when you don’t know a fucking thing about me and you don’t know the first fucking thing about the subject, you moron. Maybe I’ve worked in banking? Maybe I’ve had some of the largest banks in the US as clients? Stick your comments up your ass.
What a piss poor excuse for a thought! What the fuck has that got to do with the treatment of their customers by the consumer banks? Who’s talking about the internal operations of banks? We’re talking about how the bank treats you, you asshole.
Who said there was a conspiracy, other than you, dipshit? As SilentGoldfish points out, (s)he has no choice but to use a bank. Just like the rest of us in the real world.
So where’s your evidence you putz?
Never had a bank ratchet up the fees while you weren’t paying attention?
Never had an experience where you’ve gotten minimal interest on your deposits while being charged outlandish fees for what should be provided as a service? How do you justify $20 to certify a check? How much more does it cost the bank to give you a piece of paper guaranteeing to pay, than to give you the cash?
You can buy cheques on the internet at $12.00 a thousand, but the bank wants $40.00?
They all but crammed ATMs down our collective throats, mostly by being open only while people are at work. Now after ATMs have become a (welcome) way of life, and while saving the bank money…
… the banks add fees. When the backlash to that practise was evidenced by people returning to teller service, banks alienated their customers again by attaching fees to full-service transactions.
You see fuckwad? If you have ever been to a bank you would see evidence of these practices. I prefer you stay under your rock.
You’ve documented sufficiently that banks charge fees, but you have not documented your claim, which was that they are inept at investing and that the fees they charge are intended to mitigate their ineptitude.
You made a claim of investing ineptitude by banks. Cerowyn demanded that you back up those claims. You came here and started squealing like a stuck little piggy.
But hey, maybe you did work in banking. I’d accept that as evidence of ineptitude in the industry.
I’ll add my voice to those suggesting that NutMagnet has only demonstrated that banks have been increasing their fees. There is no support yet for the assertion that
.
In order to defend this point, you must show that banks, in general, are “inept” at investing, and that a direct result of this ineptitude is the increase of user fees.
And while I’m here, perhaps you can pass on to Ed Mierzwinski and his ilk that my U.S. Senators were evidently listening to me, not necessarily their “big bank campaign contributors.” Of course, what I was telling them was that I don’t think it’s the proper role of the federal government to regulate bank’s user fees.
Dan. Read the sentence again. It clearly says that ATM use was forced on the consumer because the banks themselves are only open when the people who need their services are at work.
Coldfire:
Yes, I have. Those were statements, phrased as rhetorical questions. (Sheesh). And I served on the loan committee for a ($12M) credit union for 4 years, and was the president of it for 2 years. The way we competed with the overpowering presence of the banks was to differentiate ourselves by providing service and keeping service fees to a minimum.
Lib
No I have not documented my “claim”. This rant was getting long enough. What other justification do you think banks can provide for this practise other than greed?
Christ! $1.47 billion! So, to make up for the bad loans they want my $20?
But to shed perspective on this thread. I am addressing Cerowyn’s “response” to my comments. I resent him calling me a “dumb” shit" and accusing me of “parroting moronic predjudice”. He knows nothing about me, he didn’t address the OP, and he’s a fucking jerk.
Now how did it fall to me to defend the complaining bank customers in the OP and present my resume because I’ve stated the obvious?
I am not surprised that a schmuck like NutMagnet is getting all this flak, but I am surprised that there are so many objections to banking ineptitude.
Banks frequently extend enormous loans to extremely unlikely individuals and shady businesses, often because their analysts just don’t get around to reviewing the documents sufficiently. To compound their mistakes, they notoriously throw vast quantities of good money after bad.
Yes, I do have personal experience in this field, as I work in bankruptcy law. We represent banks trying to recover their money from insolvent corporations that often enough, they never should have lent to in the first place, a conclusion that requires very little hindsight.
I think you should have actually read my entire response. I actually agreed with you with respect to your claim of investing ineptitude. Don’t thank me, it’s okay. Really.
Ace, if by “new posters” you mean “people who have been posting for over a year,” then yeah, I guess I am.
It just tickles me that you call me a crank, though. Please don’t stop.
I love amphibolous headlines: