5 ms·

Couldn't wait until the next day to make the purchase? Couldn't use cash or a credit card instead? You're an adult. You're obviously literate or you couldn't

Couldn't wait until the next day to make the purchase? Couldn't use cash or a credit card instead? You're an adult. You're obviously literate or you couldn't be posting here. Unless these fees were not disclosed to you (a MAJOR breach of the law if true), you had every opportunity to know that this would occur and to prevent it. Try taking responsibility for your own actions.

outworlder 11y ago
And, as part of his adult responsibilities, he's obviously responsible for watching his bank account balance like a hawk. It's not like adults have to do anything else. Also, you're assuming the "purchase" was something superfluous that could wait.
mbrameld 11y ago
You can't imagine a scenario where a responsible adult has had a checking account with a balance over $5000 for many years and has never run in to the charge for dropping below that level, eventually forgetting about that $5 fee? Now if you managed to picture that and believe it's possible for a responsible adult to forget about an obscure fee his bank has never charged him before, try to imagine your home's AC goes out in the middle of August when it's 100 degrees out. Now you're stressed out but you've got enough money in checking to cover the replacement that day, so you call somebody out to replace it and schedule a transfer from savings the same day. Can you maybe see just a little how a mistake like that could happen to a responsible adult? Do you have every possible fee your bank charges committed to memory? And finally, are you trying to add anything to this discussion or just displaying your self-righteousness?
- fredkbloggs 11y ago
  I'm trying to provide something other than Progressivist claptrap, in the desperate hope that some young people will read this and understand that there's more than one viewpoint in the world, and that some of them actually treat people like human beings rather than victims. As for the substance of your complaint, I do not agree. Yes, I can certainly imagine various excuses. I can also imagine accepting that mistakes often have consequences, and that being $55 poorer is a rather modest one, all things considered. It's fine to curse a little and be upset. It's fine (good, even!) to change banks afterward. But the level of hatred and entitlement in this thread is simply not justified by the balance of behavior.
  - themartorana 11y ago
    Sounds like what I assume bankers tell themselves to sleep at night. Ya know - they're adults that should have known better. $50 is a modest fee to charge for teaching them a lesson. They should thank me. If they just got a job and stopped being poor, they wouldn't be in this situation to begin with. Takers.
    - fredkbloggs 11y ago
      I doubt very much that they care enough to tell themselves anything, and I'm sure they don't lose any sleep over it. You're making this way too personal; they just want money. They don't care if you learned a lesson, if you're rich or poor, if you're a taker or a maker, or if you feel grateful or hateful. They care about their $50, because those fees are profits and profits keep them in the corner office where they can bilk the shareholders for hundreds of millions while paying squat for dividends. Nothing else.
      - rlucas 11y ago
        I assure you that a $37B (almost all of which is margin) LOB is quite sufficient cause for any number of bankers to lose sleep over. RTFA.
        fredkbloggs 11y ago
        I did read it. I have no doubt they care a great deal about the $37B. I don't think they care in the slightest whether anyone likes their fees or feels harmed by them, and I certainly don't believe they're losing sleep over that. No doubt if one fee is regulated away, they'll simply replace it with another as they have many times before. RTFC.
  - orangecat 11y ago
    I'm a libertarian and support free markets; please stop making us look bad. Reordering transactions to maximize fees is flat-out fraud. It's not anything any reasonable person would expect, even if it is detailed in a 6-point font on page 63 of the "contract".
kefka 11y ago
Ah, so if every bank gives a 1000 page boilerplate "contract", and they all entail usurious fees, it's just the person's problem because they should have known? Well, fuck that logic. All the banks are acting in a cartel with these. And banking is effectively required. Many workplaces require direct deposit, which guess what..... require a bank account. Banking should be boring, simple, and hassle free. Contracts should be simple and readable, and not filled with dense legalese and caveats that say "tl;dr: we can change anything we like whenever we like. oh and we post it underneath a rock".
- fredkbloggs 11y ago
  > Ah, so if every bank gives a 1000 page boilerplate "contract", and they all entail usurious fees, it's just the person's problem because they should have known? Yes. If someone hands me a 1000-page contract and asks me to sign it, I'm walking out the door. As any sane person would. > All the banks are acting in a cartel with these. Well, (a) numerous posters (who otherwise agree with you) seem to disagree on this point and have offered both specific and general recommendations for banks that perhaps are not. And (b), if that's true, you should open your own bank. If you can't, then you should go look into why you can't, because the barriers to entry in this space are 100% artificial; that is, they are creations of the government. Not the market. > Banking should be boring, simple, and hassle free. Contracts should be simple and readable, and not filled with dense legalese and caveats that say "tl;dr: we can change anything we like whenever we like. oh and we post it underneath a rock". I agree 100%. I look forward to opening an account at your bank.

outworlder 11y ago

And, as part of his adult responsibilities, he's obviously responsible for watching his bank account balance like a hawk. It's not like adults have to do anything else. Also, you're assuming the "purchase" was something superfluous that could wait.

mbrameld 11y ago

You can't imagine a scenario where a responsible adult has had a checking account with a balance over $5000 for many years and has never run in to the charge for dropping below that level, eventually forgetting about that $5 fee? Now if you managed to picture that and believe it's possible for a responsible adult to forget about an obscure fee his bank has never charged him before, try to imagine your home's AC goes out in the middle of August when it's 100 degrees out. Now you're stressed out but you've got enough money in checking to cover the replacement that day, so you call somebody out to replace it and schedule a transfer from savings the same day. Can you maybe see just a little how a mistake like that could happen to a responsible adult? Do you have every possible fee your bank charges committed to memory? And finally, are you trying to add anything to this discussion or just displaying your self-righteousness?

fredkbloggs 11y ago
I'm trying to provide something other than Progressivist claptrap, in the desperate hope that some young people will read this and understand that there's more than one viewpoint in the world, and that some of them actually treat people like human beings rather than victims. As for the substance of your complaint, I do not agree. Yes, I can certainly imagine various excuses. I can also imagine accepting that mistakes often have consequences, and that being $55 poorer is a rather modest one, all things considered. It's fine to curse a little and be upset. It's fine (good, even!) to change banks afterward. But the level of hatred and entitlement in this thread is simply not justified by the balance of behavior.
- themartorana 11y ago
  Sounds like what I assume bankers tell themselves to sleep at night. Ya know - they're adults that should have known better. $50 is a modest fee to charge for teaching them a lesson. They should thank me. If they just got a job and stopped being poor, they wouldn't be in this situation to begin with. Takers.
  - fredkbloggs 11y ago
    I doubt very much that they care enough to tell themselves anything, and I'm sure they don't lose any sleep over it. You're making this way too personal; they just want money. They don't care if you learned a lesson, if you're rich or poor, if you're a taker or a maker, or if you feel grateful or hateful. They care about their $50, because those fees are profits and profits keep them in the corner office where they can bilk the shareholders for hundreds of millions while paying squat for dividends. Nothing else.
    - rlucas 11y ago
      I assure you that a $37B (almost all of which is margin) LOB is quite sufficient cause for any number of bankers to lose sleep over. RTFA.
      - fredkbloggs 11y ago
        I did read it. I have no doubt they care a great deal about the $37B. I don't think they care in the slightest whether anyone likes their fees or feels harmed by them, and I certainly don't believe they're losing sleep over that. No doubt if one fee is regulated away, they'll simply replace it with another as they have many times before. RTFC.
- orangecat 11y ago
  I'm a libertarian and support free markets; please stop making us look bad. Reordering transactions to maximize fees is flat-out fraud. It's not anything any reasonable person would expect, even if it is detailed in a 6-point font on page 63 of the "contract".

kefka 11y ago

Ah, so if every bank gives a 1000 page boilerplate "contract", and they all entail usurious fees, it's just the person's problem because they should have known? Well, fuck that logic. All the banks are acting in a cartel with these. And banking is effectively required. Many workplaces require direct deposit, which guess what..... require a bank account. Banking should be boring, simple, and hassle free. Contracts should be simple and readable, and not filled with dense legalese and caveats that say "tl;dr: we can change anything we like whenever we like. oh and we post it underneath a rock".

fredkbloggs 11y ago
> Ah, so if every bank gives a 1000 page boilerplate "contract", and they all entail usurious fees, it's just the person's problem because they should have known? Yes. If someone hands me a 1000-page contract and asks me to sign it, I'm walking out the door. As any sane person would. > All the banks are acting in a cartel with these. Well, (a) numerous posters (who otherwise agree with you) seem to disagree on this point and have offered both specific and general recommendations for banks that perhaps are not. And (b), if that's true, you should open your own bank. If you can't, then you should go look into why you can't, because the barriers to entry in this space are 100% artificial; that is, they are creations of the government. Not the market. > Banking should be boring, simple, and hassle free. Contracts should be simple and readable, and not filled with dense legalese and caveats that say "tl;dr: we can change anything we like whenever we like. oh and we post it underneath a rock". I agree 100%. I look forward to opening an account at your bank.