Obama & Dems Kill Free Checking

[Quantum Windbag]

That's how the free market works (not that I expect a conservative welfare recipient to understand the free market), right?

If you don't like the fees, find another bank.

Good point, except that the other banks have to follow the same regulations that make it impossible to offer free checking, which is why you are wrong.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Dems will do for health care what they're doing for banking.

 

[Neubarth]

I've had free checking with my credit union for the past 34 years. They even pay interest on my average balance.

 

[Mr Natural]

Good lord! Guess Obama's setting up for his next book "How I destroyed Middle Class"

Too late.

Thirty years of trickle-down, supply-side, bullshit Reaganomics have destoyed the middle class.

 

[Meister]

Conservative whiners must all be pretty poor if their balances don't get them free checking. Maybe if they got a real job

Your a total tool, sangha.....a total tool. You have your head so far up barry's butt that it's pathetic.

 

[Meister]

Good lord! Guess Obama's setting up for his next book "How I destroyed Middle Class"

Too late.

Thirty years of trickle-down, supply-side, bullshit Reaganomics have destoyed the middle class.

If barry gets his way we haven't seen anything yet, it's just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Care4all]

Democrat drive to bring the neck of the American economy under their jackboot claims another victim: free checking accounts.

"End Is Seen to Free Checking

Bank of America and other banks are preparing new fees on basic banking services as they try to replace revenue lost to regulatory rules, in a push that is expected to spell an end to free checking accounts for many Americans."

End Seen to Free Checking - WSJ.com

you are such a silly silly boy and the biggest
Con partisan hack we've got on this board! a toast to you for the award frank!

House vote on this Credit card reform:
Dems 104 yays Repubs 175 yays
Dems 145 nays Repubs 2 nays
GovTrack: House Vote #277 (May 20, 2009)

Senate vote on this credit card reform:

Dems 53 yays Repubs 35 yays
Dems 1 nay Repubs 4 nays
GovTrack: Senate Vote On Passage: H.R. 627: Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act...

I'd say it was NOT ONLY Democrats that passed and supported this, wouldn't you Frank?

Or are you giving your republican darlings a pass?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

you are such a silly silly boy and the biggest
Con partisan hack we've got on this board! a toast to you for the award frank!

House vote on this Credit card reform:
Dems 104 yays Repubs 175 yays
Dems 145 nays Repubs 2 nays
GovTrack: House Vote #277 (May 20, 2009)

Senate vote on this credit card reform:

Dems 53 yays Repubs 35 yays
Dems 1 nay Repubs 4 nays
GovTrack: Senate Vote On Passage: H.R. 627: Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act...

I'd say it was NOT ONLY Democrats that passed and supported this, wouldn't you Frank?

Or are you giving your republican darlings a pass?

Bipartisan statism is still statism. We do not need this bill.

 

[Care4all]

has anyone READ what is in the bill?

H.R. 627 - Summary: Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us)

 

[Care4all]

you are such a silly silly boy and the biggest
Con partisan hack we've got on this board! a toast to you for the award frank!

House vote on this Credit card reform:
Dems 104 yays Repubs 175 yays
Dems 145 nays Repubs 2 nays
GovTrack: House Vote #277 (May 20, 2009)

Senate vote on this credit card reform:

Dems 53 yays Repubs 35 yays
Dems 1 nay Repubs 4 nays
GovTrack: Senate Vote On Passage: H.R. 627: Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act...

I'd say it was NOT ONLY Democrats that passed and supported this, wouldn't you Frank?

Or are you giving your republican darlings a pass?

Bipartisan statism is still statism. We do not need this bill.

why do you think it was not needed QW?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Democrat drive to bring the neck of the American economy under their jackboot claims another victim: free checking accounts.

"End Is Seen to Free Checking

Bank of America and other banks are preparing new fees on basic banking services as they try to replace revenue lost to regulatory rules, in a push that is expected to spell an end to free checking accounts for many Americans."

End Seen to Free Checking - WSJ.com

you are such a silly silly boy and the biggest
Con partisan hack we've got on this board! a toast to you for the award frank!

House vote on this Credit card reform:
Dems 104 yays Repubs 175 yays
Dems 145 nays Repubs 2 nays
GovTrack: House Vote #277 (May 20, 2009)

Senate vote on this credit card reform:

Dems 53 yays Repubs 35 yays
Dems 1 nay Repubs 4 nays
GovTrack: Senate Vote On Passage: H.R. 627: Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act...

I'd say it was NOT ONLY Democrats that passed and supported this, wouldn't you Frank?

Or are you giving your republican darlings a pass?

This is like complaining about how salty the water was that Katrina brought on shore: it's Statism that's the problem and the Republicans still have a few of them but ALL The Dems are Statists (Neo-National Socialists) or are you saying this was a Republican lead effort?

 

[Modbert]

Why am I thinking that the banks are simply using the recent regulations as a excuse to raise their prices? Besides, how much do you think we would be paying the banks today if they had not been bailed out?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why am I thinking that the banks are simply using the recent regulations as a excuse to raise their prices? Besides, how much do you think we would be paying the banks today if they had not been bailed out?

Have you ever worked a day in the "private sector" or do you just hear about it on the DU?

Free checking is a huge marketing devise banks use to attract customers...customers, look it up, not everybody get regulated and loses their choices like every time the Gubbamint gets involved.

Customers have choices, customers like to shop, customers like free checking.

 

[Modbert]

Have you ever worked a day in the "private sector" or do you just hear about it on the DU?

Free checking is a huge marketing devise banks use to attract customers...customers, look it up, not everybody get regulated and loses their choices like every time the Gubbamint gets involved.

Customers have choices, customers like to shop, customers like free checking.

Yes, but did you bother to ask yourself what sort of regulations are the reasons why they're raising their prices? Or did you just see the word regulations and figured it was that "Obama and his Dem cronies" fault?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

why do you think it was not needed QW?

Because there is essentially nothing wrong with credit the way it works now. Government regulation that punishes everyone because a few people take advantage of loopholes is stupid, just close the loopholes. Instead they write a new law that makes things harder for everyone.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Have you ever worked a day in the "private sector" or do you just hear about it on the DU?

Free checking is a huge marketing devise banks use to attract customers...customers, look it up, not everybody get regulated and loses their choices like every time the Gubbamint gets involved.

Customers have choices, customers like to shop, customers like free checking.

Yes, but did you bother to ask yourself what sort of regulations are the reasons why they're raising their prices? Or did you just see the word regulations and figured it was that "Obama and his Dem cronies" fault?

Clearly, you didn't bother to read the article before you set the land speed record for Obama defense.

The new policy is that Consumers must proactively "opt-in" to agree to overdraft charges, so instead BofA and other will say, "thanks, but no thanks --no more free checking"

Read the article next time before you defend Obama, you'll still defend Obama but you'll be less of a total rube

 

[Modbert]

Clearly, you didn't bother to read the article before you set the land speed record for Obama defense.

The new policy is that Consumers must proactively "opt-in" to agree to overdraft charges, so instead BofA and other will say, "thanks, but no thanks --no more free checking"

Read the article next time before you defend Obama, you'll still defend Obama but you'll be less of a total rube

It has nothing to do with Obama. It has to do with the regulations you have a problem with. And I'm sure the bank wants to protect their bottom lines considering they probably made a fortune from overdraft charges. I know several financial responsible people who were whacked with overdraft fees because the bank basically screwed around to make it happen or had crappy rules concerning overdraft fees in the first place that allow it to happen.

 

[Modbert]

And I'm surprised nobody's posted this.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0rSXjVuJVg]YouTube - Louis C.K. - Being Broke[/ame]

 

[Modbert]

Also Frank, I did read the article.

Frank obviously doesn't care if the customers are getting screwed by the banks.

Legal Briefing: Bank Overdraft Fee Lawsuit Goes Forward - DailyFinance

Consumer attorneys across the country sued all the big banks -- Bank of America (BAC), Citibank (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), and Wells Fargo (WFC), just to name a few of the defendants -- alleging that the banks manipulated the way they processed debit transactions in order to charge customers the most possible overdraft fees. In a major effort to get the case dismissed, the banks marshaled a posse of Big Law firms, including Covington & Burling, Morrison & Foerster, Wilmer Cutler, Strook & Strook & Lavan, and Arnold & Porter. But the claims were just too well pled to be dismissed, decided the judge.

While the plaintiffs are still a long way from a win, one advantage they have is that the underlying facts really aren't in dispute; the banks admit to manipulating the transactions to rake in fees. However, a majority of big banks reserve the right to do this in their contracts with consumers; that is, to post big transactions first, even if little transactions occurred first, in an effort to clean out your account and make as many transactions bounce as possible. (Did you sign up for that when you opened your checking account? Are you sure?

If the plaintiffs ultimately win, the banks could collectively face a multi-billion dollar judgment. In 2008 alone, banks took in $24 billion in overdraft fees. Bank of America has apparently read the handwriting on the wall, and decided to end overdraft fees for debit cards by simply preventing charges from going through if an account is overdrawn.

So cry me a river Frank, Bank of America and their cronies can no longer screw their customers in one way, so they're going to try another way. Give me a break.

 

[Modbert]

Bank of America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In January 2008 Bank of America began notifying some customers without payment problems that their interest rates were being more than doubled, up to 28%. The bank was criticized for raising rates on customers in good standing, and for declining to explain why it has done so.[96][97] In September 2009, a Bank of America credit card customer, Ann Minch, posted a video on YouTube criticizing the bank for raising her interest rate. After the video went viral, she was contacted by a Bank of America representative who lowered her rate. The story attracted national attention from television and internet commentators.[98][99][100] More recently, the banks has been criticized for allegedly seizing three properties that were not under their ownership, apparently due to incorrect addresses on their legal documents.[101]

Let's see, doubling if not tripling interest rates on customers in good standing for no apparent reason. What other reason other than greed would Bank of America do that Frank? Do tell me, after all, they are the customer.

Hell Frank, just earlier this year:

Bank of America's Fraud Charges are Very Serious - Business - The Atlantic

Bank of America agreed to a $150 million settlement with the SEC -- five times the original amount -- the same day New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo slapped the bank with a long-expected lawsuit for concealing crucial information from shareholders. There are three main accusations in the lawsuit. I'll tell you if I think they'll hold up:

1) Before the shareholder vote in December, BofA concealed Merrill's losses from shareholders.

2) After the shareholder vote, Bank of America forced the government to save the merger with taxpayer assistance after discovering losses only slightly higher than previously known.

3) BofA did not disclose Merrill's bonus timing or amount possibly on numerous occasions.

But go ahead Frank, defend such practices and tell us all why regulations are not needed.