Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I predicted this several months ago when the Durbin Amendment was working its way through Congress and Durbin was going around strongarming people who threatened to vote for Tester's amendment suspending Durbin's bill.

Banks (and financial instititions in general) have a bottom line to make. If you take from/eliminate/reduce ONE potential pool of income (under the guise of "consumer protection"), they will simply increase or create ANOTHER pool of income to make up or it. So, in the long run, all Durbin's amendment did was reduce costs for retailers by capping interchange fees (with ZERO of that cost savings passed on to consumers in the form of lower prices) while driving up costs on OTHER services banking customers used to get for free.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/pet ... -bank-fees" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here we have the President and Senator Durbin advocating a run on banks that charge such fees:

The president told ABC News he hoped that "you're going to see a bunch of the banks say this is not good business practice." Reminding the banking behemoth of the money it had gotten from the federal government in its bailout of Wall Street, Durbin called the fee "an outrage" and urged BofA depositors to bank with their feet and take their business elsewhere.

"Get the heck out of that bank. Find yourself a bank or credit union that won't gouge you for $5 a month and still will give you a debit card that you can use every single day," Durbin, the Senate's No. 2 Democrat said.

It's hard to remember the last time a major U.S. politician advocated a run on a bank but, as we've already seen, BofA is "too big to fail" so there's no worry there. What's one more bailout among friends?

And here we have the President of the ABA explaining exactly what I predicted months and months ago. The "Consumer Financial Protection Act" does NOT protect consumers from ANYTHING. It just shifted costs and created ANOTHER burdensome regulation for the financial industry:

ABA President: "It's disappointing and puzzling that the president would attack a private corporation for responding to government price fixing that has fundamentally altered the economics of offering a debit card. As a direct result of the Durbin Amendment, consumers have started paying for financial services they previously enjoyed free of charge. Unfortunately, this proves that whenever government tries to control pricing of a product or service, consumers lose."

Now, before you start lumping in ALL financial institutions, be it known that the credit union I run will NOT be implementing a fee to simply use your debit card, but we WILL be reaping the rewards as these bank runs start! I hope to take this $250 million credit union and be a billion by the end of next year!

Free Market - switch banks. Blessing in the long run. Maybe this will be the final straw to take down B of A

AZGrizFan wrote:Banks (and financial instititions in general) have a bottom line to make. If you take from/eliminate/reduce ONE potential pool of income (under the guise of "consumer protection"), they will simply increase or create ANOTHER pool of income to make up or it.

I heard a man on the street segment last week asking people about these new fees and was yelling at the radio at their responses. WTF don't people get? Why do they think it's a right to have fee free debit cards? Don't like the fee, find a bank that doesn't charge them, or pay cash. People were livid.

Maybe I missed the memo, but what did the amount of money banks charge merchants with respect to debit cards have to do with financial collapse in '08

89Hen wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Banks (and financial instititions in general) have a bottom line to make. If you take from/eliminate/reduce ONE potential pool of income (under the guise of "consumer protection"), they will simply increase or create ANOTHER pool of income to make up or it.

I heard a man on the street segment last week asking people about these new fees and was yelling at the radio at their responses. WTF don't people get? Why do they think it's a right to have fee free debit cards? Don't like the fee, find a bank that doesn't charge them, or pay cash. People were livid.

Ah yes....nothing like using your card that takes cash from your account for you only to be told that if you use your cash in that manner you will be charged more cash.


People bitching about it have a right to be upset, but find someone that doesn't do it and move on.

clenz wrote:

89Hen wrote: I heard a man on the street segment last week asking people about these new fees and was yelling at the radio at their responses. WTF don't people get? Why do they think it's a right to have fee free debit cards? Don't like the fee, find a bank that doesn't charge them, or pay cash. People were livid.

Ah yes....nothing like using your card that takes cash from your account for you only to be told that if you use your cash in that manner you will be charged more cash.


People bitching about it have a right to be upset, but find someone that doesn't do it and move on.

People should do exactly what you said, but the use of a debit card is a service and most businesses charge for services so no they should be mad. But yes, if they can find a bank to do it for free that is where they should go.


Personally, I can't believe BofA did this. I am thinking they may not want to participate in the personal checking account business anymore

I'm not worried. USAA asked it's customers(crazy thought, isn't it) and decided to do away with the Debit Rewards program instead of increasing fee's. I never had BoA, but I hear a lot of people running for the door.

OL FU wrote:Maybe I missed the memo, but what did the amount of money banks charge merchants with respect to debit cards have to do with financial collapse in '08

Absolutely ZERO.

clenz wrote:Ah yes....nothing like using your card that takes cash from your account for you only to be told that if you use your cash in that manner you will be charged more cash.


People bitching about it have a right to be upset, but find someone that doesn't do it and move on.

Having a right to be upset does not equate to being right to be upset.

Are there not expenses for a bank to allow you to use a piece of plastic with a magnetic strip to buy a six pack of beer 400 miles from your house while sending the funds to the store's bank, removing the money from your account, tracking that payment so you don't fight the charge.... or do you think the interest the bank makes on your $200 checking account balance to be enough to cover it?

89Hen wrote:

clenz wrote:Ah yes....nothing like using your card that takes cash from your account for you only to be told that if you use your cash in that manner you will be charged more cash.


People bitching about it have a right to be upset, but find someone that doesn't do it and move on.

Having a right to be upset does not equate to being right to be upset.

Are there not expenses for a bank to allow you to use a piece of plastic with a magnetic strip to buy a six pack of beer 400 miles from your house while sending the funds to the store's bank, removing the money from your account, tracking that payment so you don't fight the charge.... or do you think the interest the bank makes on your $200 checking account balance to be enough to cover it?

Exactly. And that network was built on the backs of the financial industry.....and allows retailers to get guaranteed funds without having to handle cash or checks....and again, has anybody seen a corresponding drop in costs of goods at all the retailers who benefitted from the Durbin Amendment?

Didn't think so.

I don't really care. It's $5. I'm old school and use cash most of the time, anyway.

Skjellyfetti wrote:I don't really care. It's $5. I'm old school and use cash most of the time, anyway.

Nice evasion of the fact that Durbin fucked up something that wasn't broke.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:I don't really care. It's $5. I'm old school and use cash most of the time, anyway.

Nice evasion of the fact that Durbin fucked up something that wasn't broke.

How about Dodd-Frank? Jackasses pass home mortgage legislation without consulting me. I said it would have the opposite of the desired effect and sure enough, it has.

89Hen wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Nice evasion of the fact that Durbin fucked up something that wasn't broke.

How about Dodd-Frank? Jackasses pass home mortgage legislation without consulting me. I said it would have the opposite of the desired effect and sure enough, it has.

Sure wish they'd consult us industry experts on things like this, Hen.

It's an annoying oversight - but it should be a boon to credit unions... which in the long run is better. (I've had my $ in one for almost 10 years - never have these kinds of issues)

AZGrizFan wrote:

89Hen wrote: How about Dodd-Frank? Jackasses pass home mortgage legislation without consulting me. I said it would have the opposite of the desired effect and sure enough, it has.

Sure wish they'd consult us industry experts on things like this, Hen.

It was just amazing to me when we had our first meeting describing the changes. We were all laughing knowing that they didn't consult a single loan originator (or at least didn't listen to a single one) about these changes.

For those that don't know what we're talking about, the government basically made it so lenders can't pay their loan officers based on the rate/points they charge a customer. Whether I give you 4.125% or 4.25%, I make the same money on the deal. That sounds great on the surface, but what that means is the banks are going to force me to charge a certain rate/point structure to get the deal. Before, if I wanted to cut my commission by charging you 4.125%, I was free to do so and share in the "loss" from 4.25%. But now all the loss is put to the bank because they have to pay me my full commission. Guess what? They won't take all the cut and pay me full, so they take a pass at doing the loan at 4.125%. How's that better for the consumer?

AZGrizFan wrote:

89Hen wrote: How about Dodd-Frank? Jackasses pass home mortgage legislation without consulting me. I said it would have the opposite of the desired effect and sure enough, it has.

Sure wish they'd consult us industry experts on things like this, Hen.

Dude, seriously? Stop making sense.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:It's an annoying oversight - but it should be a boon to credit unions... which in the long run is better. (I've had my $ in one for almost 10 years - never have these kinds of issues)

Unfortunately, you're in the minority.

90 million Americans have credit union accounts (slightly less than 1/3) ....but only 6% of America's assets are held in credit unions.

OL FU wrote:Maybe I missed the memo, but what did the amount of money banks charge merchants with respect to debit cards have to do with financial collapse in '08

Never let a good crisis go to waste.

dbackjon wrote:Free Market - switch banks. Blessing in the long run. Maybe this will be the final straw to take down B of A

Sounds like you want that to happen. Let B of A flounder around and try to succeed, but don't bail it out if it keeps making bad decisions.

Ivytalk wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Free Market - switch banks. Blessing in the long run. Maybe this will be the final straw to take down B of A

Sounds like you want that to happen. Let B of A flounder around and try to succeed, but don't bail it out if it keeps making bad decisions.

A bad decision driven by a governmental bad regulation.

Ivytalk wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Free Market - switch banks. Blessing in the long run. Maybe this will be the final straw to take down B of A

Sounds like you want that to happen. Let B of A flounder around and try to succeed, but don't bail it out if it keeps making bad decisions.

Just have Mr. Buffet give it another injection.

Buffett bought a bunch of Wells Fargo (half of my parent company) a couple months ago and the stock went from $29 to $24 and has stayed there since.

CitadelGrad wrote:

OL FU wrote:Maybe I missed the memo, but what did the amount of money banks charge merchants with respect to debit cards have to do with financial collapse in '08

Never let a good crisis go to waste.

Very little, but it's low hanging fruit because no one likes extra fees. Peanuts.

AZGrizFan wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:It's an annoying oversight - but it should be a boon to credit unions... which in the long run is better. (I've had my $ in one for almost 10 years - never have these kinds of issues)

Unfortunately, you're in the minority.

90 million Americans have credit union accounts (slightly less than 1/3) ....but only 6% of America's assets are held in credit unions.

TBH and I currently use a bank...it's a small town bank that her entire family uses and her aunt works at. We have amazing service through it. However, that bank is 2.5 hours from Cedar Falls. We have looked at moving our stuff over to a CU in CF, but there are some nice perks to the bank we are at right now and don't want to lose those.