Debit card fees, not overdraft fees. Senate defeated a vote to push back the regulation of transaction fees, aka what businesses pay to companies to process the transactions.Poseidon wrote:
Bank of America lets you have a choice. Either disallow any transaction over your balance or allow it and take the $35 fee. It's perfect, because for people like me with only part time jobs obviously I can't afford a $35 feee every time I overdraft, but for a big business person or someone with the money to spare and they just use the account a separate entity, they can take the fee. Works out for everyone.Macbeth wrote:
Senate voted to limit debit card fees. Smart move guys
I'm not pissed with this specific politician.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Public officials lie all the time. That's a given. And that's why you are pissed with this specific politician? OK.
Compare to his former colleague from NY who did something similar, but not nearly as egregious. Completely different response.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
no wonder some people hate twitter . . . 
I was just basing my comment off this. Virtually every politician lies to his/her constituency. It's a given - that doesn't make it ok, but it's a commonly accepted fact. Why we should bitch about this guy lying but give everyone else a free pass until that lack of honesty comes out in public is what I'm questioning.FEOS wrote:
So the fact that he lied to his constituents (and everyone else) is irrelevant, then? It has nothing to do with "cheating."
Ah, okay.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Debit card fees, not overdraft fees. Senate defeated a vote to push back the regulation of transaction fees, aka what businesses pay to companies to process the transactions.Poseidon wrote:
Bank of America lets you have a choice. Either disallow any transaction over your balance or allow it and take the $35 fee. It's perfect, because for people like me with only part time jobs obviously I can't afford a $35 feee every time I overdraft, but for a big business person or someone with the money to spare and they just use the account a separate entity, they can take the fee. Works out for everyone.Macbeth wrote:
Senate voted to limit debit card fees. Smart move guys
I was addressing Macb's lame sheepish apologist bs for the dude.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I was just basing my comment off this. Virtually every politician lies to his/her constituency. It's a given - that doesn't make it ok, but it's a commonly accepted fact. Why we should bitch about this guy lying but give everyone else a free pass until that lack of honesty comes out in public is what I'm questioning.FEOS wrote:
So the fact that he lied to his constituents (and everyone else) is irrelevant, then? It has nothing to do with "cheating."
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
I don't believe people's sex lives are the business of anyone but them and their consenting partners. That pass I give to normal people also covers celebrities and politicians. I'm not going to hold AW to a higher standard than I would anyone else who lied about cheating just because I don't agree with him when it comes to politics.FEOS wrote:
lame sheepish apologist bs
But I guess ideological consistency is being sheepish nowadays. I'll strive to hold arbitrarily conflicting views towards things for now on. Hope I don't contract schizophrenia.
Last edited by Macbeth (2011-06-08 16:21:19)
too late
Tu Stultus Es
No, it has nothing to do with overdrafts. It's a cap on the amount that the banks can charge businesses when transactions are made. The fee is why you see a whole lot of places saying 'no credit cards for purchases under $20'.Poseidon wrote:
Bank of America lets you have a choice. Either disallow any transaction over your balance or allow it and take the $35 fee. It's perfect, because for people like me with only part time jobs obviously I can't afford a $35 feee every time I overdraft, but for a big business person or someone with the money to spare and they just use the account a separate entity, they can take the fee. Works out for everyone.Macbeth wrote:
Senate voted to limit debit card fees. Smart move guys
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
you should read all the thread before you respondJay wrote:
No, it has nothing to do with overdrafts. It's a cap on the amount that the banks can charge businesses when transactions are made. The fee is why you see a whole lot of places saying 'no credit cards for purchases under $20'.Poseidon wrote:
Bank of America lets you have a choice. Either disallow any transaction over your balance or allow it and take the $35 fee. It's perfect, because for people like me with only part time jobs obviously I can't afford a $35 feee every time I overdraft, but for a big business person or someone with the money to spare and they just use the account a separate entity, they can take the fee. Works out for everyone.Macbeth wrote:
Senate voted to limit debit card fees. Smart move guys
I should, but this is DST and I'm likely to run into a lowing vs Jaekus argument before I get to the end of a threadKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
you should read all the thread before you respondJay wrote:
No, it has nothing to do with overdrafts. It's a cap on the amount that the banks can charge businesses when transactions are made. The fee is why you see a whole lot of places saying 'no credit cards for purchases under $20'.Poseidon wrote:
Bank of America lets you have a choice. Either disallow any transaction over your balance or allow it and take the $35 fee. It's perfect, because for people like me with only part time jobs obviously I can't afford a $35 feee every time I overdraft, but for a big business person or someone with the money to spare and they just use the account a separate entity, they can take the fee. Works out for everyone.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
it takes like 5 minutes, don't be lazy
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|7056
You can read 90+ pages in 5 mins?KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
it takes like 5 minutes, don't be lazy
no, just the last few pages. keep up Alex.
just hold on a minute matthew.
What you talkin bout Willis?
tis trueJay wrote:
I should, but this is DST and I'm likely to run into a lowing vs Jaekus argument before I get to the end of a threadKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
you should read all the thread before you respondJay wrote:
No, it has nothing to do with overdrafts. It's a cap on the amount that the banks can charge businesses when transactions are made. The fee is why you see a whole lot of places saying 'no credit cards for purchases under $20'.
LoL
Nic wrote:
tis trueJay wrote:
I should, but this is DST and I'm likely to run into a lowing vs Jaekus argument before I get to the end of a threadKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
you should read all the thread before you respond
don't know why you bother, hes only contrary to be contrary.
QFTNic wrote:
don't know why you bother, hes only contrary to be contrary.
Yeah I know, but it's like when my brother would be difficult just to be difficult when I was a kid, so I can't help myself but bombard him with logic. And then I take a moment to reflect and three pages have gone byNic wrote:
don't know why you bother, hes only contrary to be contrary.
Yeah, but he ignores the logic, and takes what you say in another direction, then you bite, and it's all over.
He will never acknowledge the logic, just take the argument in another pointless and out there direction.
He will never acknowledge the logic, just take the argument in another pointless and out there direction.
He is lowing.
Fear him.
Fear him.
lowing