the whole point of this sub-argument with which I so inconsiderately hijacked this thread (sorry about that) is banks aren't obligated to operate from a "moral" standpoint (i.e. make risky loans to people with questionable means of paying it back just because someone feels they "should").
do many of them exercise morality in their practice? I'm sure they do but there's nothing forcing them and nothing should. ethics yes, morality no.
payday loan companies are legal businesses (until our state governments start doing something about them) so banks are perfectly welcome to lend them money if they determine the risk/reward to be acceptable.
do I wish the banking industry would run them out by "cutting" them off? sure! but it's not going to happen. an organized attempt to cut off payday loan companies would end up in court so fast the banks wouldn't know what hit them.
I was objecting to people coming down on the banks because they don't lend to certain people. if the bank doesn't want to loan you money, they don't have to (provided obvious protections such as race and religion are honored of course), brokeness ain't a color and doesn't have a god....it's not a word either but that never stopped me before.
payday loan companies are intentionally praying on the financially vulnerable with their little schemes to hook people who have not adequately been taught money skills by our society (not the bank's job.)
yes you may think that by loaning them money the banks are complicit, but quite frankly, I'd just assume the banks stick to numbers and the law and let society work out the morality part - if the payday loan companies are bad, which I think they are, our lawmakers should get rid of them under the aegis of protecting the citizens they represent.
or they should just have pie and forget about it.