GOP wants to get rid of overdraft fee limits

[L_Mariachi]

@anon67050589

They need to learn that people helping each other out at the state or federal level is no different than when someone from church brings over a casserole.

Of course it is. You don’t have to wash a dish and return it to the government.

[nimelennar]

@singletona082

In normal functional society do they have any reason to exist?

Yes.

@singletona082

‘Yes the guy who has no money in his account clearly has enough to pay fines.’ Seems… A touch backward.

On the other hand, “Hey, this guy doesn’t have enough money in his account to pay his rent, so let’s spot him the money so that he doesn’t get evicted, and charge him a pittance to discourage that behaviour in an account that shouldnt* ever go below zero,” seems a perfectly good idea.

However, when it’s weaponized against the consumer (by structuring things so that the account will regularly go into overdraft, and so that the fees are harshly punitive as opposed to merely a discouragement), then it starts getting indefensible.

In theory, “let the account go below zero” can be helpful to the customer. However, that quickly goes away when the bank starts seeing it as a way to make money, as opposed to a way to help the customer out.

[Felton]

@alahmnat

and some of the employment-oriented ones can be really lax about what qualifies, like as long as someone in your family qualifies, you’re good

True! I started an account with Navy Federal Credit Union almost 20 years ago when I was married to a marine. They even asked my mother if she wanted to open an account once when she was visiting a branch with me. This was years after I had any connection to the military, but they said it didn’t matter.

[Phrenological]

@lava

here’s hoping every one of these betrayals is another nail in the GOP coffin.

It only affects those who haven’t pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, so no. It won’t affect the GOP, even among the temporarily embarrassed millionaires who have those prepaid debit cards.

[anon26940528]

@lava

here’s hoping every one of these betrayals is another nail in the GOP coffin.

I don’t think that’s how it works. It’s like the Marlboro Man. Political parties are about self-image. Being Republican (and for that matter, so is being a Democrat) is a lifestyle choice, and people will cling to that brand until it kills them… and it will.

Note: Not saying Republicans and Democrats are the same, I’m just saying that people’s choices about which side they identify with in a highly dichotomized and simplified political framework is often entirely about self-image. This doesn’t mean everyone who participates in the process is a mindless zombie. As in, there is a difference between people who vote Democrat and people who embrace Democrat as an identity.

[anon63581570]

To address a thing about ‘they are the same’? I live in a conservative household as someone with liberal social views. I view both parties as more interested in their own enrichment than the national good.

However republicans time and again, to me, have demonstrated policies that pose a greater harm to everyone else as well as a willingness to use ruthless and underhanded tactics to get their way.

So it is ‘the republicans drag things down.’ Then ‘democrats do not make things better because they find a way to make bread off of the situation for themselves’ followed by ‘republicans make things even worse.’

Fuck the southern strategy. Fuck commingling morality and faith with politics. It has turned elections into holy crusades where anything can be justified in the name of The Party.

And fuck everyone that says ‘well you just read it on the internet that does not count.’

Apologies for going off topic. So to return to topic. Since we cannot get business to go ‘no I do not want to make piles of money even at the expense of everyone around me.’ How do we sell them on the idea this practice is harmful in the long term even if short term quarterlies show improvement by ‘job creators’?

[wrecksdart]

@singletona082

While coopting the downtrodden and making them think it is literally everyone else’s fault. Making the victim defend the attacker.

Also consider trump’s removal of the ‘Fiduciary Rule’:

...the fiduciary rule was created by the U.S. Department of Labor to require that brokers who offer financial advice put their clients' interests ahead of their own...

All the GOP talk about “Free Market” this and that, and they’re removing the ability of financial advisors to take advantage of that free market to provide the best choice for the consumer.

[alahmnat]

@singletona082

Since we cannot get business to go ‘no I do not want to make piles of money even at the expense of everyone around me.’ How do we sell them on the idea this practice is harmful in the long term even if short term quarterlies show improvement by ‘job creators’?

You can’t. That’s why regulations exist.

[LearnedCoward]

22 likes but flagged into oblivion.

[andy_hilmer]

The free market requires regulation. To expand the pool of suppliers and buyers beyond the point of oligopoly requires putting in check all concentrations of wealth. The one “deregulation” that can help is breaking the exclusivity of patent monopolies in favor of exclusivity of royalties.

Banking has some other issues in that it’s essentially an extension of the state monopoly on money, which makes “financial deregulation” a laughable concept. Private (non-state) banks are a bullshit concept with a fiat currency.