So anyone who isn't creditworthy (ie. poor) pays additional tax in the form of higher-priced goods. But to heck with them for being poor, right, because you get the convenience and cash back?
I was just pointing out that the 1-3% isn't fully eaten by the credit card intermediaries. I do agree with you that it does pass on a tax to the consumer, and it would be better to just charge a 0.2% fee (or whatever the actual cost of credit card processing is) without the points, rather than take 2.5% from everyone and then give the bulk back to whomever you deem "creditworthy"
The bulk of people with bad credit are not rich... and bad credit disproportionately harms people who are not rich. But that wasn't the point of my comment or the GP's; we were talking about the 1-3% tax on goods (effectively) imposed by credit companies... and how people who aren't in lower socio-economic classes are largely oblivious to the costs it imposes on poorer populations.
To be fair, the poor shouldn't be racking up credit card bills. That's just adding fuel to the fire. A world existed before credit cards became commonplace.
You're talking about something entirely different. Let me take another crack at explaining. You're a grocery store. Some (large) fraction of your patrons use credit cards. Rather than charge just those patrons a 1-3% surcharge to cover Visa's fees, you simply raise your prices across the board by 1-3% so that you can make enough margin to survive.
A poor person, who can't (or shouldn't) use credit cards comes in to buy food. They now pay the full-price (already marked up 1-3%) -- essentially paying that as a "tax" that wealthier patrons, with good cash-back cards, get back later as a refund.
