Microlenders to blame for wage demands

[adrianh]

Now here is a case in point...yet again. My garden was in a bit of a mess so I asked my Zimbabwean guy to see if he can find a labourer on the local labour marketing street corner. Off he goes and comes back with an extremely well spoken guy. I don't pay much attention to the guy because my guy has it in hand. Two days go by and the guy does a sterling job on the garden. I start talking to him a bit to figure out what he is about. He is a Zimbabwean who studied marketing for thee years and then did a course in entrepreneurship. He finds himself here trying to get by until he can settle into a suitable job. The guy cleans garden, what a damn waste of talent. He works his butt of and does a tremendous job. Anyhow, we will speak tomorrow and I think that he is a guy that I can work with, he is motivated, driven, well spoken and intelligent. Now tell me who I should hire and work with, a person like him or a lazy ass locoal (black & white) I'm sure you know the answer.

"Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants; money will not give him a code of values, if he's evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he's evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

“There is no such thing as a lousy job - only lousy men who don't care to do it.”

― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

“I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognize the good of others as a justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life.”

― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged



hmmmm.....maybe the masses should read this book...maybe everybody should read the book or watch the movie...Ayn Rand captures so many profound concepts

[IanF]

Adrian
I hope you find something for your "Zimbabwean Gardener" as he has the right attitude and not looking for entitlement. Maybe this is why foreigners do well as they don't feel entitled to anything.

[adrianh]

I sure going to find something for him, I am able to make lots and lots of stuff and it is up to him, the marketer / entrepreneur to tell me what it is that I can make and that he can market. Lets see if the guy has the drive to make the most of the oppetunity offered to him....the locals certainly don't want to develop opportunities offered to them, they simply want to be given the reward on a platter.

[Marq]

Back to the original article that started this thread.....

Politics, amcu,num, cosatu and the like create an issue that has a knock on effect that creates a demand for more bucks.
The Corporates tell the politicians to go away.
The workers strike cause the Government tells them to.
They now have no bucks and have to borrow to stay alive.
The Corporate banks will not lend to this market.
The mico lenders come in and do the job.
Now Government through Trevor Manual (this time) tells all to blame the micro lenders.

Loan sharks have been around since time began, and have probably saved many a community. Yes there are high penalties and yes one should avoid them. These are the basics of life.

But once again Government, the Corporates and the banks who run this world have put in a red herring to take the real problem away from themselves.

The Banks are the main culprit here.
If they had not introduced the concept of interest and greed, there would not be a demand for more wages.
If they had not redlined the small guy with a dubious job, there would be lending at a more reasonable rate.
At the end of the day the Banks are equally as ruthless in collecting their outstandings as the loan sharks. They just take a longer route with more paperwork. The net effects financially are the same and the end results are also equal.

Equally to blame are politicians, union bosses and their racketeering operations. Forcing one to 'belong' and feigning representation when all they are doing is lining their own pockets at workers expense. Where are they when it comes to reviewing and regulating the law around the garnishee system? Where are they after they have stirred up the workers and created violence and negative spaces? Where are they in regulating the micro lending operations? Where are they when the employee is retrenched and out in the cold? They are ones who have instilled the thoughts of rent boycotts, no pay options, service delivery demonstrations, inciting violence, toyi toyi for any reasons, necklacing and have shown a bad array of social and moral judgement. They are the ones who removed the traditional ways and replaced good values with the seven deadly sins.

Right behind these snivelling poltroons are the Corporates for playing the same game and exploiting workers.

I dont like loan sharks any more than the next guy, but I am sure they are the last ones to look at here.
I am also sure that the Banks, Corporates and Government do far worse and offer a bigger threat to any of us, than all the loan sharks put together can create.

You have all been spun by the chief doctor of spin.

[adrianh]

@Marq - makes a lot of sense!

[polpak]

Adrian

Also hope you find something for your "Zimbabwean Gardener" as certainly he appears to have the right attitude :-)


Some years back found myself often assessing people in terms of whether they have made the huge (mental outlook) transition from being a hunter-gatherer to being a cultivator.

In this the hunter-gatherers tend to be seeking short-term or immediate gratification, then came cultivators - including traders, who were prepared to surrender short-term or immediate gains for longer-term larger gains.



Mathew Ridley's theory (eg book "The Rational Optimist") suggests while the ability to trade may sound like not much of an advantage, exchanging objects became a powerful adaptive mechanism in its own right, towards creating the developed world.

As early humans traded, they swapped objects made by them, such as fishing nets or game traps, for food, or swapped different types of gathered food for meat and so on; This development of trading enabled individuals and groups to specialize at particular crafts, this has resulted in more and more improvements.

Changes particularly printing helped create the industrial age, then compulsory education accelerated the spread of learning, from wider opportunity followed the acceleration of these changes.




Perhaps need wider, easier and more accurate, tests to identify individuals outlooks, whether more hunter-gatherer or more cultivator/trader, along with an education system to encourage those more hunter-gatherer, to either adapt better, or be encouraged towards where they may be more useful and successful.

[polpak]

Difference between a reasonable loan and an un-reasonable loan is only a few % points.



Loans were around since time began, along with loan sharks.


Loans also contributed to development of most the modern world.


Legislative challenge is to define reasonable rates.

At which multiple of the South African Reserve Banks Prime Overdraft Rate is an interest rate if higher unreasonable ?

At which point may such rate not be legally collectable.


Regardless of any measurement or boundaries, some will always chase loans with little if any consideration of the consequences.

[ians]

"There is a young white guy that pops in the shop now and again. He lives nearby is always complaining about not being able to find work. I decided to let him join me as he is decent and quite intelligent. He works for couple of days and I don't need him one day. He complains to my wife that if he doesn't work then they don't eat. (this got up my nose because he had only worked for me for 3 days - what did they do then - trying to make us feel guilty is not a way to earn my sympathy) Anyhow, I let him work the day. He works the Thursday and then asks to have Friday off to get his ID. (I found this strange too because the government offices are walking distance from the shop and it doesn't take the whole day - I can vouch for it because I went to do my passport two moths ago) So Saturday comes and he works from 10am. 13H00 he asks if he can go home early.... Right, so lets get this straight, the guy doesn't have work, wants to get paid, wants me to feel guilty yet wants to work when it suits him. I have plenty of work and I can keep him occupied for 16 hours a day should he want it (I have said so on numerous occasions). I paid him, dropped him off and carried on working on my own. Bottom line, I'll give him a miss."

I have had this on more than one occasion, from my experience...

You ask them to work on Saturday morning, make sure you don't pay him on Friday, other wise he will either come in smelling or booze or his mothe ror girlfriend will phone in and tell you he is not feeling well.

They spend more time smoking and on social networks than time they actually work.

Cry because they don't have money, but arrive at work with the latest top of the range cellphone and smoke all day.

My best so far...they come begging for work literally on their hands and knees, so you need someone and give them a job, 2 weeks later you are at the CCMA because they are not happy with the rate you are paying

Just reading Adrian's post I am in pretty much the same boat and waiting patiently for him to find a solution that works

[IanF]

Here we are blaming everyone but the guy who willing took the loan!
Would a financial literacy course not be better. Nedbank's Eugene ads seem to go in that direction

[adrianh]

Sounds familiar.

My solution is simply to no longer require his services. - due to "restructuring" - we got rid of his, chair, desk & tools.

[adrianh]

Maybe the problem goes deeper. We live in a country with the 1st world mixed within the 3rd world. Now lets look it the problem from a lateral perspective: One of the fundamental differences between the two worlds is that the first world is able to get more credit because they generally earn more. What is the difference between a guy earning R100K a month and spending Spending R101K a month on debt and a guy earning R500 a week and spending R501 rand...could it only be status?

Our problem as a society is not that we don't have enough money per se, it is planned obsolescent consumerism. We eat fast burning expensive crap food, we buy ridiculously over priced over specced cars & houses, we buy buy buy only to replace that which was good last year.

The problem lies within our marketing driven foolish minds that are made to believe that we all need to have just a bit more than we can afford, a better cell phone, car, shoe or whatever. We are unable to see that money is simply a tool like a shovel is a tool.

[Marq]

Thats quite right.
Fuelling this problem and keeping society foolish is the name of the game. The main culprits behind the scenes - advertising and marketing by the .......banks and corporates who know how to spin you a yarn or two.

Are they winning -

Would a financial literacy course not be better. Nedbank's Eugene ads seem to go in that direction

Does Nedbank want to educate you or ....give you a loan and keep you in nice clothes and big car.
I said it earlier - the banks are to blame for most things.
Its a vicious catch 22 scenario for most.

[adrianh]

Now here is the question: Who is to blame, is it the marketer presenting the product, is it the bank providing the loan or is it the dumba$$ who can't help himself.

By analogy: If various ladies of the night offer their services in many different and exciting ways would everybody use their services because they are such good marketers & advertisers. How come most people are able to control the urge to buy their services yet they are unable to control the urge to buy a new TV or cellphone ?

Marketing does not put a gun against anybody's head to do anything, stupid people do stupid things because they are too stupid to realize that they are actually in control of their own urges, be it to shag the neighbours wife or buy a new BMW on credit.

[Marq]

Good point.

Seems subtle is more powerful than the gross.
But then the ladies of the night are not on every street corner or selling me their wares (is that the right term here) every five minutes on the box - so not sure if that is a fair reflection of outcomes.

[Miro Bagrov]

Now here is the question: Who is to blame, is it the marketer presenting the product, is it the bank providing the loan or is it the dumba$$ who can't help himself.

By analogy: If various ladies of the night offer their services in many different and exciting ways would everybody use their services because they are such good marketers & advertisers. How come most people are able to control the urge to buy their services yet they are unable to control the urge to buy a new TV or cellphone ?

Marketing does not put a gun against anybody's head to do anything, stupid people do stupid things because they are too stupid to realize that they are actually in control of their own urges, be it to shag the neighbours wife or buy a new BMW on credit.

Well - what you are seeing is just the message that the boss at Treasury wants to send out to the micro-lenders, to say 'I will come down on you!'

You see the micro-lenders are not the problem here. The government is slipping into chaos, and losing control of the interest rates in SA.

So the name of the game is, make more trouble for micro-lenders, so that the banks can get back their clients. That's because the banks are going down. The government is going down. The international system of markets are going down.

The issue, really, is, that the market is getting less and less sensitive to the Reserve Bank's changes in interest rates. Slowly, they are losing the ability to tell lenders on the sidelines how much they can charge for loans.

That's the whole point. It's obviously not the micro-lender's fault.
--- Because if they want to attack micro-loans, they must also attack unsecured-lending-accounts (credit cards & 'short-term' loans) of the major retail banks.
But somehow, they are not attacking the banks, who, by the way, have a larger % share in the micro-loan market than micro-lenders!