Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-09-2011, 08:31 AM
 
Location: deafened by howls of 'racism!!!'
52,219 posts, read 33,962,855 times
Reputation: 28969

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinm View Post
Why are they "bad guys"? If you read the entire argument, small banks and credit unions are unable to shift the lost profits over to other services like the large banks.
banks with less than $10 billion in assets are exempted, according to the OP's article.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-09-2011, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,881,868 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinm View Post
That "benefit" is easily defeated since the majority of debit cards bear the MasterCard/VISA logo and thus the transaction can be completed as a "charge" instead of a debit and not require a PIN.

I use my debit card daily at fast food resturants. I have NEVER been asked for my PIN.
That's not how it works. Branded debit cards (MC/Visa) are duel cards -- they can be used as debit or credit. The customer decides which network that the transaction travels. If the card is used, for example, at a supermarket, the pad has a button for credit and debt. If the customer chooses credit, no PIN is needed. If they choose debit, a PIN is required. The merchant also has the ability to 'steer' the transaction if they have sophisticated systems, in order to get the best rate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhett_Butler View Post
Definately a start, though a dime off of the $.44 seems like a token gesture.....
12 cents compared to 44 cents is 32 cents off, not 10 cents off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,881,868 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Hahahaha!


Against the banks?
Obviously you too are clueless how a business works.

All costs are passed down to the consumer.
The banks didn't lose. The consumers lost once again in higher fees elsewhere.
The banks were making a reasonable profit at the 15 cent rate. Their costs dropped. Plus, their fraud losses dropped too. Then they raise the fee to 44 cents. At that rate, they're making a killing, not just a reasonable profit.

Banks are pigs and will comb the law for a way to add another fee. If they can't, they'll just have to live with making a normal profit -- oh heavens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 08:51 AM
 
4,911 posts, read 3,416,123 times
Reputation: 1257
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Hahahaha!


Against the banks?
Obviously you too are clueless how a business works.

All costs are passed down to the consumer.
The banks didn't lose. The consumers lost once again in higher fees elsewhere.
So how would the customer have won? Incrreasing the debit card fee? Or is your argument in that universe where business always wins and the customer always lose no matter what?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 08:56 AM
 
4,911 posts, read 3,416,123 times
Reputation: 1257
That argument "oh well, they'll just raise prices" has gotten old a long time ago

If tommorow the Senate defeated a bill to give the banks $10,000,000,000 free and clear in taxpayer money I swear some con would chime in with


Hahahaha! The banks didn't lose! All they have to do is increase their fees!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 09:00 AM
 
112 posts, read 62,475 times
Reputation: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
I wonder who the bad guys were trying to block the pro consumer bill?

Roll Call

Nineteen Democrats joined 35 Republicans in voting for Tester’s proposal.

19 out of 53 in the Democratic Caucus voted the wrong way. 35 out of 47 GOPers voted the wrong way.
There were claims it was defending the small "ma and pa" community banks.

To me this vote was a microcosm of the battle American civilians endure. Going up against the elites everyday.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,881,868 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmmjv View Post
So how would the customer have won? Incrreasing the debit card fee? Or is your argument in that universe where business always wins and the customer always lose no matter what?
As it is now, the bill saves merchants $10 billion a year. That $10 billionwould otherwise be passed onto customers in price hikes. That's a win for consumers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 09:07 AM
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
782 posts, read 1,105,333 times
Reputation: 3172
The way I have always understood this process is that if you use your card as a debit..YOU are responsible for the fee...if you use the card as a credit the MERCHANT is responsible the fee. But the merchant usually ate the cost both ways to maintain their business. Haven't seen it lately but this process was also discussed on TV when money gurus were being interviewed on ways to cut costs using debit/credit cards. BUT, lately I have gone into a store to make a purchase, privately owned convience stores usually, where there is a notice as part of the machine dialogue that I was being charged a .45! cent processing fee for a debit card purchase.
Remember when Debit cards first came out...back in the eighties?? First, they were called check cards..then debit/check cards and now debit/credit cards.. They advertised and the card was sold for your benefit because your purchases were INSTANTLY posted and the money was taken INSTANTLY out of your account (a better faster check) saving you the hassle of having to constantly balance your checkbook > fast forward to TODAY..some debit purchases today do post instantly...but there are some that don't and you are still left with money floating in cyberspace...IOW you still have to balance your checkbook except that unless you keep the hardcopy reciept you have no proof of your transaction like you did with a check.

Last edited by Chanygirl; 06-09-2011 at 09:20 AM.. Reason: just wanted to highlite some history as I remembered it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 09:08 AM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,928,650 times
Reputation: 4555
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
It saves merchants $10 billion a year. That $10 billion is passed onto customers in price hikes.
Not all of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2011, 10:59 AM
 
14,862 posts, read 8,484,317 times
Reputation: 7306
It seems that this issue, like so many others ... has "consumers" cheering something without understanding what they are cheering.

The major clue that is apparently being missed here is "proposal by the Federal Reserve". Let me translate ..... not good for the little guy ... regardless of who that little guy is.

Now that we've established that ... let's look at a comment Big Ben had to say: “It’s going to affect the revenues of the small issuers,” Ben S. Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, told a Senate committee last month, “and it could result in some smaller banks being less profitable or even failing.

Now this is a little larger than a clue. Forget the "retailer argument" for a second ... and lets just look at this "not good for the smaller banks" element. This is another step in the "consolidation" process of the Big Banks swallowing up little banks and credit unions ... ultimately, not good for the average consumer, as banking competition disappears and the Big Banks take over (we're right back to the easy formula of common sense .. if the FED is for it ... YOU should be against it).

Now let's look at the "good for the retailer" angle. A reduction in the fees a retailer has to pay seems like a win for the retailers, and the not so bright consumer in turn thinks it's good for them too.

Now, lets look at who are those "winning" retailers are that will actually see these big bonuses? WalMArt ... Home Depot ... massive corporate chains that process the majority of debit transactions (the same ones that sell you the junk made in China) .... not the Mom and Pop convenience store. So again ... the benefit goes to the Big Guys ..... WalMart will reap big dividends at the expense of all of the little banks that will get swallowed up by the Big Banks.

The consumer will ultimately be the one that gets screwed here ... and the FED and Big Banks know this ... and they are laughing at you! They throw you a bone, claiming a 10 Billion reduction in retail fees each year, as if the consumer is going to see a penny of it. You won't. It goes in the pocket of "retailers" not yours. And this retailer fee has nothing to do with the $2.00 -$4.00 transaction fee that that the bank charges you for a ATM transaction ... that .42 retailer fee is a separate item. So, as the little banks fail, and are swallowed up by the Big Banks ... those $2.00 -$4.00 transaction fees charged to your bank account will also be consolidated into the hands of those Big Banks. Another win for the Big Banks, now that they've swallowed up the failing little banks.

There is very little benefit to the mom and pop convenience store which may save $300 per month (not enough to make any significant difference in their bottom line), while WalMart saves 200 Million a month in those retail transaction fees. Again ... the Big Guy wins.

So can you begin to see what is happening? Open your eyes ... that's a good start. The Banks that are fussing about this are the little banks, because they know this is just another power grab for Big Banks and Big Corporations. The Big Banks may join in on the fussing, but it's a fraud .. the Big Banks know they are ultimately going to benefit big time, so their pretend opposition is false opposition so that the average drooling imbecile consumer supports the takeover. When you cheer this, you are really cheering the expansion of the rope factory that is creating the rope to hang you with.

This formula has been used so many times, it's sickening that people keep swallowing this bait hook, line and sinker. They did it to you with Health Care Reform ... oh ... the insurance companies are fighting it .. so it must be good. (the reality is, the insurance companies wrote the friggin legislation!!)

People need to start thinking again ... and it's not hard. You don't need to understand the complexities of this ... you just need to get a clue that if the Federal Reserve proposes it ... it ain't good for you ... that's all you need to remember.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top