score

I was told recently that your credit score is an important number. I agree on a certain level, but to refer to it as important gives credence to the arbitrary and manufactured. The belief that a number has any more importance than the color of your eyes generates an unrealistic ideal set. In the short time one walks this dying planet, should it be a series of numbers that defines him? Are we being reduced to the statistic columns we fall into in massive databases? What are the odds a bank teller at your regular stop knows your name before punching in your account number or reading your transaction slip? Numbers like the credit score were created from mathematical formulas to determine the most profitable candidates with as little effort or ambiguity as possible.

Colleges reduce applicants to a series of well-defined, prioritized numbers. First it was exclusive to those that could afford it. As that number grew it became based on a grade point average so that students could be categorized and sorted. It became apparent that high school and college are completely dissimilar. A GPA does not provide any sense of how a student will perform, succeed, and most importantly, return the investment to the university. The Scholastic Aptitude Test was created to better analyze a students academic worth. When this test was exposed as favoring the upper classes, a new test was developed called the American College Test. This test is used primarily in the south and midwest of the US because it more accurately assesses a students financial worth without the underlying classism. In these regions there is very little class differential so the scores are more individual and have a stronger association to the student.

Once a college has accepted a potential student they are assigned a number. This number is now an easy way to lump any scores, assessments, or behavioral categorization to that student without the added stress on employees to know his or her name directly. This means an employee force numbering the same as one from the mid-fifties can handle an exponentially higher work load. This works in much the same way as a social security or driver's license number does for the government. Costs are lower because these organizations are then able to hire employees with less skill.

The GPA, SAT and ACT scores, and diplomas are then used by some employers to determine the value of hiring certain applicants. Other professions, and most positions that are beyond entry-level, then use a series of references and previous employment to do the same. If an applicant met the standards of a good school and worked for a recognizable company he is more valuable than one that went to an unknown school and worked for a small company because he has proven to be economically viable. Very little thought is put toward the attitude, social skills, or general abilities of the applicant until after a series of inquiries or interviews. The person who went to a small school for financial reasons or because of a smaller faculty-student ratio and then worked at a small company to gain a better depth of experience in their field is a better candidate, but sometimes overlooked.

A number defines a small fraction of a person's worth, but is easier to determine than credibility, integrity, trustworthiness, and responsibility. A person's character has little relevance to their financial, academic, or occupational value. It is unreasonable to associate the assigned numbers in prison to a credit score or an account number. Unfortunately, it is not unrealistic. To a bank a person may be a series of account numbers and a mortgage. To the government he is a driver's license, a social security number, and a set of W-2 forms on annual tax returns. To a college he is a student ID, an email account, a GPA, and an ACT or SAT score. To an insurance company he is an account number and a series of claims. To a credit card company he is an account number and a credit score.

This is why these numbers are important. They are arbitrarily chosen, but standardized across a mass population. They make the choices of lenders and officials easier. They fit into guidelines of policy. Without them they are forced to hire more employees who are then forced to manage an impossible workload. Without them statistics and analysis and categorization are near impossible and almost worthless. Without them a background-check is a series of subjective claims and testimonials. Without them a person is impossible to quantify.

I don't have a credit card. The thought has crossed my mind recently to get one, but currently seems unnecessary. I have three debit cards, and two of those are check cards that work in every credit card machine. Last year was a great year and I didn't feel any pressure to get a credit card or to restrict myself all that much. I earned roughly fourteen thousand dollars. According to the Census Bureau and Wikipedia, I was three hundred fifty thousand pennies away from a "condition in which a person is deprived of, and or lacks the essentials for a minimum standard of well-being and life." I didn't know what I had earned until my tax returns came due. I know people who live comfortably making one-and-a-half times that and I know people struggling who make twice that. I have seen great people sucked into massive debt and watched materially-gluttonous people earn hundreds in reward benefits.

Credit cards prey on the struggling. Students just arriving at college are bombarded by free enrollments. The credit companies are thriving in a country of the fiscally irresponsible. They market hard to give their product a manufactured necessity. They promote a card's convenience, it's accessibility, and it's flexibility. Their profits soar as the average amount saved for Americans runs in the red. Their profits don't rely on responsible spenders who pay in full at the end of each month, but rather, are reliant on the majority who see the minimum balance as a way of keeping money in their pocket. The ability to hold off payment morphes from something to be used in emergencies to a necessary evil.

The number created from an obscure formula now assigns value to each person. This number determines if he will get a loan, a car, or a house. This number is accessed by any company looking to assess him without meeting him. This number reduces an entire lifetime of mistakes, successes, and choices to a statistic. This number erases his drug addiction, his quest to find himself, and any other life choice made beyond the scope of numerical summation. This number is one in a growing list of numbers that eliminate the humanity of interaction.

A man can change over the course of days or in an instant. He can witness tragedy or reach bottom and make major changes toward a different life. A man can transition quickly from one stage of his life to another. A number is static or changes slowly. A man can go into debt because he takes a risk on a business that is in direct competition with a corporate juggernaut. A man can lose his family, job, and assets in a hurricane and then struggles from check-to-check to survive. A man can start out life as an adventurous twenty-year-old with no steady income and a thirst for the next best thing that drives his credit debt beyond a manageable level. A score on a test remains static no matter how much he learns after taking it. A score that takes weighted analysis of a payment record, control of debt, signs of responsibility, unused credit cards, and other factors from decades ago is slow to change.

This is why a credit score is important. A credit score can take decades to regain a reasonable level. Even with re-aging you're not ensured an increased score. Experían rates me above fifty-one percent of consumers with a score of seven hundred twenty-six. What does that mean? Does it mean I'm a responsible consumer? Does it mean I should look into buying a house? Does it mean the banks will be fighting over me? How much will that number increase if I enroll in a credit card and start buying things erratically while paying in full monthly? What sort of interest rates am I getting with that score and how do they differ from someone below six hundred? Does that score mean I'm more valuable than half of consumers?

Or does it mean that an outside agency took a series of statistics, plugged them into a weighted formula, and created a number between three hundred thirty and eight hundred thirty that is now used by every major crediting organization to define my debt potential?