Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- In Blind Poll, Republicans Choose Progressive Budget Solutions Over Their Own Party's
- Not Guilty By Virtue of Videotape, Which, Unlike the Police, Doesn't Lie
- The 'Land of 10,000 Lakes' Is Running Dry
- Manning: Before Wikileaks, Leaked Docs Offered to NYT, WaPo
- Bob Woodward Embodies US Political Culture in a Single Outburst
- Yoga Wlll Turn Kids Into Godless Sun-Worshipping Pagans, Lawsuit Charges
- A Better Plan Than 'Endless Growth': Enough Is Enough
- The 'Land of 10,000 Lakes' Is Running Dry
- Big Winner in Italian Election? The Five Star Movement
- In Blind Poll, Republicans Choose Progressive Budget Solutions Over Their Own Party's
Popular content
Today's Top News
Snarling Banker
Woody Guthrie wrote a song titled "Jolly Banker," a perfect-pitch parody of the propensity of Depression-era bankers to feel good about gouging their small borrowers.
Woody's song could also apply to the gouging we're getting from today's national chain banks, except the song's title should be "Snarling Banker." Only a couple of years ago, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, and others were quite jolly, because they were piling up mountains of profits through such sneaky schemes as secretly enrolling customers in checking accounts that charged $35-a-pop for every overdrawn check, then rigging the flow of checks so unwitting customers would be overdrawn.
Public outrage exploded, especially because only a year earlier, We the People had bailed out these same banks. Thus, Congress shut down some of the worst gouges. This pinched bankers' exorbitant profits a bit, and they've been snarling ever since. "Banks aren't charities," they barked – apparently thinking that someone might've mistaken them as such.
One thing you can count on is that banker greed is bottomless, and it's now coming back with a vengeance. Of course, they could make money honestly (as community banks and credit unions do) by making good loans and delivering good service, but instead they're returning to what they call "creative banking." You would call it "fee gouging."
Wells Fargo now hits you for $15 a month just to have a checking account, unless you keep at least $7,500 in your account. Citibank charges $20 a month, unless you keep $15,000 on deposit – more than double last year's level. Bank fees for money orders have doubled, and fees for cashiers checks have quadrupled.
There is a way out of this endless abuse-the-customer game: move your money out of their vaults! For help, go to www.MoveYourMoneyProject.org.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
27 Comments so far
Show AllThe Banksters are to the economy what drug dealers & suppliers are to a neighborhood: parasites whom we call all do without.
Actually, with the level of suffering working people are enduring today, the dealers are actually providing a useful service, unlike the banksters.
I would apologize to drug dealers for comparing them to bankers.
It's another way of privileging the 1% since it's usually the average Joe who occasionally bounces a check.
Three years ago, close to Thanksgiving, I didn't realize my bank account was close to "sea level." My son-in-law asked me for a few dollars for gas and such, and I didn't think anything of it. When I went to Bank of America to cash a check, the teller SHOULD have told me it left my account overdrawn. Naturally, over the holidays (and traveling), I wasn't paying attention.
In any case, I must have written 4 checks in all after that, none in any amount greater than $20. And when I went to Bank of America on the Monday after Thanksgiving, I was told that I had bounced 5 checks (counting the money to my son in law), and they demanded $30 or $35 for each check. The checks were in amounts like $12. I argued that the MAFIA had better loan rates! I told them I would not pay for more than ONE over-draft since the teller should have mentioned it to me when the account status was obvious.
I had to go to 4 different Bank of America offices before I had the matter settled. I paid for 2, $70 rather than $150 (or so). The reason I'm sharing this circumstance is to directly quote the banker I encountered in the Orlando area. He proudly justified his position NOT to remove any overdraft fees by reminding me that it worked the same for everyone: whether they were overdrawn by a dollar or $20,000.
I did my best to let him know what I thought of his explanation... that what it did was hold the poor person accountable for the far greater "sin" of the "privileged" client. Under the GUISE of "all held to equal standards," the risk and cost factors associated with the poor laborer trying to eke out a living, hardly compared with the damage possible from those of the upper fiscal ranks. How much does a bank suffer if I am off by $45 compared to someone off by thousands--on purpose. Why should both be held equivalently? What appears as equal is not always what's fair.
This is not a criticism of you personally, S-R. Don't people keep track of how much they keep in their account? And don't they have the internet so they can view their accounts? That always puzzles me, as it seems kind of important to watch what's happening in your account.
That other stuff, the trickster/gouger stuff - that ought to be just plain outright illegal.
Our credit union doesn't play tricks like that. In fact, because of my advanced age, I pay no monthly fees and my checks are free. Using their ATM is also free. Also, I have an overdraft pocket, not that I ever need it, as I keep track.
I did use a bank, long ago. They cleaned out my account because the balance was less than the monthly cost to them - without notifying me. I stormed into the bank and demanded my last money. They gave it back. And then I switched to a CU.
You-the-People have got to start kicking up some dust or the banksters will eviscerate you.
This is a criticism of the banks. While people have a personal responsibility to keep track of their accounts, the banks can with almost no effort be friendlier with their customers on this matter. As S-R pointed out the teller could have told her that she was overdrawn. If we give the teller the benefit of the doubt and assume that she was having a bad day and somehow did not notice that the account was overdrawn, then we might ask why, in these days of computers and internet the bank could not have sent S-R an email saying that she was overdrawn. If her bank is anything like the banks that I deal with it will take them over a week to clear the check when the money is sitting in the account as they take as long as possible to clear the check. So why then can they not send out an automatic email saying to promptly get cash or equivalent to the bank to cover the check? Why can they not offer you the ability to get an automatic email sent to inform you if your account balance goes below a certain level. Such automatic emails, which can be set up online by the client, cost the banks almost nothing except the lost revenue that they would get from charging customers fines for inadvertent penny-ante overdrafts. Which is, as redballoon describes, "trickster/gouger stuff - that ought to be just plain outright illegal."
Another question to ask of banks is why they must process the moneys taken out of your account before processing the moneys put into the account. This can easily result in a fine for insufficient funds in the account even though you put the money into the account to cover the payment before the bank processed the payment.
Things were different when the banks were constrained on how much they could loan based on how much money was deposited in accounts by their clients. Back then the banks wanted our money in their banks, and back then, when most of the accounting was done by hand they were able to afford to pay us interest on the accounts and the fees were few and minimal.
Do search out other choices. I deal with 3 local banks. One is only local and was nice enough to lend me MUCH needed money during the 1980s farm crisis. I will never forget that. Another local has merged with a few other small banks in the general area and my sister-in-law is the branch manager and they're a good outfit. The other local is actually now quite large, but they started in a town only 10 miles from me. They still feel moderately local. I do credit cards with bigger banks because they pay me. I never pay them.
two words...credit union
That's four words and three dots.
hightower, so many of us love you, but your simplistic solution is bullshit liberalism.
enacting one or two laws to regulate them.....moving our petty savings outta banks....
come on.
my god. do you realize half the country is in a REAL depression...and we are murdering innocent people by the hundreds every week?
what next? let's organize a third party! Oh boy. that will just CHANGE things right away. How about we ONLY vote for progressive democrats! Oh boy that will work really fast. And it's worked so well since the 1980's hasn't it?
Jim, get to earth. the whole political system has to be overthrown. As well as the economic system. Get some balls, and get outta the middle of the road. You got yellow stripes.
You go, boy! Tilt at those windmills.
Where does any one person start?
Move your money. That's a start (or did Mr Hightower just say that?).
I already moved my great fortune a couple of years ago.
So - YOU start! What've you done, this week, to overthrow the system? With his articles and blog, Hightower is doing more than you are, so sit down and shut up.
Fucking revolutionary wannabes who think that having balls is snarking about someone who has made a real impact on American life and who has exhibited authentic courage, not the bullshit cowardice of an anonymous loud mouth.
Thanks for speaking my mind, Mr. Riversong. Sometimes you make sense!
"Wells Fargo now hits you for $15 a month just to have a checking account"
I think both Mr.Hightower's examples are for the higher end checking accounts (i never understood why someone opens one of them anyway). The basic checking for Wells Fargo $10 or free with direct deposit or $1500 balance.
Citi has a similar product.
That being said, it usually takes about 30 mi to move accounts from one institution to another and set up the autopay for whatever bills you are paying.
I was disappointed I could not participate in the occupy call for moving your money out of the big banks, because I did it over forty years ago.
You own your credit union. The people there work for you and are interested in your well being
When you save there you get higher interest because you are a share holder.
When you borrow money you pay less interest, because you own the place.
I never have been able to understand why anyone would go to a big commercial bank unless you are a huge corporation.
When I owned a business, I had to go to a commercial bank because credit unions were not allowed to offer business banking, and did I suffer with those bastards.
I think credit unions now can.
I have often over the years asked people why they deal with institutions that are designed to make as large a profit off of you as they can. It is called capitalism.
People say: “But they gave me a free toaster” Like pedophiles giving candy to children.
Or: “The teller is so nice.” They are trained to do that. My local Safeway instructed staff to say hello to customers, or they would get fired. So you are greeted by this automaton squawking: “Hello”, like a parrot. It is chilling.
Please tell me why people go to these bloodsucker banks, I have never understood it.
Grant
*DEAD BANKER* - The only tolerable kind..
Hightower's article is a breath of fresh air to me. His simple, folksy, practical solution is something we can actually do; contrast that with all of the "Obama should" articles. Individually our balances and business are peanuts, but collectively they are huge, and a mass movement can impact them where it hurts, on the bottom line. More importantly, we'll be helping honest institutions who are part of our community.
We can either sit around and complain, or do something.
Hightower is kind of mixed. Some of his articles can sound like partisan apologia but he's more of the type to lean progressive populist so he'll often deliver better articles that can be motivating to the readers at large. Now, about what you said about our responsibility, true and would add that we need to train ourselves and each other not to get psyched out and baited by the banks to come back for them.
Thank you, CassandraSpeaks, for making this much needed comment.
There is nothing more discouraging than to read the repetitious and incoherent denunciations of Obama that are so abundant on CD. I wouldn't vote for Obama myself, but sitting around complaining about him is self destructive and pointless.
I hope there will be many more comments like yours on CD. Let the complainers start their own website. It's time for real radicalism and practical suggestions that will actually help build the future we want.
It's so sad that those "repetitious and incoherent denunciations of Obama" discourage you, leezasky. And those "complainers" really SHOULD start their own website,so you'd never have to read their discouraging comments. I can hardly wait to see what that "real radicalism and practical suggestions" would be. When I read disgusting tripe like your comment, I question the sanity of the person who wrote it. I could list in the most coherent way what is wrong with BO. I could explain why BO's actions and omissions are far worse than any criticism or repeated criticisms of him. Since I have doubts about your sanity, I'm not going to do that. If you're not suffering from insanity, it's possible, even probable, that you suffer from what Thomas Hart Benton called "the simples",and that trying to explain anything to you is a waste of time.
Jesus threw the moneylenders out of the temple. It's past time we did the same.
Live in the cash economy, work under the table, barter, trade, use local currencies and time banks, don't pay federal income taxes. Live lower on the food chain and live free of the bastards.
Let them eat cake, but not our dignity.
Robert, the best way to deal with the moneychangers is to implement a very old, but never truly observed, idea. Jewish law called for a Year of Jubilee every 49 years in which debts would be forgiven, slaves freed and land redistributed. Unsurprisingly, the 1% of that era made sure it never happened, and it was Jesus' insistence upon its immediate observance that got him crucified.
America is overwhelmingly Christian, with a fair number of Jews. Perhaps the idea would resonate with the 99% and we could call for a Year of Jubilee and nationalize the banks.
There's a book about this written by a heroic French Protestant pastor, Andre Trocme, who saved thousands of Jews from the Nazis. You can download it for free, legally, from the publisher. Regardless of your religious views or lack thereof, it's an idea worth considering.
http://www.plough.com/ebooks/nonviolentrevolution.html
I vote for more articles like this one on CD, and fewer articles like the self serving narcissism of Robert Reich and other "rich radicals" who are trying to do that trick Jesus talked about: making a camel pass through the eye of a needle.