Abstract
Fictitious scare statistics have featured prominently in recent debates over consumer credit policy. The latest example is David Evans and Joshua Wright’s statistical claims about the impact of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act on the cost and availability of consumer credit and economic growth. This brief critique shows that the claims in Evans and Wright's study - funded by the American Bankers Association - are either based on exceptionally flawed methodology or on wholesale conjecture.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
