Spokane7
59°
October 13, 2011 in Business
Lawmakers seek probe on banks’ debit card fees
WASHINGTON — Members of Congress are asking the Justice Department to investigate whether Bank of America and other major banks improperly worked together to charge customers new monthly fees for using their debit cards.
Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., and four other Democrats said today that they’ve asked Attorney General Eric Holder to open a probe into possible collusion by the banks.
Welch said the lawmakers had no evidence of collusion. But he said the timing of the fees merit an investigation.
“You don’t have a competitive marketplace,” Welch said at a news conference.
Bank of America said last month that it would charge its customers $5 a month if they use their debit cards for purchases. Customers who use their cards only at ATMs will not have to pay the fee.
Chase and Wells Fargo are also testing $3 monthly debit-card fees in select markets.
The fees have sparked public outrage and helped fuel protests on Wall Street. Many have criticized the banks for charging to use debit cards after those same banks received hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded bailouts. Bank of America, Chase and Wells Fargo were among the recipients of rescue funds.
Bank of America, the nation’s largest bank, said the monthly charge was necessary because the Federal Reserve has capped the fees that they can charge merchants for swiping the debit cards. Congress directed the Fed to adopt the cap on swipe fees under the financial overhaul law.
On Thursday, representatives for Bank of America and Chase declined to comment on the lawmakers’ request for a probe. A representative for Wells Fargo wasn’t immediately available for comment.
Also requesting the investigation were Democratic Reps. John Conyers of Michigan, Keith Ellison of Minnesota, Mike Honda of California and Raul Grijalva of Arizona.
The lawmakers said statements made by some banks and their trade associations raise questions about possible coordination.
In their letter to Holder, they cite an e-mail by the Texas Bankers Association to its members. It was sent after legislation failed that would have delayed a cap on the swipe fees banks can charge merchants.
The e-mail said: “Now the industry must regroup and each and every one of you must decide how you are going to pay for the use of debit cards. It may be through a monthly fee.”
The Merchants Payments Coalition, an organization of trade groups for a variety of retailers, supported the lawmakers’ move.
Bank of America will start charging the fee early next year. Chase and Wells Fargo haven’t said when they will make a final decision on whether to roll out the debit-card fee more broadly.
© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Seven firms or nonprofits win Agora Awards 
Welcome_Black_Carter on October 13 at 9:12 a.m.
Let’s just say “thanks Frank and Dodd” That’s where this “fee” originated. The Gov “protecting” the consumer. Stupidity…..same thing when the were gonna protect the consumer and reduce satelite/cable tv rates…..
Keep big government out of our lives and it will be better for everybody.
misjustice on October 13 at 10:16 a.m.
Let’s just say “thanks BofA” for showing gratitude after your bali out from the taxpayers. Next time you come cryin’ to the taxpayers with your grubby hands out for a bail out, you can go to h-e-double toothpicks.
Where’s my tax cut?
bpackley on October 13 at 10:17 a.m.
Of course BIG banks will charge fees for using their debit cards! Especially the crooks at Bank of America! Why? Because they can! They are allowed to!! And of course it is Democrats calling for probes and NOT Republicans! Maybe if Bank of American would treat it’s depositors better, maybe they would receive more depositors!!
And, if Bank of America would actually want to help people modify and refinance their home loans, especially for former CountryWide customers, they wouldn’t have as many foreclosures and might actually make some money!!! What a concept! But of course, Bank of America will never figure out the concept of treating the customer right!
All I can say is that if you are affiliated with Bank of America at all, whether you are a depositor or home loan customer or investor, get away from Bank of America as much as possible!! Show the business that you will not tolerate their behavior by taking your business somewhere else!
johnclarke on October 13 at 10:54 a.m.
my peeps - if you bank at BOA you have only yourself to blame. Join a Credit Union. Yeah, maybe it’s a little painful because you have to change your direct deposit, bill pay yada yada. The friendly CU folks will help you with that.
Stick it to The Man, and join us. We welcome you.
RedCedar on October 13 at 11:09 a.m.
I have a radical idea for people who don’t like debit card fees and who also don’t like the near-zero interest rates that banks pay on deposits:
Use cash
That’s why cash was invented. All stores still accept it, no matter how scruffy you look. Banks will give you cash in exchange for any check drawn on their bank, although they might want your fingerprint if they think you’re too scruffy. If doing without a bank account is too much of a hassle, at least avoid the debit card fees by carrying a wad of cash in your pocket and using it to buy stuff. Robbers don’t expect people to carry cash any more, so the risk of being robbed is way down these days. Better yet, you will end up spending less money if you use cash rather than a debit card. The debit card is never “empty”, but as you watch that wad of bills get smaller as you go about your shopping day, you’ll decide that you really didn’t need the Italian marble patio barbecue grill with hand-set slate gas-fired fire pit and over-sized umbrella after all.
gmorton on October 13 at 11:22 a.m.
RedCedar wrote,
“I have a radical idea for people who don’t like debit card fees and who also don’t like the near-zero interest rates that banks pay on deposits: . . .”
:-)
Great comment, Red.
Of course, this being the Age of Entitlements, many of the peeps think they are “entitled,” not only to jobs, health care, education for their kids, “affordable” housing, etc., but debit cards as well. The notion that they should actually have to *pay* for that service grates against their parasitical instincts.
oneanddone on October 13 at 11:30 a.m.
Before anyone goes off on BofA let’s wait and see if business will lower their prices after the swipe fee decrease goes into effect. That was their promise. I for one expect business to pocket the difference without any effort to pass that savings onto us. They had already priced this fee into their prices and conned Congress into thinking it would be a good PR move.
gmorton on October 13 at 11:32 a.m.
misjustice wrote,
“Let’s just say ‘thanks BofA’ for showing gratitude after your bali out from the taxpayers. Next time you come cryin’ to the taxpayers with your grubby hands out for a bail out, you can go to h-e-double toothpicks.”
That’s what they should have been told the first time. You should know, however, that many banks, including Wells Fargo, which received bailout funds were forced to take them. WF told the gummint, “We’re fine; we don’t need your money.” But Treasury told them they would have to accept it, lest they gain an “unfair” PR advantage over their less prudent competitors.
So they took the money, placed it in a locked account, and handed it back as soon as they were legally able.
johnclarke on October 13 at 11:41 a.m.
“Of course, this being the Age of Entitlements, many of the peeps think they are “entitled,” not only to jobs, health care, education for their kids, “affordable” housing, etc., but debit cards as well. The notion that they should actually have to *pay* for that service grates against their parasitical instincts.”
Oh gmorton, you angry angry man. Banking 101; you deposit your money, and they keep it safe. Also, banks stay in business and make a profit by using your money to secure loans to other people. They charge interest and this becomes profit. (That model worked for a while, but of course regular profits are not enough for greedy people.) So really, this is not about “entitlements” of “free lunches” or any of the odd little sayings you have. This is a business partnership, and in exchange for your deposits, it is perfectly reasonable to expect service, or perhaps interest in return. Also, Mr. Man - banks can simply borrow overnight Fed funds from Big Gubmint and put them in a series of investment schemes to make money. No deposits, no Big Gubmint = no banks.
johnclarke on October 13 at 11:48 a.m.
And, on your second post, banks have no one to blame but themselves for what happened during the financial crisis. they whined and complained about “unfair regulations” and their paid for buddy Phil Gramm essentially unwound key regulations that have successfully kept bankers from shooting themselves (and us) in the face. Then, after running themselves into the ground they come running to Uncle Sugar for money. This should all sound alot like the Savings and Loan ‘free lunch’ because it’s literally the same scenario.
Guess what ? They are doing EXACTLY THE SAME THING all over again because of the possbility of the Volker rule. They have 3,000 lobbyists in Washington trying to buy their way out of having to practice business in a safe manner.
gmorton on October 13 at 12:04 p.m.
johnclarke wrote,
“Also, banks stay in business and make a profit by using your money to secure loans to other people. They charge interest and this becomes profit.”
You’re a few decades behind there, John. Modern banks offer many services beyond managing savings and making loans – such as offering credit and debit cards. The interest they earn on their loans does *not* pay for those services.
“This is a business partnership, and in exchange for your deposits, it is perfectly reasonable to expect service, or perhaps interest in return.”
What is reasonable to expect are the services and charges you agreed to when you opened your account. If you believe the charges imposed are not worth the services received, you are perfectly free to do without that service, or seek out another provider of that service whose terms are more acceptable to you. No one has any duty to offer you debit card services, or offer them at any particular price.
gmorton on October 13 at 12:08 p.m.
johnclarke wrote,
“And, on your second post, banks have no one to blame but themselves for what happened during the financial crisis.”
Oh, I agree. Except for those, like Wells Fargo, who had bailout money stuffed down their throats.
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/10/business/fi-wells-fargo10
Hunterman on October 13 at 12:11 p.m.
I wonder how many people who whine and complain about these mega banks still do any business with them at all. We have the power to do something about it. Don’t do business with them! Don’t expect any of our lawmakers to do anything about it- they are not going to bite the hands that makes them rich.
gmorton on October 13 at 12:27 p.m.
Hunterman wrote,
“Don’t expect any of our lawmakers to do anything about it- they are not going to bite the hands that makes them rich.”
I’m sure that’s true for some them. A few are wise enough to know that what a bank charges you for a debit card is none of the gummint’s business.
tobiasg on October 13 at 12:34 p.m.
gmorton wrote,
I’m sure that’s true for some them. A few are wise enough to know that what a bank charges you for a debit card is none of the gummint’s business.
It is if those businesses are doing so in collaboration. If you think otherwise, you’re definitely on the wrong side of whose best interests need to be preserved. Corporations are NOT people, despite what you and Mitt Romney and Supreme Court might believe.
gmorton on October 13 at 12:53 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“Corporations are NOT people, despite what you and Mitt Romney and Supreme Court might believe.”
Ah, another voice in that atonal choir. I’ve asked jimwv2 these questions, and never received an answer – if corporations are not people, what are they? Martians? Computers? Disembodied spirits?
If corporations are not people, what about labor unions? Football teams? Greenpeace? ACORN? A garden club?
Of course you’re right in a set-theoretical sense. A group is not an individual. It is a plurality of individuals, or persons. Are you suggesting that if two or more people join together to pursue a common interest, they cease to be persons and forfeit their First Amendment rights?
Please explain.
richardch on October 13 at 12:57 p.m.
Corporations are people, workers, shareholders, customers all. If you don’t like that corporation don’t purchase their product. This fee is a gift from little dickie durbin tacked on to the frank dodd bill and another case of govt distorting the market place. If wells fargo can give me a better deal I’ll go with them rather than BOA. that is choice something that all the dems want to take away from you, and force you to buy what they think is best and healthy for the environment.
tobiasg on October 13 at 1:05 p.m.
Both gmorton and richard are sick.
PROVE to me that a corporation has a heartbeat, has consciousness and most of all, show me a damn birth certificate!
RedCedar on October 13 at 1:05 p.m.
Regarding the proper relationship between government and banks, I submit that congress should not be regulating the fees that banks charge, either to retailers or to card holders. Rather, the government should enforce anti-trust law and ensure that there is true competition in every area of the the economy, including banking.
And I still say that if you don’t like the paltry interest rates, limited hours, and fees on top of fees, use cash. It spends just fine everywhere, it defeats all the efforts of government spooks and capitalist marketers to track where you go and what you buy, and the shoebox under the bed is always open, 24/7 with no fees.
tobiasg on October 13 at 1:07 p.m.
This is where the country is going, it won’t be much longer, a few decades and there will be no resemblance of what we’ve had over the past two centuries.
Corporations can control our lives…but gubmint cannot because that’s unumerkin! We’re so screwed and some of you just cannot get it through your thick skulls.
lego on October 13 at 1:14 p.m.
I’m not really sure why people think that the Dodd-Frank Act is increasing their costs because banks have deciding to start charging this fee. Newsflash people, you were already paying this fee because it was priced into consumer goods. Before the FED put the kibosh on it, retailers had to pay large transaction fees for these cards.
Also, I think it is highly unlikely that retailers will be able to pocket the difference now that they will pay less for these fees. The retail market is extremely competitive and that keeps downward pressure on prices.
Another important thing to keep in mind, the cost of these transactions is approximately .04 cents to the banks and they are still allowed to charge up to .24 cents. That is a 500% profit. I would recommend anyone who is charged these ‘new’ fees to move to another bank.
gmorton on October 13 at 1:19 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“Both gmorton and richard are sick.”
*Sigh*. Ask straightforward questions and get *ad hominems* in response.
“PROVE to me that a corporation has a heartbeat, has consciousness and most of all, show me a damn birth certificate!”
Easy enough to do. It has as many of those as it has investors and employees.
johnclarke on October 13 at 1:22 p.m.
You’re a few decades behind there, John. Modern banks offer many services beyond managing savings and making loans – such as offering credit and debit cards. The interest they earn on their loans does *not* pay for those services.
gmorton, Pick up any public bank’s 10-K and note what is the #1 source of revenue/profit is. Credit cards are paid for by collecting interest. Debit Cards, like checking accounts are easily offered at no charge as a courtesy for deposting your money.
“What is reasonable to expect are the services and charges you agreed to when you opened your account.”
Thank you for making my point for me. This tacked on fee from BoA is just then changing the terms of the original agreement, because they are just sore losers.
I like Red Cedar’s suggestion, and I also like mine. Move to a credit union.
Diana on October 13 at 1:29 p.m.
Let the free market decide. Move your money.
I don’t know the origin of this, but “I’ll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one”.
tobiasg on October 13 at 1:32 p.m.
gmorton, so corporations are super-human? I mean, the investors are people, they get together and form a collective super-human entity which is gives them double voices?
Get off whatever you’re on. THAT is your ad hominem attack.
Sorry buddy but some of us are sick of the wealthy making the rules up as they go. You fat cats are making more than you’ve ever made and you’re gradually chipping away at what little us working poor have left…so I’m sorry if I come across as a bit of a jerk but you and your corporate super-humans have been having your way with us long enough and we’ve had it!
gmorton on October 13 at 1:44 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“Corporations can control our lives…but gubmint cannot because that’s unumerkin! We’re so screwed and some of you just cannot get it through your thick skulls.”
Er, no, tobias. No corporation can control your life, or any aspect of it (unless, of course, it has the assistance of gummint force).
Corporations do not maintain goon squads, jails, gulags, or gas chambers. They do not deploy armies, hit teams, battleships, or bombers.
They do not dictate where you may work (except for them), where you may live, where you may travel, what you may do for a living, how much you may charge for your own products or services, how you must educate your kids, what drugs you may take, to whom you may serve hamburgers, or whom you must admit to your business. Only gummint presumes to do such things and enforce its edicts at gunpoint.
Corporations do not demand any of your money, except in exchange for products or services you may desire from them. They do not force you to buy their products or utilize any of their services.
But perhaps you don’t understand what “control” means. Perhaps you think that if someone refuses to give you something you want or think you need, unless you pay them for it, they are “controlling” you. If so, you are confused. Corporations are not responsible for your needs or desires, and have no obligations to help you meet them. Meeting your needs is your problem, and no one else’s.
Corporations are entitled to control their own resources, just as you are. That is not “control” over you, however. You are perfectly free to eschew their offerings and meet your own needs with your own resources. You need to get straight on that.
tobiasg on October 13 at 1:47 p.m.
wrong gmorton and you are a master at spinning things the way you want but the reality is our country is controlled by greed and by corporations, therefore they control us. FACT.
Now please, you give me a headache because every single day you’re right there with responses of talking points on steroids that make you SOUND like you know what you’re talking about but it’s all smoke and mirrors to keep the poor poorer and rich richer.
If we all listen to people like gmorton, we’re a third world country in a matter of a few decades, the only difference is instead of being Communist, we’ll be corporate dictated.
johnclarke on October 13 at 1:47 p.m.
With you Diana. I think this co-called investigation is just a big fat waste of taxpayer dollars. Banks can charge what they want within the FDIC regulated framework, and customers can choose to take their business elsewhere.
Bruce (aka thatoneguy) on October 13 at 1:49 p.m.
RedCedar: “…you’ll decide that you really didn’t need the Italian marble patio barbecue grill with hand-set slate gas-fired fire pit and over-sized umbrella after all.”
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Who would ever decide that? LOL.
gmorton on October 13 at 1:51 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“I mean, the investors are people, they get together and form a collective super-human entity which is gives them double voices?”
Sorry, but you lost me there. Please explain this “double voice.” People do not get extra votes because they’ve invested in a corporation. Nor can they spend the same dollar twice.
What are you talking about?
johnclarke on October 13 at 1:57 p.m.
Corporations do not maintain goon squads, jails, gulags, or gas chambers. They do not deploy armies, hit teams, battleships, or bombers.
Wrong again, gmorton - with the exception of battleships. Military contractors do all of the rest, they interrogate, they do run jails and they have caused plenty of death and destruction. I don’t think anyone has battleships.
If I have not mentioned it lately, your lecturing tone is very annoying. Being wrong all the time is one thing, but sounding superior about everything is another. You don’t use facts or data - you are just rendering a rather odd opinion.
gmorton on October 13 at 2:01 p.m.
johnclarke wrote,
“Debit Cards, like checking accounts are easily offered at no charge as a courtesy for deposting your money.”
Er, no, John. They are not offered “as a courtesy” (i.e., a free lunch). They were previously paid for via fees charged to merchants. Since the gummint has seen fit to forbid that method, the banks are finding other ways to pay for them.
Neither banks nor anyone else has any duty to offer you their services as a “courtesy,” John. They are in business to make money, not bestow gifts on parasites.
“This tacked on fee from BoA is just then changing the terms of the original agreement, because they are just sore losers.”
No. The gummint changed the terms of the original agreement. And that agreement is “at will” by both parties. Either party may change it or withdraw from it at any time.
gmorton on October 13 at 2:13 p.m.
johnclarke wrote,
“Military contractors do all of the rest, they interrogate, they do run jails and they have caused plenty of death and destruction.”
Er, no, John. If they run them it is on behalf of some government. Corporations can indeed be destructive when they crony up with a government. They do not engage in such activities on their own, however.
gmorton on October 13 at 2:18 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“wrong gmorton and you are a master at spinning things the way you want but the reality is our country is controlled by greed and by corporations, therefore they control us.”
Well, tobias, perhaps you can explain where my error lies, and the nature of this “control” you allege. No corporation has any control whatsoever over any aspect of my life, except to the extent I choose to use their products or services. Perhaps you could explain how they control yours.
tobiasg on October 13 at 2:29 p.m.
Perhaps gmorton they do not control your life because you’re part of the corporation-government alliance. For the rest of us, they make our decisions because of people like you that allow these corporations to pour money into politics because “corporations are people”…pure BS
johnclarke on October 13 at 2:36 p.m.
Er, gmorton you once again make my point for me.
BTW, if you think corporations do not maintain private armies that do the bidding of evil men in high places, you are naive. These people don’t need the government to make them evil. Not only do they employ their own people, but they hire other corporations that specialize in such things.
No matter, I wish you well with your hobby of posting really strange crap.
WHS on October 13 at 2:59 p.m.
gmorton, do you drive a car? Do you buy food at a grocery store? Do you have health insurance? Do you pay a mortgage? If you answered yes to any of these, then you are under the control of the corporations… Because, if you are part of the 99% or even better, part of the 50%, then you have to budget and plan for all of these expenses. If the corporations decide that they don’t want to give you a raise, but in the same breath increase the prices of their products… You have to adjust your life to fit these new demands. You don’t get to just say no… When this becomes unbalanced, it is the working class that pay the price.
This may be simplified, but really no more simplified than most of your posts.
Now, if you answered no to those questions, then you are member of the 1% and obviously have no clue as to what the rest of us have to deal with daily.
The problem with all of this is we, the working class, are tired of working and paying for the wealthy to increase their wealth without giving anything back… Remember trickle down economics? You know why it didn’t work, because the wealthy have failed to live up to their side of the bargain.
WHS
tobiasg on October 13 at 5:18 p.m.
gmorton has proved my car is human, my house, anything I touch is human! Brilliant!
valleyman on October 13 at 5:37 p.m.
Laughable when some of you are trying to take away the legal standing that many businesses operate under the notion of “individual” when in the same breath you are screaming for “corporate hacks” to go to jail for their crimes… If a corporation is not a person in the legal eyes of the law, how can they be “held accountable” like you demand?
Do you even understand what it is you clamor for or are you really as brainwashed as johnclarke and tobiasg and think that we’ve got corporations running our lives? Last time I checked, we still have free choice and we can still choose to live our lives the way we want… We choose to shop at Walmart, we choose to bank with BofA, and we choose to have the conveniences of what the “evil corporations” offer us. DEAL WITH IT or CHOOSE to do something else.
tobiasg on October 13 at 5:50 p.m.
So valleyman, what you’re saying is that these entities are “human” but are not accountable? It sounds as though it is YOU that is laughable.
PassinThru on October 13 at 6:11 p.m.
I see these people complaining downtown about corporate greed, and many of them expect something for nothing. Then, on the other hand, I think of the bailout of BofA and their increased assessment of fees and I say, “Gee, I don’t like either of these groups!” Wife and I pulled recently our accounts out of WaMu/Chase and BofA and went strictly Credit Union.
gmorton on October 13 at 6:38 p.m.
WHS wrote,
“gmorton, do you drive a car? Do you buy food at a grocery store? Do you have health insurance? Do you pay a mortgage? If you answered yes to any of these, then you are under the control of the corporations.”
Er, no, WHS. I would only be under their control if they forced me to buy their products, or to do something else I did not wish to do. But I am the one who decides whether to buy their groceries, health insurance, etc., not them.
They do control their own products and services, and decide who may avail themselves of them and under what conditions. If I dislike the prices they charge or other conditions they may impose, I can simply pass over their offerings and satisfy my desires via my own resources.
Like tobias, you seem to be confused regarding what constitutes “control.” You do not exert “control” over your neighbor because you refuse to give him your money. You exert control when you take *his* money, by force.
You both fall into this confusion because you’ve been conditioned to an “entitlement mentality.” You’ve come to believe you’re “entitled” to food, fuel for your car, health insurance, an “affordable” mortgage, etc. So when the persons who produce those goods set conditions on your use of them, such as charging you for them, you think they are “controlling” you.
Well, you are not entitled to any of those things, and no one has any duty to provide you with any of them or provide them under any particular conditions. If you don’t like the conditions others impose on the use of their property, don’t use it – produce those goods for yourself.
gmorton on October 13 at 6:43 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“For the rest of us, they make our decisions . . .”
Really? What decisions has some corporation made for you? They certainly have never made any for me.
And I’m still waiting for you to explain how corporations “control” you.
tobiasg on October 13 at 6:45 p.m.
Truthfully gmorton, it is you that has the “entitlement mentality.” You feel that corporations and the wealthy are entitled to have things their way.
You’ve argued that corporations are people, I guess that is the only way that you can ever look past the “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” Now that you’ve established corporations as people, you do not have to change it to “government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations.”
“entitlement” my foot.
gmorton on October 13 at 6:51 p.m.
Also still waiting for you to explain what corporations are, if they are not groups of persons, tobias.
tobiasg on October 13 at 6:59 p.m.
gmorton, corporations are groups of people but are not and should not function as a person itself.
Are you that stupid to get it? You say government is bad…but corporations are fine? Get a grip.
Why should corporations be allowed to infiltrate government? Why should any corporation have any say in what happens in government? They are not allowed to vote, or is that next? If so, I’m registering my dog to vote, he’s more close to being a person than any corporation is.
gmorton on October 13 at 6:59 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“You feel that corporations and the wealthy are entitled to have things their way.”
Which “things”? If you mean their own property, products, and other resources, then, yes, they are entitled to have things their way with respect to those. They are not entitled to have their way with *your* resources, however.
And of course, neither are you entitled to have your way with theirs.
gmorton on October 13 at 7:15 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“gmorton, corporations are groups of people but are not and should not function as a person itself.”
They don’t. They can’t vote, run for public office, marry, adopt children, or collect Social Security. They are “persons” only for the purposes of contract law. So are labor unions, charities, Greenpeace, the ACLU, the NAACP, and numerous other other organizations.
When any of those organizations speaks, it is its members who are speaking; when they donate to a political candidate or cause, it is their members who are donating, and no one else. Not Martians, zombies, or ghosts. When pursuing their interests, it is the interests of their investors they are pursuing, all of whom are 100% human.
tobiasg on October 13 at 7:22 p.m.
And you feel ALL of those entities should have those rights?
YAY United Corporations of America!
gmorton on October 13 at 8:13 p.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“And you feel ALL of those entities should have those rights?”
Of course. Your rights do not disappear when you join with others to exercise them.
valleyman on October 13 at 10:14 p.m.
@tobiasg: If I’m laughable then the joke’s on you…
gr8whitedope on October 13 at 10:33 p.m.
Corporations are people, my fiends; hey, hey, hey, and I got Roberts on the court to make sure that people r free. Hey, hey, hey.
And $$$$ = speech. Another one of my ideas, hey, hey, hey.
Miss me yet?
gr8whitedope on October 13 at 10:46 p.m.
Ok my brother, Neil, was involved in the Savings and Loan “crisis” in the 80s, and some folks want to blame me for the 2008 bankingwallstreet crisis but hey, it’s all in the family.
We are rich and you are not! And if your are not rich it’s your fault. Just ask that pizza guy, whats his name?
Miss me yet?
valleyman on October 14 at 12:29 a.m.
@dope: Racist much?
tobiasg on October 14 at 3:38 a.m.
gmorton writes…
Of course. Your rights do not disappear when you join with others to exercise them.
So, why is it that YOUR party is doing everything they can to destroy unions?
Face it, you’re a walking, talking, hypocrite.
valleyman on October 14 at 9:12 a.m.
@tobiasg: How is it that taking away the ability of PUBLIC unions (i.e. those paid for by our tax dollars) to bargain against the interests of the citizens (i.e. getting something the government can’t afford to give them), taking away anyone’s rights? I wasn’t aware the constitution provided for the right to “unionize.”
So where are people being deprived? Oh, I know… It’s in the coming REVOLUTION being backed by the DEMOCRATS to disenfranchise the “rich” in this country. Anyone else observed how the measure of richness has been on a sliding scale for the past 3 years? You are next my friend…. Once they take from everyone else, and the takers run out of those to take from, the scale will slide again and they’ll be banging at your door with the pitchforks and the pieces of legislation…
gmorton on October 14 at 9:12 a.m.
tobiasg wrote,
“So, why is it that YOUR party is doing everything they can to destroy unions?”
Which party would that be?
No one that I know of is trying to “destroy” unions. Many would repeal laws which force employers to deal with them, however.
You have every right to form or join a union. By the same token, an employer has every right to tell you and your union to get lost.
WHS on October 14 at 12:00 p.m.
gmorton and the rest of the radical right…. The difference between the two parties is not about entitlement and profits, but about morality and ethics.
You feel the corporations have no responsibilty but to the share holders and to the making of profits.
We feel there is a responsibilty to the working man and the citizens that actually create those profits.
The reality is, if we continue to operate in current fashion, there is going to be a meltdown. Henry Ford was aware of this, and rather than make huge profits, he paid his people well, priced his product to sell and prospered accordingly. However, there were many businesses that did not and do not follow this model. Hence, why the government has had to step in and create regulations for them to follow.
Well, in today’s market place, we have removed many of those regulations, under the guise of trickle down economics, and where are we? I will tell you… The corporations have failed to live up to their end of the bargain. There is no trickle down, there is only profit. They have squeazed the working man to the point that we are starting to fight back. Enough is enough. That is the difference. See, I, and most of the left have no problem with the corporations making a profit. That’s the American way, that’s capitalism. However, when regulations are systematically removed and morality and ethics are ignored, then eventually the people will rise against you.
Morality and Ethics my friend. Some people have them, some people don’t, which side are you on?
WHS
DickAdams on October 18 at 11:55 p.m.
WHS:
I think you should write to these fat cats and ask/beg to be put in their will.