Bernie Sanders Plan: Turn Post Offices into Banks

[g5000]

It ended because private banks began offering higher interest rates on savings after WWII. They became competitive with the postal savings system.

That's your route to profitability? Offer lower rates on savings than private banks?

The whole point Sanders is making is that there are millions of individuals who don't have a private bank account, and are cut off from many modern financial services as a result. Direct deposit, for example. Such people have to resort to these bloodsucking check cashing services which charge high fees.

The postal banking system would not compete with private banks. It would be supplemental.

Yes, it's sad that poor people have no money to open bank accounts.
Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?
And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

What's sad is that you feel compelled to ask so many questions that could be answered by reading the information at the links.

The links in the op did not answer my questions.

It answers the question about the fees. It doesn't bother addressing your apples and oranges fallacy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

Trying to make an apples and oranges fallacy now, are we?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

Excellent! You should market the plan as helping poor people, not as a profit center for the Post Office.
That would be believable.

 

[g5000]

Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

Trying to make an apples and oranges fallacy now, are we?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

Excellent! You should market the plan as helping poor people, not as a profit center for the Post Office.
That would be believable.

Hello?!?!

That's EXACTLY how Sanders is marketing it. YOU are the one who brought up profits.

Jesus H. Christ, man!

Anything else? Do you have ANYTHING besides your biases to bring to this conversation? Because they just aren't working for you right now.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's your route to profitability? Offer lower rates on savings than private banks?

The whole point Sanders is making is that there are millions of individuals who don't have a private bank account, and are cut off from many modern financial services as a result. Direct deposit, for example. Such people have to resort to these bloodsucking check cashing services which charge high fees.

The postal banking system would not compete with private banks. It would be supplemental.

Yes, it's sad that poor people have no money to open bank accounts.
Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?
And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

What's sad is that you feel compelled to ask so many questions that could be answered by reading the information at the links.

The links in the op did not answer my questions.

It answers the question about the fees. It doesn't bother addressing your apples and oranges fallacy.

I did enjoy the 25% rate on loans.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

Trying to make an apples and oranges fallacy now, are we?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

Excellent! You should market the plan as helping poor people, not as a profit center for the Post Office.
That would be believable.

Hello?!?!

That's EXACTLY how Sanders is marketing it. YOU are the one who brought up profits.

Jesus H. Christ, man!

I said it would lose money.
You're the one who claimed it would be profitable. Durr.

 

[Arianrhod]

Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

Trying to make an apples and oranges fallacy now, are we?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

Excellent! You should market the plan as helping poor people, not as a profit center for the Post Office.
That would be believable.

For one thing, it would do both.

For another, people like you have a constitutional aversion to helping anyone but yourselves, so you'd do what you're doing in this thread - find or manufacture reasons why the idea sucks.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

Trying to make an apples and oranges fallacy now, are we?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

Excellent! You should market the plan as helping poor people, not as a profit center for the Post Office.
That would be believable.

Hello?!?!

That's EXACTLY how Sanders is marketing it. YOU are the one who brought up profits.

Jesus H. Christ, man!

Anything else? Do you have ANYTHING besides your biases to bring to this conversation? Because they just aren't working for you right now.

The Post Office already loses enough money. Why do you want to lose more with this stupid bank idea?

Look at that, post #2. LOL!

 

[Arianrhod]

Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

Trying to make an apples and oranges fallacy now, are we?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

Excellent! You should market the plan as helping poor people, not as a profit center for the Post Office.
That would be believable.

Hello?!?!

That's EXACTLY how Sanders is marketing it. YOU are the one who brought up profits.

Jesus H. Christ, man!

I said it would lose money.
You're the one who claimed it would be profitable. Durr.

Using the information available at the links, show us how it would lose money. In detail. Using your math skills. Thanks.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

Trying to make an apples and oranges fallacy now, are we?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

Excellent! You should market the plan as helping poor people, not as a profit center for the Post Office.
That would be believable.

For one thing, it would do both.

For another, people like you have a constitutional aversion to helping anyone but yourselves, so you'd do what you're doing in this thread - find or manufacture reasons why the idea sucks.

A government run bank does suck.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Kind of reminds me of the time (mostly democrat) congress people used the congressional post office as a bank for quick cash. Post Offices have a hard time competing with services like UPS and Fed Ex because there is no incentive in the federal government to work hard enough to make a profit. Look what the "partnership" between government and the private sector did to the mortgage industry. The guy who was in charge of monitoring Fannie Mae told his bosses (the American public) that Fannie was doing fine when it was on the verge of collapse and no criminal charges were ever filed. God help us if the federal government ever takes over the banks. You would be better off burying your money in the backyard before the socialist democratic republic confiscates it "for the greater good".

The USPS's biggest competitor is e-mail, not UPS or FedEx.

E-mail killed the Post Office.

=====
You can send a 1 oz letter via the USPS for less than a buck but the same letter sent via Fed - Ex or UPS would be over $17.

And righties hate the post office and want to privatize it.

I wonder why.

It would be far less than $17, but FEDEX and UPS are required by law to charge a certain minimum price, so you observation is irrelevant.

=======

Try it and see. You will be surprised how much it will cost.

And who made that law? Wouldn't be a bought and paid for Congressperson, would it?

OF COURSE NOT </S >

 

[Votto]

The Post Office already loses enough money. Why do you want to lose more with this stupid bank idea?

So that they will be too big to fail silly.

 

[Votto]

Hmm, hey Bernie, will these post office banks in low income areas require that people show ID before cashing their checks?

You racist pig. They should not have to show ID.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Kind of reminds me of the time (mostly democrat) congress people used the congressional post office as a bank for quick cash. Post Offices have a hard time competing with services like UPS and Fed Ex because there is no incentive in the federal government to work hard enough to make a profit. Look what the "partnership" between government and the private sector did to the mortgage industry. The guy who was in charge of monitoring Fannie Mae told his bosses (the American public) that Fannie was doing fine when it was on the verge of collapse and no criminal charges were ever filed. God help us if the federal government ever takes over the banks. You would be better off burying your money in the backyard before the socialist democratic republic confiscates it "for the greater good".

The USPS's biggest competitor is e-mail, not UPS or FedEx.

E-mail killed the Post Office.

=====
You can send a 1 oz letter via the USPS for less than a buck but the same letter sent via Fed - Ex or UPS would be over $17.

And righties hate the post office and want to privatize it.

I wonder why.

The USPS takes three days. FedEx is overnight.

You are paying for speed.

==========
The Post Office has overnight service too --- well I think they call it " next day " and it is FAR FAR LESS than Fed-Ex or UPS.

 

[bripat9643]

Kind of reminds me of the time (mostly democrat) congress people used the congressional post office as a bank for quick cash. Post Offices have a hard time competing with services like UPS and Fed Ex because there is no incentive in the federal government to work hard enough to make a profit. Look what the "partnership" between government and the private sector did to the mortgage industry. The guy who was in charge of monitoring Fannie Mae told his bosses (the American public) that Fannie was doing fine when it was on the verge of collapse and no criminal charges were ever filed. God help us if the federal government ever takes over the banks. You would be better off burying your money in the backyard before the socialist democratic republic confiscates it "for the greater good".

The USPS's biggest competitor is e-mail, not UPS or FedEx.

E-mail killed the Post Office.

=====
You can send a 1 oz letter via the USPS for less than a buck but the same letter sent via Fed - Ex or UPS would be over $17.

And righties hate the post office and want to privatize it.

I wonder why.

It would be far less than $17, but FEDEX and UPS are required by law to charge a certain minimum price, so you observation is irrelevant.

=======

Try it and see. You will be surprised how much it will cost.

And who made that law? Wouldn't be a bought and paid for Congressperson, would it?

OF COURSE NOT </S >

Yep, they were bought and paid for by the Postal Union.

 

[bripat9643]

Kind of reminds me of the time (mostly democrat) congress people used the congressional post office as a bank for quick cash. Post Offices have a hard time competing with services like UPS and Fed Ex because there is no incentive in the federal government to work hard enough to make a profit. Look what the "partnership" between government and the private sector did to the mortgage industry. The guy who was in charge of monitoring Fannie Mae told his bosses (the American public) that Fannie was doing fine when it was on the verge of collapse and no criminal charges were ever filed. God help us if the federal government ever takes over the banks. You would be better off burying your money in the backyard before the socialist democratic republic confiscates it "for the greater good".

The USPS's biggest competitor is e-mail, not UPS or FedEx.

E-mail killed the Post Office.

=====
You can send a 1 oz letter via the USPS for less than a buck but the same letter sent via Fed - Ex or UPS would be over $17.

And righties hate the post office and want to privatize it.

I wonder why.

The USPS takes three days. FedEx is overnight.

You are paying for speed.

==========
The Post Office has overnight service too --- well I think they call it " next day " and it is FAR FAR LESS than Fed-Ex or UPS.

Yep, and far less reliable.

 

[Arianrhod]

Will the Post Office be providing these check cashing services for free?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

And as asked above, will they require photo id of their poor, minority customers?

Trying to make an apples and oranges fallacy now, are we?

They would charge a nominal fee, much lower than what is charged at the current neighborhood ripoff joints.

Excellent! You should market the plan as helping poor people, not as a profit center for the Post Office.
That would be believable.

For one thing, it would do both.

For another, people like you have a constitutional aversion to helping anyone but yourselves, so you'd do what you're doing in this thread - find or manufacture reasons why the idea sucks.

A government run bank does suck.

For example -?

 

[g5000]

Kind of reminds me of the time (mostly democrat) congress people used the congressional post office as a bank for quick cash. Post Offices have a hard time competing with services like UPS and Fed Ex because there is no incentive in the federal government to work hard enough to make a profit. Look what the "partnership" between government and the private sector did to the mortgage industry. The guy who was in charge of monitoring Fannie Mae told his bosses (the American public) that Fannie was doing fine when it was on the verge of collapse and no criminal charges were ever filed. God help us if the federal government ever takes over the banks. You would be better off burying your money in the backyard before the socialist democratic republic confiscates it "for the greater good".

The USPS's biggest competitor is e-mail, not UPS or FedEx.

E-mail killed the Post Office.

=====
You can send a 1 oz letter via the USPS for less than a buck but the same letter sent via Fed - Ex or UPS would be over $17.

And righties hate the post office and want to privatize it.

I wonder why.

The USPS takes three days. FedEx is overnight.

You are paying for speed.

==========
The Post Office has overnight service too --- well I think they call it " next day " and it is FAR FAR LESS than Fed-Ex or UPS.

The call it Priority Mail Express, and it costs $22.95.

That's not "FAR FAR LESS", now is it.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Kind of reminds me of the time (mostly democrat) congress people used the congressional post office as a bank for quick cash. Post Offices have a hard time competing with services like UPS and Fed Ex because there is no incentive in the federal government to work hard enough to make a profit. Look what the "partnership" between government and the private sector did to the mortgage industry. The guy who was in charge of monitoring Fannie Mae told his bosses (the American public) that Fannie was doing fine when it was on the verge of collapse and no criminal charges were ever filed. God help us if the federal government ever takes over the banks. You would be better off burying your money in the backyard before the socialist democratic republic confiscates it "for the greater good".

The USPS's biggest competitor is e-mail, not UPS or FedEx.

E-mail killed the Post Office.

=====
You can send a 1 oz letter via the USPS for less than a buck but the same letter sent via Fed - Ex or UPS would be over $17.

And righties hate the post office and want to privatize it.

I wonder why.

The USPS takes three days. FedEx is overnight.

You are paying for speed.

==========
The Post Office has overnight service too --- well I think they call it " next day " and it is FAR FAR LESS than Fed-Ex or UPS.

The call it Priority Mail Express, and it costs $22.95.

That's not "FAR FAR LESS", now is it.

==========
I dunno. It would require checking the same size package and same weight on all three services.

I haven't used Fed-Ex since we bought this house 15 years ago or UPS for that matter in my personal life.

Except for having things shipped to me by Amazon and other online retailers. Some things wind up coming in my mail box via the USPS ... depends on their size and weight I suppose.

I'm a fan of the USPS though and believe the company / service gets a lot of unmerited criticism.

How would Fed-Ex perform if they had to prove they had financed the retirement of employees who haven't even been born yet?

That is the situation the USPS is in because of ' for sale to the highest bidder ' Congressmen whom Fed-Ex and UPS have paid to write legislation forcing the USPS to do exactly that.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The Post Office already loses enough money. Why do you want to lose more with this stupid bank idea?

USPS reports $586 million net loss in Q3

 

[Skull Pilot]

You couldn't pay me to put my money in a government run bank