“Q: Curt: Do you think consumer credit should be tied to income?”– Yes. And for

–“Q: Curt: Do you think consumer credit should be tied to income?”–

Yes. And for all intents and purposes, the actuarials have vast data to work with and credit issuance is effectively a science. But just like Keynesian “saltwater economics”, it’s evolved into a science of abuse of the population.
So:
(a) there is no value in the consumer financial system whether credit, insurance, or retirement savings since under fiat money we are all borrowing from our future selves. As such all consumer credit should be at zero interest – at least for durable goods and no more than the usable primary lifespan of the object.
(b) All credit capacity is currently and previously easily calculated, and high interest rates and easy credit are just a means of redistribution from responsible people to irresponsible people, hurting the irresponsible people both in future economic, psychological, and social terms.
(c) If all credit is issued by purely statistical means (and yes we have the data) then
… i) people cannot be baited into hazard by credit seduction
… ii) companies will have to compete on products and services not credit capacity
… iii) there is no need for the repossession of consumer goods
… iv) people will live more within their means, prices for homes in particular will decrease (and more so with legislating a max of 15 year mortgages)
… v) If we are successful in enacting ‘right to repair’ that will prevent spending on non-durable products, planned obsolescence and “Shoddyism” (yes that’s a thing) meaning the practice of making or selling goods that are cheaply made and likely to break or wear out quickly, often despite appearances or claims of durability, then that will modify debt, quality of life, behavior, and ameliorate social stress.

That’s the short answer but I ope it helps.

Cheers
CD

Reply addressees: @Plizsammler @artus9010