What I’m saying is that education is the most important thing. Either parents or math class need to teach students how a credit card works; we don’t need to ban all young folks from cards because some people screw them up big time.

Had we learned how to properly manage money before being handed nearly $100k of open credit each, we never would have gotten into this situation and instead of a $40k debt repaid, we’d have $40k in the bank or a down payment on a home. Instead, we’ll probably be renting until I’m in my mid-30s and my husband is nearly 40.

Not only has this delayed us purchasing a home, but it has delayed us starting a family as well. We want to wait until we have more of a financial cushion and more job stability before we start a family, so we’re looking (realistically) at at least 2-3 more years.

I’ve learned a lot from the mistakes I made as a 20-something, (I’m now 30) but you can bet I’ll be teaching my children how to budget and manage money before I turn them loose in college. I’m even thinking I should make them support themselves through college to make them more self sufficient.

Yes, just like it is sexist and unfair that males typically pay more than females. Again, its just a form of discrimination, which you seem to be in favor of.

“Is it obviously unfair that adults under 59 1/2 can’t make penalty-free withdrawals from their retirement accounts without jumping through certain hoops?”

Well, see there is as this is something you volunteer for and you legally sign up for ( cause you are an adult and you can sign your life away as an adult ). You are following the terms of a contract that you yourself decided to do. This is not a form of age discrimination, this is a legal contract. If you do not want to follow those rules, then don’t invest in a retirement account.

“Is it obviously unfair that children under 16 (or whatever the age is in your state) can’t drive cars?”

Since you asked my opinion, I don’t think 16 year olds should be driving either. I would make it to where you had to be an 18 year old adult so that you are liable for the decisions you make behind the wheel. In today’s world, if your 16 year old gets in a car accident, you are the one that is liable and gets sued.

“Is it obviously unfair that children under 12 get reduced-price tickets in some circumstances?”

There is a difference between a businesses offering a discount of its own free will and the government regulating the business telling it how to do business with certain age groups.

“Did you wake up on the morning of your 18th birthday to find that overnight you had suddenly acquired all the wisdom necessary to take on adult responsibilities?”

I was on my own at 18 and in a lot of ways prior to 18. I didn’t have a parent that would co-sign for me, or to pay my way to college so I could party all night. Within 30 days of turning 18, I had to sign my Selective Service Card for the government in case of a draft because I was now an adult. I also worked 10 hours a day like an adult, had my own car in my own name like an adult and paid rent like an adult… but the government said I couldn’t kill my braincells like an adult and now they want to dictate how other business have business interactions with me. ( if I were still in that age group, which sad to say I am not ).

You can keep coming on here and drag up the most ridiculous scenarios you can think of to justify the governments age discrimination and their need to regulate everything they can, but it still doesn’t make it right.

Children are not all the same, and adults are not all the same, so why should they necessarily all be treated the same? 18-20-year-old college students are the perfect example: In many respects, they are independent adults, but financially, they are not. It is true that some older adults are also not financially independent, so the age-based criterion in the law is not perfect. But *no* age-based criterion is perfect (Did you wake up on the morning of your 18th birthday to find that overnight you had suddenly acquired all the wisdom necessary to take on adult responsibilities? I sure didn’t), and I think this one does pretty well.

Again, I am not against the stricter guidelines for credit cards, but they should be applied for everyone and not just those the government thinks they need to babysit.

I would have an issue if all three criteria were required, but ONLY ONE seems remarkably fair and well reasoned. It seems as if a lot of people read this as all three would be required.

If the teen is responsible, he will have no trouble proving income. If the teen wants to learn to be responsible, he can take an educational course (which should be part of the normal school curriculum anyway) or have his parents co-sign and thus be involved.

This will slow the predatory lending practices on college campuses AND will encourage awareness and education. What on earth could be wrong with that?

They should draw the line somewhere. Age 18 is adulthood so thats a good place.

I see the problem that college kids get into with the free availability of credit. But people do have to start somewhere with credit cards and if we start at 19 or 25 I think the end result is going to be the same usually, either you can handle debt or you can’t.

Maybe a little more regulation about how credit cards can work is in order rather than just excluding younger people?

As to your second point, Trent, I think that Ms. Weston has the right idea: a charge card (preferably with a low credit limit) would allow the under twenty-one crowd to get experience with credit and start building their credit report with lower risk that they will get in over their heads. And it wasn’t suitable, the three options listed in the bill provide ways to get a ‘real’ credit card.

And just for the record, I’m 26 and got my first credit card (a MasterCard with a $3800 limit) when I was 16. I was working at McDonald’s at the time, so perhaps I could have qualified under the bill’s second condition, even then.

I do agree, however, that there needs to be much better education. I didn’t get my first credit card until after college because I was terrified of them – I had heard the horror stories. I didn’t goof up with credit cards until I was 27. I think it’s a good idea to make some form of consumer education course a mandatory part of high school.

Also, as some have pointed out, it’s ridiculous that these companies giving credit cards to college kids with no income and no established credit in the first place.

I am not saying that credit card companies should just hand out credit just because they turned 18… I am just saying the rules for getting credit need to be the same for all adults.

- Low credit limits
- High interest rates
- Don’t issue them a card at all until other credit is established, or require a security deposit.

I don’t think the government should be making laws that protect shoddy business practices like allowing people with limited income (students) access to large lines of credit. “We loaned a person with no income $5000 and then they can’t pay it back, boohoo, how will we get paid?”.

Idiots. If I made a loan like that (to a stranger), I doubt I’d get much sympathy when I didn’t get paid back. I don’t know why a credit card issuer should, either. Start out with small amounts and then increase the limits as the creditor shows they can handle it, and decrease the interest rate as they show responsibility. If someone with a $500 credit limit can’t pay up, then they are only out $500 and that’s a lot less to eat.

Let’s also not mention the aggressive on-campus promotions where they want these kids to sign up. I mean, really, if I extended my example of showing up at a college campus with a $5k unsecured loan, who would listen to my sob story when I couldn’t get my money back?

18 is a legal adult. Let’s keep it that way.

Still, others might not have had the same advantages that I had to learn that responsiblity. Prevention (ie. this bill), doesnt give young adults the chance to learn these things. They are just putting off the problem, not solving it.