Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a horrible development and hopefully it will get shut down. The idea of private businesses denying service to people who don't agree with their politics is an incredibly dangerous idea and one that social libertarians and liberals especially should be horrified by.
Agree - this is just a way for them to make it look like they are jumping on the current bandwagon of what is going on today. Free advertising! Getting people to talk about them without costing them a dime.
A PR move they have no intention of actually doing.
I bet they believe this is some brilliant marketing to bring in new customers, dreamed up by the resident SJW!
Let's see if it works, for people to close their bank accounts at their established banking institution and move them there? Or if people just leave them.
This is a horrible development and hopefully it will get shut down. The idea of private businesses denying service to people who don't agree with their politics is an incredibly dangerous idea and one that social libertarians and liberals especially should be horrified by.
So I assume you think the baker should have been forced to bake the cake?
Badly formed question. The Constitution puts boundaries what government can do. So - there's no mention of what corporations or employees can do, because their behavior is not governed by the Constitution. (That's what laws are for. Is this hard or something?)
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,563 posts, read 12,525,568 times
Reputation: 10474
Where you shop / what you buy .. it's a form of redlining and card companies have been doing it for a very long time. While I don't agree with them doing it I can understand their reasoning for doing it, risk. They are putting their money on the line each time a card user uses their cards. But, their reasons for 'gun control' goes far beyond risk and is nothing but political.
Buy retread tires, alcohol, use the card at a casino, a massage parlor, etc., and a person might find their interest raised, their credit limit cut, hard to get credit limit increases, or, no credit limit increases, or, their card closed.
On the other hand, using the card at upscale shops or for upscale purchases will put one in a good light with card companies.
First use of a new card will often set the tone ..
Use the card for the first time at a thrift store and a person will forever be on the card company crap list.
Use the card for the first time to buy a cup of coffee at Starbucks, or similar, and a person will be on the card company favorable list, well, until the card is used for a redline purchase.
Buying gas for the first use is a neutral purchase.
Using the card at low end places or for low end purchases and the card company will think a person has money problems and that they are a bad risk.
Using the card at upscale places or for upscale purchases and the card company will think a person is good with money and that they are an acceptable risk.
Personally, I do buy gas as the first purchase, usually because I need it anyway. But, if I want to go have a nice dinner at the local casino I don't give a flip if the card company doesn't like it.
So I assume you think the baker should have been forced to bake the cake?
I know the left defends the corporate mega-banks whenever possible, but set aside your loyalty to them for a moment. They have no grounds to claim religious freedom, unlike the baker. It's not even an apples and oranges comparison, it's apples and mangoes.
A more apt comparison and one I have argued against ad nausem, is the banks refusing to process payments for licensed marijuana dispensaries.
No liberal would ever support this. Who will support it are the NeoLibs, who defend the mega-corporations, wars, the surveillance state & want to censor free speech.
Imagine your bank declining to offer service to anyone who smokes marijuana. Maybe they decide to cut off service to anyone who owns a car. Or a house over 1200 sq. ft.?
What we'd have is no less than corporations dictating what Americans can or can not do, or being cast out of society. No corporation should have this type of power, which is why liberals and civil libertarians oppose it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
