you can google and fine some pretty fucked up shit the US banks do to the most vulnerable people, like changing the order the transactions are processed in so that they can hit people with overdraft fees.
What is this? The 19th century? Bro i am in India, and banks here don’t do that shit because it’s a fucking waste of time. Y’all deluding yourselves in thinking America is the best at everything.
Yeah, but I don’t have to do calculations and remember how much balance I had to avoid going into overdraft because:
The bank balance is available on my phone with the press of a button (UPI)
The bank doesn’t allow me to have -ve balance by spending non-existent cash (Duh!) on my savings account.
We have something called savings account also gives us Cheque books. But most of us know not to use Cheque leaves for transaction purposes (You get fined, if you end up encashing a cheque when your balance cannot cover the Cheque amount)
But most of us know not to use Cheque leaves for transaction purposes (You get fined, if you end up encashing a cheque when your balance cannot cover the Cheque amount)
Wow, that sucks. Maybe you should talk to your bank about getting some kind of protection against a check being returned NSF and paying a massive-ass fine.
I don’t have a checkbook since I am not from the US, also stop woth the bootkicking/victim blaming, they literally did shit like if you had some small charges that should have been fine, then you had a bigger charge that put you over the limit, then they processed the big one first (even though it was the last) then processed the small ones after and then they didn’t charge one overdraft fee, but multiple.
also there is the obvious case of the 2008 financial crisis, make some bootlicker argument for that, mate
I mean if you did withdraws down below the amount in your account and then paid overdraft fees, who’s fault is that? If you want to spend money you don’t have use a credit card.
then they processed the big one first (even though it was the last) then processed the small ones after and then they didn’t charge one overdraft fee, but multiple.
Yes, as per the explicit terms of your account agreement.
also there is the obvious case of the 2008 financial crisis
Yes, where a lot of people took out loans they knew they wouldn’t be able to repay.
I mean if you did withdraws down below the amount in your account and then paid overdraft fees, who’s fault is that? If you want to spend money you don’t have use a credit card.
Lol bro what primitive money grubbing system is this? I am always aware of my bank balance via an app (UPI, India).
This should be obvious: Transactions should fail if there’s not enough balance. No overdraft bullshit.
aka sub-prime lending. this sort of thing has happened before, “buying on margin” in the 1920s, for the stock market. it didnt end well then either.
the way that laws work is that if you sign a contract, it’s legally binding - so if you take out a giant loan to buy a house & cant make the mortgage payments, you’re out of house and you’re liable to pay back the loan. you gotta read the fine print before you sign anything.
I don’t have a checkbook since I am not from the US
So you don’t have to deposit an amount near your withdrawals? I’m curious about these places without overdraft fees. How far in the negative do they allow you to go?
Even without using a checkbook, I just got used to getting close to my limit. I deposit $100. I’d make a mental note that I spent $20 here, $50 there, and $25 at another place. Then I’d consider my money give, giving the transactions a few days to clear (back before things were so instant). Suck it banks, no overdraft fees this time!
Well we use cards here, mostly debit, if you try to pay for something or withdraw that’s over what you have the transaction simply fails.
The US system is like living in cavemen times.
if you make a transaction for example through online banking and you don’t have the money needed, it will sit there for a while waiting for money to arrive then it gets cancelled if money doesn’t arrive in time.
Predatory lending. Overdraft fees. Minimum balances. Setting due dates on holidays and and weekends, then refusing to process payments for a three days prior to the due date. Opening lines of credit for people with mental handicaps. Fixing their books. Lying to regulatory agencies.
You had to focus on one thing in my comment, and you still didn’t even get it correct!
Bank of America intentionally processed transactions out of order to put accounts in the red faster in order to maximize per-transaction penalties. They are not the only bank.
Earlier today I read about someone who had their withdrawal processed before their deposit, placing their account into the red for a miniscule amount of times but still incurring the $35 overdraft fee.
Money printing. Larger amounts loaned out every year devaluing all existing dollars. The number might be higher but it counts for less. Official inflation figures don’t even cover it since they don’t count things people actually try to use to store wealth.
Most new money enters the system by being created via loans ultimately from the federal reserve bank. This is the primary way the money supply expands.
That’s an assumption about what I meant, but the fact is both create money. Banks loan out new money, which must only be matched by deposits equal to a small percentage of their outstanding loans specified by the reserve requirement. Which not too long ago IIRC was temporarily removed entirely.
Haha, no edit needed; I can take it! I was thinking “so he’s their inside man now, in a bigger heist? Or maybe it’s commentary on wage-theft and low wages from big banks…”
More like 40. I had a checking/savings account that my grandmother set up for me when I was born. It paid .5% interest on a checking account, and the savings acciunt paid 2.5%. They stopped giving those rates sometime in the 90s. Same bank charged me an “inactivity fee” in the mid 00s to 0 out the accounts and closed them.
That sounds cool, but given that bank interest creates currency directly that means if it continues at that rate then eventually peso value will start to see a sharp decline.
Yeah, but it’s not that direct a process, and while there’s still interest in the currency we can support a lot more of it. High interests have also meant less spending and lower inflation.
Really the currency losing value is something that happens always so just getting anything in return is a win, though it sucks for people holding money without a good investment.
I got 5% on my ISA twenty years ago, and it really did feel like getting free money. Now my savings are depreciating so quickly I feel like I’d be better off spending it all. Not that it’s very much.
Add comment