I am sorry. I am probably all wrong. I thought it was what had been told tome, but it is not as if I actually read a book or anything.

I never knew longevity mattered - seems silly when switching is sometimes the only way to lower an APR.

Improving your credit score: [link]

My sole fight with my mother this weekend came about when she was reminiscing about when I was 16 and "such a handful."

Mine has yet to let go of the time I hid in a department store. I was three.

I thought everybody knew Joan was gay. Also into the kinky sex (the x-rated version of her song "Fetish" is pretty specific). Since Carmen was also with Dave Navarro, I gotta figure she's a little bent.

I never knew longevity mattered - seems silly when switching is sometimes the only way to lower an APR.

I assume this is one of the many ways that the credit card companies git ya.

I am sorry. I am probably all wrong. I thought it was what had been told tome, but it is not as if I actually read a book or anything.

Oh, I'm no authority on the matter. I wonder if there are trends and fads in financial reporting that cause us to retain this kind of contradictory advice.

From a course on credit amangement I recently took, longevity matters, because a percentage of your credit score is determined by how long your accounts have been open. It's not the largest percent of your score, though, so if, say, you're me, and you had an old card with a high limit that you kept running it up to? You might be better off to close it and get a card with a lower limit. The worst thing you can do to your credit score is be late with payments.

According to the teacher, who is a bank loan officer, the "rules" for determining credit score and credit worthiness have changed lately. The one thing I remember her mentioning in that context is, used to be if you had a lot of credit available, it made you look "dangerous" to lenders because you COULD overspend yourself and then be unable to pay them back. Now, they only look at how much you actually owe, not how much you could owe. This change may have come about because of the new bankruptcy laws. Credit companies don't have to be quite as careful about "weeding out" people who might go bankrupt on them, because now you pretty much can't. That's my own opinion, though, she didn't say that.

Back to work.

All this reminds me that my bank wants me to sign up for a new credit card as overdraft protection (they switched cc-providers, so I still have the old line but now it won't do overdraft. )I'm kinda thinking of not getting the new one because I don't really need overdraft protection because of how freaking conservative I am with my checking account.

Need to check what other things it was related to, if any. I mean, I have two cards I've never used, they were just foisted on me by the bank as some sort of package (one with the checking account, another when I took out a loan against a CD. ) It's like: here! We have your money! Let's see if we can get more of it!

Now, they only look at how much you actually owe, not how much you could owe. This change may have come about because of the new bankruptcy laws. Credit companies don't have to be quite as careful about "weeding out" people who might go bankrupt on them, because now you pretty much can't. That's my own opinion, though, she didn't say that.

I think I heard about the available vs. used credit formula from the Frontline documentary, before the bankruptcy laws went into effect. In any case, I would argue it's a pretty fair and efficient proxy for how responsible a person is with credit, and it's not the credit companies who make the score, it's FICO.

Credit scores are WHACK. I have tons of cards and a lot of debt, and the only negative hit on my score is the credit card I cancelled. (Turns out it's better to just cut the card in half and forget about it.)

Oops. John McCain's MySpace page was pulling its images from someone else's server, so the original site changed the images.

[link]