Well, it’s all about the legislation. There has been renewed interest in the legislation considering banning the use of credit cards to pay for gambling debts. Personally, I think that bannig it is incorrect. It should instead be treated as another form of a cash advance. I am reminded of an accountant friend of mine (yes, they do exist) who told me that it’s illegal to use one credit card to pay off another (without an agreement). Basically it’s all about credit, cash and debt.
Using cash for a bill means you owe nothing after the transaction.
Using credit for a bill means you owe something after the transaction.
Using credit to pay for a pure credit transaction is just plain cheating (and the banks and law says so most of the time, and in most places).
Using credit to pay for gambling debts is nothing more than an extension of the previous point. You should not be using credit to pay for what should be a cash transaction only; because the last thing you want to have is people owing money to ‘easy’ firms when they should really be owing money to ‘hard’ firms.
Sarcastic statement? somewhat. I’m a bit of a pragmatist on things like this. The only problem is that I don’t believe you should be cheating by laying off a debt for a month when you should be paying money for it.
If it wasn't for carbon-14, I wouldn't date at all