Should Banks Be Choosing Who Gets To Stay In Business?

[toobfreak]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I see a business potential for another bank to step in and pick up former Bank Of America customers.

*****SMILE*****

 

[WinterBorn]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

I think a case can be made for refusing to loan money to manufacture and sell military style rifles based, not on the beliefs of the bank owners, but on the potential for a crash in that market segment. The market is already bloated, since fear of bans has had an effect on sales for 8 years. And with the current backlash, however uneducated, could do even more harm. I doubt there will be a day when none are available because of banking. But the market will balance itself.

I just looked on Guns America. Under AK47s and clones, there are 70 rifles for sale. Under AR15s there are 930.

 

[Care4all]

I see a business potential for another bank to step in and pick up former Bank Of America customers.

*****SMILE*****

agree..... there are lots of other banks

 

[shockedcanadian]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

This is the Canadian system for all intents and purposes. In fact, the banking system was originally run by Crown Corporations, now they are simply covertly controlled, guided and influenced internally with the pretext that it is a "private business". This way, they choose the winners and losers, share financial details of customers and screw people over at Will internally without a warrant or the inconvenience of having to follow silly laws meant to protect Human Rights.

Why do you think Canada is so protective of the banking industry here? We ensure foreign banks cannot access our economy, it would help capitalism greatly to have many U,S banks here, but Canada doesn't want this as it waters down their control. Instead, they say, "send us your IT jobs (the state will infiltrate your HR, executives and management there as well, but, at least you can't finance people we don't want to succeed) and manufacturing, we will gladly take those jobs. Keep our of our banking though, along with healthcare, that's the primary methods in which the state controls and dictates to Canadians.

 

[toobfreak]

I just looked on Guns America. Under AK47s and clones, there are 70 rifles for sale. Under AR15s there are 930.

Probably all from people living in areas like Vermont forced trying to unload them quick in advance of the statewide ban.

 

[toobfreak]

I see a business potential for another bank to step in and pick up former Bank Of America customers.

*****SMILE*****

agree..... there are lots of other banks

And what happens when other banks follow suit not wishing to look insensitive to political issues or come under attack from David Hogg with calls of boycott as supporting child murderers? What happens when none of the banks will finance loans and you are blacklisted as a social pariah?

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I see a business potential for another bank to step in and pick up former Bank Of America customers.

*****SMILE*****

agree..... there are lots of other banks

And what happens when other banks follow suit not wishing to look insensitive to political issues or come under attack from David Hogg with calls of boycott as supporting child murderers? What happens when none of the banks will finance loans and you are blacklisted as a social pariah?

What happens when most those banks lose their customers because they only want to pay out 0.1% interest or less and it's more profitable for me to invest in something that pays out better or in my mattress?

OTOH... I think that there's a case for a class action suit against the banks if they have a personal vendetta against gun owners and gun shops. I've already stated that the NRA should run such a suit considering the demonization the media has been giving them.

*****SMILE*****

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

Strawman fallacy.

Banks are not choosing who gets to stay in business.

As already correctly noted: there are ample other financial institutions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I see a business potential for another bank to step in and pick up former Bank Of America customers.

*****SMILE*****

agree..... there are lots of other banks

And what happens when other banks follow suit not wishing to look insensitive to political issues or come under attack from David Hogg with calls of boycott as supporting child murderers? What happens when none of the banks will finance loans and you are blacklisted as a social pariah?

Slippery slope fallacy.

Remarkable the ignorance conservatives have of free market economics; remarkable the lack of faith conservatives have in free markets.

As long as there is a demand for firearms, that market will be served.

This is a non-issue – nothing but childish, inane sophistry.

 

[toobfreak]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

Strawman fallacy.

Banks are not choosing who gets to stay in business.

As already correctly noted: there are ample other financial institutions.

Strawman argument. There are ample other financial institutions, FOR NOW. And what happens when only a limited number of banks will agree to finance them, and now only at a much higher rate, as a "high risk" loan? Soon you can'y afford top open your business or stay open. Just one more way the Left is COMING FOR YOUR GUNS (well not YOU, we know you are too pussy to own them).

 

[toobfreak]

Remarkable the ignorance conservatives have of free market economics; remarkable the lack of faith conservatives have in free markets.

Remarkable ignorance that you still think our fascist leftist oligarchy allows us to maintain a free market. The evidence points otherwise.

 

[WinterBorn]

I just looked on Guns America. Under AK47s and clones, there are 70 rifles for sale. Under AR15s there are 930.

Probably all from people living in areas like Vermont forced trying to unload them quick in advance of the statewide ban.

Vermonters? lol

So you don't think the panic buying over the last decade has saturated the market?

 

[WinterBorn]

I see a business potential for another bank to step in and pick up former Bank Of America customers.

*****SMILE*****

agree..... there are lots of other banks

And what happens when other banks follow suit not wishing to look insensitive to political issues or come under attack from David Hogg with calls of boycott as supporting child murderers? What happens when none of the banks will finance loans and you are blacklisted as a social pariah?

How aware are you of how many loans gun manufacturers get right now?

 

[WinterBorn]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

Strawman fallacy.

Banks are not choosing who gets to stay in business.

As already correctly noted: there are ample other financial institutions.

Strawman argument. There are ample other financial institutions, FOR NOW. And what happens when only a limited number of banks will agree to finance them, and now only at a much higher rate, as a "high risk" loan? Soon you can'y afford top open your business or stay open. Just one more way the Left is COMING FOR YOUR GUNS (well not YOU, we know you are too pussy to own them).

Aside from a few that will try to make political hay out of grandstanding, banks will loan money where they think they can make money.

Are you assuming that there will be no ban on ARs out of this panic based on nonsense? And if there is a ban, do you think gun manufacturers will be able to repay the loans they take out to build ARs?

 

[Dragonlady]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

This is the Canadian system for all intents and purposes. In fact, the banking system was originally run by Crown Corporations, now they are simply covertly controlled, guided and influenced internally with the pretext that it is a "private business". This way, they choose the winners and losers, share financial details of customers and screw people over at Will internally without a warrant or the inconvenience of having to follow silly laws meant to protect Human Rights.

Why do you think Canada is so protective of the banking industry here? We ensure foreign banks cannot access our economy, it would help capitalism greatly to have many U>S banks here, but Canada doesn't want this as it waters down their control. Instead, they say, "send us you IT jobs (the state will infiltrate your HR, executives and management there as well, but, at least you can't finance people we don't want to succeed) and manufacturing, we will glady take those jobs. Keep our of our banking though, along with healthcare, that's the primary methods in which the state controls and dictates to Canadians.

 

[Astrostar]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

Spurious argument at the very least; utter b.s. at the worst. I applaud BofA for its decision to make life more difficult for manufacturers of weapons capable of automatic fire and intended to be sold to the domestic market. This type of firearm should be illegal, and slowly but surely, with a few recent baby steps, the nation is making progress in that direction.

The actions of BofA clearly support our Constitution and the "well regulated" verbege of the 2nd Amendment. Kudos to them!

 

[WinterBorn]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

Spurious argument at the very least; utter b.s. at the worst. I applaud BofA for its decision to make life more difficult for manufacturers of weapons capable of automatic fire and intended to be sold to the domestic market. This type of firearm should be illegal, and slowly but surely, with a few recent baby steps, the nation is making progress in that direction.

The actions of BofA clearly support our Constitution and the "well regulated" verbege of the 2nd Amendment. Kudos to them!

Who manufactures weapons capable of automatic fire?

 

[Dragonlady]

You decide to open a meat market, but your financial institution is owned by a vegetarian so they decide to shut you down.

You decide to buy a gas station but your bank president is a big green energy/electric car hawk, so they walk out on you.

You want to publish a mens magazine or a christian publication but your bank is run by a feminist or atheist and they pull the rug out on you.

Right or wrong? Is that not the very basis of FASCISM? Isn't that a violation of the bank's responsibility to the public trust? Why then are banks like BANK OF AMERICA getting to decide to pull out from people supplying guns which are not only LEGAL but protected under the Bill of Rights?

Bank of America to Stop Financing Makers of Military-Style Guns

Since military-looking rifles are only a small part of the guns used in shootings, what will BOA stop financing next, hand guns? Knives? Bats? How can a bank be allowed to pick winners and losers, what we can and cannot buy, in effect making law and social decisions, yet the Justice Department is all over a bakery just for not wishing to put a flagrantly homosexual message on a cake? It is NOT UP TO OUR BANKS to decide who can be in business and who cannot; it is not up to them to choose winners and losers above and beyond the free market.

Strawman fallacy.

Banks are not choosing who gets to stay in business.

As already correctly noted: there are ample other financial institutions.

Strawman argument. There are ample other financial institutions, FOR NOW. And what happens when only a limited number of banks will agree to finance them, and now only at a much higher rate, as a "high risk" loan? Soon you can'y afford top open your business or stay open. Just one more way the Left is COMING FOR YOUR GUNS (well not YOU, we know you are too pussy to own them).

Aside from a few that will try to make political hay out of grandstanding, banks will loan money where they think they can make money.

Are you assuming that there will be no ban on ARs out of this panic based on nonsense? And if there is a ban, do you think gun manufacturers will be able to repay the loans they take out to build ARs?

As a long time banker (9 years) before I moved to law, I can vouch for the idea that bankers don’t give a rat’s ass about politics and had we ever tried to use our discretionary limits to advance a personal political agenda, either for or against, it would end our careers.

As a banker, it would be very difficult for anyone to get financing for a new gun company right now. That decision would be based not on politics but on the market forces at play.

1. The Remington bankruptcy: this 200 year old storied manufacturer couldn’t stay in business. What chance would a new manufacturer have to break into a crowded market?

2. Ironically, gun sales have plummeted since Trump’s election. As a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment, fears that the government is going to ban gun sales have abated. This drop in sales was a huge factor in the Remington bankruptcy.

3. Over supply: over 11 million guns were manufactured in the US in 2016, up from from 4 million guns in 2006. Coupled with the drop in sales since Trump’s election, dealers are already awash in inventory which isn’t selling.

4. Uncertainty going into the midterms. If the Democrats retake the House and/or the Senate come November, it’s entirely possible that some types of guns will be restricted or banned. Will the weapons you want to manufacture still be saleable if that happens.

5. 30% of all new businesses fail in the first year. 60% in the first two. A new business has to have a really impressive business plan, and the owner must be well capitalized and offer good collateral to get any loan approved.

Throughout my banking and legal career, I’ve had to deal with clients I found to be odious at best. I had to handle the renewal of the liquor license for the strip palace three blocks from my home that I truly wanted to see shut down, having been sexually harassed by drunk creeps coming out of that place while I waited for the street car, more times than I could count. When my request that the file be given to someone else was ignored, I sat down and got our client’s liquor license renewed.

As you can see, there are lots of reasons why a lending officer would turn down a bank loan for someone wanting to start a new gun company that have nothing to do with the politics of the lending officer.

 

[Care4all]

IS this also BOA not letting their credit cards to be used by customers to buy the specific automatic weapons???