re:  Dollars and sense:  Why do banks fear Elizabeth Warren?  Because she's on our side

The Chronicle editorialists seem to be doing business with a different set of credit card companies than anyone I know.  In decrying the excesses of the industry, "new fees and tricky ways to disguise interest rates", all cloaked in apparently indecipherable language, the writers come to the conclusion that the relationship between consumer and credit card company "isn't a relationship of equals" but rather one that "the bank wins".

Interesting analysis, because unlike, say, pending requirements concerning health insurance, I'm unaware of any laws requiring consumers to have credit cards at all — much less a credit card from a particular company.  In my experience, if I am unhappy with the service or fees of a particular credit institution, I can do what I do with every other product I buy:  shop around for a better deal and give my business to someone else if I'm unhappy with the service I'm getting ... or decide not to use a credit card at all.  The credit card company is powerless to stop me.

The beauty of a capitalist system built around voluntary exchange is that competition rules the day.  No company (without special status conferred by some government entity) has the authority or the ability to force you to do business with them.  Instead, companies have to satisfy consumers, who vote with their dollars on those goods and services they want. 

Competition promotes innovation and efficiency.  Products like laptop computers and cell phones are less expensive than they were 10 years ago — and far more technically advanced.  This isn't because of some government bureaucrat or watchdog agency mandating improvements or regulating prices, but rather the achievement of competition on an open market.  Rather than dreaming up new ways to regulate the credit industry, perhaps a better approach would be thinking of ways to remove barriers to competition.

Sincerely,
Dave Smith
Houston, TX