A woefully poor New York Times piece was the subject of a recent AFSA blog post aimed at providing some much-needed context.
The article, Where Military Paychecks are Prime Targets was replete with mischaracterizations, omissions and over simplifications, earning a satisfyingly robust pushback from AFSA, which notes that “….what’s more interesting than what is in the story is what is not…”.
While the article purports to detail instances of predatory lending in military communities, it mentions the Military Lending Act only in passing and, AFSA notes, does not discuss the Department of Defense’s clams that this law protects military borrowers from predatory lenders. Furthermore:
“The story also fails to include a fair-minded detailing of safe and reliable options available to military personnel…. [Characterizing] any company servicing the market as…. “cheaters, charlatans and others who wish to get their claws into military paychecks.”
NILA notes that this does a disservice to both traditional installment lenders and to our customers and is the sort of unhelpful elitist thinking that drives blanket bans on non-prime credit and all of the hardship that this loss of financial capability brings with it.
AFSA concludes by saying that the Times article is another reminder of:
“… the ongoing inability of policymakers to get a clear and honest evaluation of the effect of the MLA’s 36% rate cap…. To date, the Department of Defense has not released any data on the MLA publicly, let alone to Members of Congress who have requested it.”
Read AFSA’s full post at: