Are Usurious? Another New Argument for the Prohibition of High Interest Loans?

Business Ethics Journal Review 1 (4):22-27 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Robert Mayer argues that certain kinds of high-interest payday loans should be legally prohibited. His reasoning is that such lending practices compel more solvent borrowers to cross-subsidize less solvent ones, and thus involve a kind of negative externality. But even if such cross-subsidization exists, I argue, this does not necessarily provide a ground for legal prohibition. Such behavior might be a necessary component of a competitive market that provides opportunities for mutually beneficial transactions to willing customers. And the alternative of a government-mandated interest rate faces severe problems of its own.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-02-21

Downloads
113 (#154,124)

6 months
6 (#512,819)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Matt Zwolinski
University of San Diego

Citations of this work

The Cost of Usury.Robert Mayer - 2013 - Business Ethics Journal Review:44-49.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Sweatshops, Choice, and Exploitation.Matt Zwolinski - 2007 - Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (4):689-727.
The Ethics of Price Gouging.Matt Zwolinski - 2008 - Business Ethics Quarterly 18 (3):347-378.
When and Why Usury Should be Prohibited.Robert Mayer - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 116 (3):513-527.

Add more references