this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
104 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10177 readers
13 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] explodicle@local106.com 20 points 10 months ago

I would love it even more if they gave me a receipt when I opt out of overdrafts, and then charge the bank an enormous fine when they turn overdrafts back on without my consent. This happened to me repeatedly.

(And every time I mention it, some bootlicker tells me I must have opted out wrong repeatedly. They need to believe the system works and everyone poor deserves it.)

[–] MayonnaiseArch 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If I try to spend more than I have it just doesn't work. Nobody charges me for it. But then I can just transfer funds from my account to another, no need for apps and shit, and it costs zero money to do it. You can probably guess I'm not from Murica (where Jesus lives)

[–] Cqrd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Some banks in the US don't do overdraft, some do, my bank doesn't charge for overdraft. It really just depends on how scummy your bank is.

[–] northendtrooper@lemmy.ca 18 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Should be expanded to identify any and all predatory fees and burn them at the stake. Feels like the FTC or Bureau of Consumer Protection should take this up as their top priority.

[–] zeluko@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago

Well the USA is known to only tackle problems as they arise instead of before they could do damage.
Creates a freedom for companies to exploit and consumers often cant or wont sue them.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 6 points 10 months ago

You can't just tell banks not to abuse their customers! That's crazy talk!

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Gonna take it you didn't read the article, because this literally is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau:

Under the proposal, banks could continue to charge fees when a customer’s account falls below zero, but either at a price in line with the bank’s actual costs to administer the overdraft or at an established benchmark created by the new rule.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) proposed potential fees of $3, $6, $7 or $14 and is seeking feedback from banks and the public on what would be appropriate. Current overdraft fees often push $30 or more, taking a significant bite out of low-income accounts.

[–] miracleorange 4 points 10 months ago

I think they were saying the CFPB should take up stopping all predatory fees as their top priority.

[–] BobGnarley@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Lol theyre gonna make it $14 and cut it just under half. It helps I guess but Its funny how theyre like $3 (or $14)

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

True, but before we go making a wishlist, let's remember that it's not even a possibility if Trump wins in November.

If anyone likes these systemic changes, mundane as they may be, remember that at the voting booth.

[–] t3rmit3 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Just like all the unfulfilled AND unattempted promises from before the last election, it's always just another election away!

[–] Radiant_sir_radiant 1 points 10 months ago

Almost makes populist Argentine president Javier Milei's "pack 300 of your ideas into a mega-decree that effectively becomes law with immediate effect until/unless parliament gets around to repealing parts of it with a 2/3 majority" strategy look like the more sensible approach.

There's a lot of shit the FTC has been slipping on.

[–] SuiXi3D@kbin.social 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

BoTH sIdeS ArE tHE saMe!!!11

[–] explodicle@local106.com 2 points 10 months ago

Leftists love to minimize the huge differences between them, like how much your overdraft fees should be.

[–] doolijb 12 points 10 months ago

But then how will Bank of America make any money?

[–] BorgDrone@lemmy.one 9 points 10 months ago (4 children)

As a European. WTF are overdraft fees?

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Money the bank changes people for not having any money.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Empathy 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

My Canadian bank just charged me $45 CAD twice and only noticed me a day after the second charge. I didn't notice because I no longer use it. I wish the limit was $3...

[–] jarfil 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Something like 10 years ago, a Spanish bank charged me 25€ after I didn't notice a 0.10€ overdraft... but it just happened that I had stopped using that bank, my cards expired, lost online access, so when I finally went to ask about closing the account in person like 5 years later, it had ballooned to over 400€ in the red. The cashier went all aggro on me, even got from behind the counter to shove the statement directly into my face, looked like was going to punch me or something.

I just left and didn't feel like returning, had no reason to deal with them, so kind of YOLOed it. Then some regulations changed, the bank got "rebranded" (went under and got bought under a similar name)... until last year when I decided to check on things just in case... and it turned out that I'm not a client anymore. Suits me 🤷

[–] bloup@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If it’s exploitation make them give all of it back that they already took.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You're vastly overestimating the powers of the executive branch.

[–] bloup@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I actually didn’t make any estimation of anything in my comment. I just don’t want people to think that this is good enough.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago

"just make them do X" carries an implication that the relevant party actually has the ability to do the thing.

It's like taking the legal cases against Trump and simplifying them to "just put him in prison lol"