Hacker News Reader

Comment by hlhdlhcohcv | Hacker News Reader

housing? security clearance? preemployment checks?

housing is definitely a thing -- arguably the largest / main use of a credit score.

clearances don't apply to the population on the whole -- you have to willing apply to a cleared role. and you're going to be spending the gov's money and handling secrets, it makes sense to see if they can handle said money, cuz if they can't they'll sell secrets

I've never heard of a pre-emplyment check requiring a credit score. sexually harassing a fellow employee and getting fired will not end up on your credit as long as you can pay bills, and even if you can't, the lack of bills is what shows up, not bad work behavior

Housing is categorically a financial transaction.

Clearances are a far broader investigation, but to the extent that they look at your credit, I believe it is also to establish your financial status, which is most definitely a significant component of the clearance process.

Preemployment: I admit to not having started a new job in many years... Is there any evidence whatsoever you can present that companies regularly reject candidates not in a position of financial trust for having poor credit?

Hey I see you're quibbling on details, maybe because you feel determined to win an argument to save face or something. I must point out that nobody here cares whether you were wrong, and digging in your heels even after multiple people provided multiple examples just drags the conversation to unproductive places.

As I said in the first reply, there is very little behavior you cannot tie money to in some way, so you can go down this path forever of trying to find a reason why credit scores are totally valid proxies for all human behavior, and you would be technically correct while missing the point entirely.

What's your point? If people will extend you credit for things like an apartment (since there is risk you will stop paying) or for a car, it seems sensible to perform credit checks then. What else are scores used for that don't intersect with someone trusting you with their property?

Again, missing the point - it is a system that has become a centralized digital scoring mechanism. This is dangerous because it centralizes power, giving institutions that are not even under democratic control the power to punish individuals or groups as they see fit across all sectors of life.

This is sensational. You said

> Credit scores are used for a lot more than finances.

but you can't provide a concrete example.

> giving institutions that are not even under democratic control

Which institutions? Banks? Landlords? Other people trusting you with their property?

> the power to punish individuals or groups as they see fit across all sectors of life.

Where? How?

Is it reasonable to expect concrete examples of ephemeral decision making that happens within opaque organizations, given that the overwhelming majority are not held to explicit disclosure of their decision, let alone a verified paper trail held to such a rigorous standard to count for reasonable proof?

The best you can hope for from a potential employer is to be told they hired someone else. The default experience in America seems to be that they'll simply ghost you.

Many examples were given, please read the linked article. And again, in a society where everything is monetized, you can argue that creditworthiness is a just proxy for anything. So if basic water and electric access or housing access can be, so can anything else where you pay money for a service. You could argue dating apps should have access to credit scores and I wouldn't be surprised if some tried.

> Which institutions?

Credit bureaus...

What do you think credit is? Anytime someone gives you something and you pay later on, that's on credit. They have to trust you to some extent. If every vendor had to perform due diligence of every potential client I would expect things to get even more expensive or just altogether deny service to people outright.

Then in a subscription economy- where having a poor credit score can result in loss of housing, insurance, and more- opaque unelected beureaus are wielding tremendous power. Perhaps they are not evil or even unfair, but if you'll recall the context of TFA, it bears many of the same failure modes of a social credit system, and will only be as good as the people regulating it.

But it will always be opaque, unelected bureaus, wouldn't it? If credit bureaus were dissolved tomorrow, the decision to extend credit would go back to the opaque, unelected operator of the business.

> Hey I see you're quibbling on details, maybe because you feel determined to win an argument to save face or something.

Ha. Pot, meet kettle.

Two out of the three examples given were not "tied to money in some way", they are examples where the creditworthiness of the person is central to the transaction.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com