring a credit card. This isn't like being able to die for your country but you can't drink until 21 or anything. There's even a line that addresses those younger people who are financially able to use a credit card -- all they have to do is prove they can pay it off. It seems folly to continue to allow them to push cards on those people who are either unable to pay them off, or simply don't understand how credit cards work -- those that treat it like free money.

Isn't that sort of why we're in trouble at the moment? People living above their means?
 

If you don't want people to live above their means, you don't legislate interest rates downwards.

High CC interest rates are a deterrent to taking on debt and being an idiot. All the US has done has subsidized its idiotic consumer to take out even more debt.

Currently where CC interest rates are are likely were the real interest rate should be. People should be running and screaming to pay off their CC debt, ending their decades of stupidity in consumption and promote discipline in saving.
 

Poor is an economic state. Why should it be illegal to solicit credit to poor people. I don't see the correlation.
 

...or poor.
 

A law serves a good purpose when it punishes you for doing something bad. Murder is bad, so we have a law against murder. But responsible 18-21 year olds owning a credit card is bad? We need a law against that? How about a law that punishes the predatory credit card issuer, not one that punishes the credit card user. That makes a little more sense.
 

I get a new credit card offer every week. I accept them all and just use the new credit card to pay the last credit card's bill. Its never ending, I cant loose.

loljk.
 

That would work if you had an unlimited credit line and low minimum payments.

You could just keep going until you die with 100 billion in credit card debt.
 

You would think, but the fact is that credit card companies cannot afford to offer a lower rate that's lower than the 20% that your other company just raised it to. There's too much risk in the system; not to mention, the new legislation makes rates more sticky, which creates even more risk because if there is a significant event that changes the credit card landscape, the company isn't going to be able to respond until 45 days later.

You have been following the credit crisis for a long time. If there's one thing you should have learned is that Wall Street got into their mess because they did not price risk accurately. And now we are setting up credit card companies, the failure of which would more directly affect individual consumers and small businesses more than the propping up of Wall Street ever would, for the same type of situation - we are making price more sticky and stripping them of the tools to price risk effectively.

And as for the people who pay on time, they are looking to get squeezed the most by this bill. Due to the added costs which I outlined in the previous paragraph (some of which are being passed on to the borrower in the form of increased rates, but some of which - in the name of competition - are being eaten by the credit card company) lenders are decreasing grace periods, reinstating annual fees, and decreasing credit limits, and these things hurt the people who pay on time much more than they would be hurt by a rate increase.
 

In all seriousness, I have am only 20 and I have two credit cards. The first one is from my bank and only has a 1000$ limit. I can up it, but I choose not too because I don't really need it. I pay it off completely every month, and really only use it to shop online and for the occasional thing at the store.

My 2nd credit card, I got was an accident. I went to Sears to buy a gift for my mother for Christmas and they asked if I wanted a Sears Card to get 10$ of my purchase. I said what is that like a discount card? And they said yeah. So I said sure. Than a few weeks later, a credit card arrived with a 5000$ limit and I was like wtf. Ive only had it for about 2 month, but I never use it. I will probably cancel it.

So I would say I am pretty responsible with my credit card.
 

lolwut
lolwut
lolwut

You know Neo eventually you're going to have to stop lying.

That is possibly the dumbest thing I have read of yours. You really have absolutely no idea as to the current political situation in this country. Please, stop posting and go reading before you post again. In a country where the Greatest President Ever can't seem to rise above the approval rating of the Worst President Ever at the same time in their presidencies, where the two parties are in a dead heat on most issues, where public anger at government is focusing on areas where the Democratic Party is vulnerable (waste and overspending), where 49% oppose Obama's plan to close Guantanamo to 38% who support, where 77% think government unwillingness to lower spending is a bigger problem than public resistance to tax hikes, where for the first time since polling of the issue began a majority describe themselves as "pro-life," this is a country where you can seriously, with a straight face, predict that the Republicans are done.

You're an ignorant ass who needs to shut up and go get some knowledge before you open your mouth.
 

I can't believe your comparing Bush's approval rating for his first term in office to Obama's and trying to act like that's a massive negative on Obama. I think its amazing that the president's approval rating is as high as it is, given Bush's extremely low rating at the end of his presidency.



whatever chaos. i just don't care anymore, you're like a fucking broken record. it's like conversing with a brick wall. i'm an idiot, an ass, etc... Obama/Democrats/Liberals are always wrong 100% of the time no matter what, repbulicans/gop/conservatives are awesome OMFG.

Never said that the reps were going to fall by the way, personally I figure that the party will either re-organize and kick people like rove and cheney to the curb, or will split. Possibly one being libertarian or something. IDFK, i don't follow the GOP close enough to really care.
 

You are again lying about what I said, apologize or shut up.

I'm tired of you just making shit up instead of replying to what I said. If you can't handle criticism of your moron president then too bad. Eight years of bullshit and you don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot? Shut up then. You spent eight years doing everything you could think of to destroy George Bush. The favor will be returned and there's nothing you can do about it.
 

Yeah, liar! If you say something that Chaos doesn't agree with that makes you a LIAR!
 

Nothing makes someone infected with the cop flu more angry than if you dont respect their authority.


Topical Solution for Toenail Fungus
 

Thank you Lars. I've been looking for some of this to spread over your mom!
 

I think rules should be put in place to protect people from credit card companies abusive practices.
 

Abusive or illegal? There's a difference.
 

Well if they're illegal then that means there's already a rule against them.
 

I know....circular logic and all........
 

Abusive.
 

lol? eight years? i only became critical of bush during his second term, perhaps a little before then. i keep asking you what I lied about and you never answer me with anything specific. love the whole continuing rant about my not "responding correctly" to posts, or whatever your bitching about. as if picking out one or two things from a post to specifically respond to is something that no one else ever does on this forum -- fucking hysterical. another "do as I say, not as I do" thing?

The links you posted to were to rasmussen, did you want me to specifically address your citations to what I feel is an obviously biased-to-republicans source? My comment about america being "pissed off at republicans" was fair, I believe, because of what I've read, and the whole thing about you guys losing the election by a landslide, and then continued to lose seats, attests to the idea that the country isn't all that enamored with y'all.

but come the fuck on, after bush was it really that surprising?

i'm just amazed that when republicans are in power, the minority bitching about you are loons, idiots, crazies, or just people worthy of being lol'ed at; but when you lose that power, suddenly you fill that roll you previously criticized to a fucking T and seem oblivious to why some of us are scratching our heads.
 

I beg to differ. Every company has an operating budget. When you increase that budget, said companies must raise revenue to retain profitability. It is far easier to raise prices than it is to conserve expenses. I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion, but I would be interested in your explanation as to how the above would not occur.