|
Got a question... Visa or Discover Card Credit Charge Surcharge on Purchases-Is it still prohibited by Banks? Hoping for any answer. My 2nd question... Link:. |
|
|
|
I would like to know the answer too. Anyone here know what is the right answer. I'll do some poking around and get back to you if I find an answer. You should email the people at Discover Card as they probably could answer your Discover Card question..
|
|
I don't see a problem here. The bonus was determined by the Board of Directors, who are appointed by the owners of the company (shareholders). If you want to do something about it, buy a huge stake in JPM, get your own directors in and have Dimon fired.... Why come here and make a pointless argument about how JPM is stealing from taxpayers and how they don't deserve the bonuses? Maybe you're just a little jealous that they make more than you..
All politicians are liars anyway. They'll do what is necessary to get elected in the next term. And it looks like people love the idea of taxing the big and evil banks, and that's exactly what they're doing. And what are the banks doing in retaliation? BofA experimenting with Discover credit card fees and checking account fees. So, who exactly is paying (with Discover card) the taxes? Banks? I think not.. And why does no one want to talk about those who borrowed more than they could afford to pay back? We should tax them as well, because they played a part in the recession. And we should also tax Bernanke, Summers, Geithner, Greenspan, Bush and Obama for their idiotic policies.. This post isn't directly towards anyone, expecially the OP. I'm just stating my opinion. Maybe, I shoud be taxed for that, because it isn't what the majority thinks.... This post has been edited by randb: 05 February 2010 - 09:47 PM.. |
|
Your simplistic response answered my question about your dimwittedness. Thanks for that..
Tax on financial instutions is being done to recover the money spent to stabilize the financial system. The money spent on AIG indirectly went to a slew of banks - the tax aims to recover some of that money. Nothing in the bill refers to compensation - your poor effort to link the 2 using Republican talking points just to take a dig at Obama is quite transparentGo back to your tea party... |
|
By that logic, we should also tax in the future, everyone recieving extended unemployment benefits, and those recieving food stamps and anything that they didn't pay for (Unemployment insurance doesn't cover extended benefits). After all, the govt is paying (with Discover card) for all that. We gotta recover that money at some point... But poor unemployed people are cool, so I'm stupid for even saying something like that.
BTW, I suggest you stop with the insults, before your posting privileges are revoked... |
|
I didnt say that I was agreeing with the legislation - I was merely pointing out that the 2 issues were somewhat unrelated...
|
|
...AND NOW WE REJOIN YOUR REGULARY SCHEDULED PROGRAM ALREADY IN PROGRESS..
|
|
I think he deserves this bonus. Where else is that extra interest on the jacked cards supposed to go to?.
It is not the bank's or Obama's fault... It is OURS. We as taxpayers elect the public officials. The public officials are the ones that decided to bail out the failing banks with tax money. These elitists are going to keep doing whatever they want, and us American taxpayers are just going to keep taking it for as long as they want to dish it out... |
|
Well...I understand...It's hard being polite...and I am sorry for the fact that you can't....
You see, I don't know what are the 2 Republican talking points are - I AM NOT EVEN A REPUBLICAN. I am just somebody who uses logic, and can connect 2 things together...the bankrupt AIG paid out 100% on their debt to the banks - who on CB have paid 100% to CA or Junk Debt Buyers? Especially when they are not in the position to pay, and don't have money? Somehow everybody pays 60%, 50%, 30%.....yet USA must step in and pay dollar for dollar.....and then, you make up something that is so arbitrary, and say to select few to pay up - for what?! And who is next? I don't think you have to be republican to understand this - it's kind of obvious. Like randb said, who is going to pay the tax - the customers of the banks, US.....APR+, CLD, AmExed, fees through the nose.. I was born in Russia, and lived there for many years....I am not going to stand in the line for 2 hours again to get milk.. I am done posting in this thread....LBCS, it was a pleasure discussing this with you....I will try to remember your handle in any future discussions,. VK.. |
|
I JUST SAY THAT TO GET PEOPLE BACK ON TOPIC.
Somebody will lock it if they SNIFF TOO MUCH "P".. |
|
Russians stood in line due to their own stupidity. Using scare tactics to promote political agendas is getting old - take your political crap elsewhere.
What I was commenting on was that the 2 items you tried to link have a very tenuous connection and using one to bolster your argument for the other did not make sense... |
|
Last post, I promise.
Ok, so I am dimwitted and republican (btw, what's worse of the 2?). But, now all the Russians are stupid??????? like their had a choice - stay in line for 2 hours in -30C winter, or go to Costco and buy anything you want.... That's rich...... |
|
I knew you will be back. But I take that some of that back. I have met several several smart Russians - what I meant to say was, the erstwhile residents of the USSR were not too bright in letting their leaders run roughshod over them for so long. Afterall everyone gets the government they deserve...
|
|
Uh... when they were working- we did. And when they return to work we will again. In fact we sometimes tax unemployment benefits on folks who are not working...
|
|
The outrage comes in when the bonuses are paid out while taxpayers get stuck with the bill for the bailout that made the bonuses possible. The bank tax is an attempt to fix that. We didn't' benefit from the bailout, the banking industry did. They can pay the bill for it. And if they have the $$ for bonuses, they also have the $$ to make the taxpayer whole again. They can skip the thank-you note.
I guess you can blame polls or politics or populism, lol...But when I have my suit dry-cleaned, I pay the bill myself... |
|
Does that sound familiar here?.
We freely choose our leaders, so Russians cannot be as stupid as Americans... |
|
Yes, and so do I....in fact, I picked up my dry cleaning today and paid for it.
But, Radi, taxpayers and government have not lost any money on BofA or WF - they paid in full, and extra for the options...Plus, I don't remember which banks, I think either GS or WF have refused the bailout money and were forced to take it! How about that? - now, because they took it, they have to pay for the options issued, interest and now bailout tax.. I am just opposed when some companies are randomly picked, and then found "guilty"....So, the banking industry benefited from the bailout? Let's tax the banking industry! All banks, in proportion to their revenues.....why some have to pay and not others?.. |
|
WHY SHOULD I HAVE MY APR JACKED TO 29.99% AND ALSO HAVE MY POCKETS PICKED FOR EXTRA TAX MONEY...EVEN THOUGH I PAID EVERY SINGLE BILL ON TIME FOR 30+ YEARS ON MY OWN.
(nobody bailed me out).. |
|
To help cover those bonuses. $16M does not appear out of thin air...
|
|
Hinklesc, no, the 16M is what they always get every year, and have got in the past, w/o APR Jackage, CLD, etc......No, this is to cover for the shortfall in their mortgage securities business...and increasing defaults on consumer loans....and, in anticipation of the additional tax they will have to pay.
VK.. |
|
I'd think the banks might take on a better long-term outlook if those bonuses were paid in bank stock with a minimum retention period, not cash...
|
|
I wonder if they are profiting more now after their recent practices (APR jacks, CLD, etc) than in the past?.
Or leading to more charged off accounts?. I am also sure many PIF right now, or BT to another account... |
|
Radi, I don't disagree...it's just something about taxing certain businesses and not others...I don't know, not kosher...I guess extraordinary situations require extraordinary solutions....my main argument with a certain user was that outrage over bonuses and tax on the banks is related..
Plus, when you are called dimwitted and stupid, you sort of want to keep on discussing your points.. In my job as a financial auditor, all the regulation that will follow this under this administration will be a huge boom to my profession, so bring it on, I guess.. VK.. |
|
Seems to me that a bank's Discover card division has never been the primary profit center. Some use them as loss leaders, dangling attractive cards as an incentive to bring in larger deposits and write loans and mortgages. Just in the last few years the fees and penalties have increased to the point where the income from them is substantial.
They do the math, I'm sure. The CLD's and rate-jacks probably bring in more than enough in fees and penalties to offset the defaults they sometimes cause... |
|
A LOST CUSTOMER FROM CLD or APR JACKAGE HAS NO COST I GUESS....
This post has been edited by GEORGE: 06 February 2010 - 12:52 AM.. |
|
Hinklesc,.
It depends on the bank...Chase is highly profitable..... "For the full year, JPMorgan earned $11.7 billion, or $2.26 per share on record managed revenue of $108.6 billion. The bank earned $5.6 billion, or $1.35 per share in 2008.". The are reducing risk by APR jacks, CLD....they wont' be doing it if it wasn't making them money. We, as consumers, hate this, but they do what they need to do to maximize profit and returns to shareholders.. VK.. |
|
For reference: any further personal attacks, or mentions of political figures or parties by name will result in the thread being closed and warnings being handed out. It's fine to discuss the topic at hand, related taxes, bonuses and such, but let's leave individual personalities, parties and politicians out of the discussion, please. It's an interesting discussion which hopefully won't be derailed by those things...
|
|
No, you got it wrong. We should put a special tax on everyone getting extended UE benefits now. I'm not drawing extended UE (UE that I didn't pay for through my employer's UE taxes), so why should I pay for all the money drawn by others? And I don't get food stamps, so those who do, should be taxed extra (when they get a job) so they can pay for the food stamps they used...
|
|
Pay me $7,000 per hour.
40 hours per week. 50 weeks per year (+2 weeks paid vacation). I won't need the BONUS.. |
|
Makes sense.
There has to be a method or rhyme and reason to these CLD's and APR jacks. My mother swore off Chase when she was reduced (IIRC $30K to $5K) and she had the account for over 10 years with an 800+ score. I wonder if they had done this is she had substantial deposit accounts with them, or mortgages (but her houses are PIF). Nothing has happened with my Chase cards.... they just sit. I began to despise them when they took over WaMu (which I liked, service was much better)... |
|
George, it sucks for all of us.....but you are not a "lost customer" - you simply voted with your wallet, and moved your business elsewhere - CU, wherever it is...It's beautiful - market forces at work! This is becoming a PIF era - who knows how long it will last....but it teaches one to conserve, and lay off plastic...nothing wrong with that..
VK.. |
|
NOT GOING Discover card FREE TILL CASH OFFERS THE REWARDS THAT MY CREDIT CARDS DO.
This post has been edited by GEORGE: 06 February 2010 - 01:11 AM.. |
|
Funny, I am in the exactly same boat as you are regarding them - so the fact that I am standing up for corp and Mr. Dimon is even more interesting.
I too was a Wamu customer - after Chase took over, everything became pricier....suddenly, the checks are not free anymore! I need to open additional 2 checking accounts, and came to chase, intending to deposit xx,xxx - you know what they said - $40 for 2 sets of checks....and I just walked out....thanks to CB, I know have checking with Alliant.. As far as CLD, chase reduced my HELOC from 64,000 to 6,400!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! btw, that HELOC is now at 3.5%.....do you think I wouldnt' mind keeing it at $64K?. VK.. |
|
That might be an interesting idea if it were done properly, expecting benefits to be repaid over time when the recipient is able. Currently these programs are set up as a shared-risk insurance plan with the costs spread over everyone in the "pool".
It would probably act as a negative incentive to return to work though, if the repayment negated the benefit from working. There's already a problem with UI paying (with Discover card) more per week than some of the available jobs. Increasing the tax burden on those folks would only worsen the disparity. Comparing that to a "bank tax" isn't exactly correct as the taxpayers funding the bailout don't have "bailout insurance". They're paying (with Discover card) the premiums so to speak, but can never collect the benefits. It'd be like assessing unemployment insurance taxes against a self-employed worker who can never receive benefits... |
|
George, what I meant by lay off plastic is to live within one means - don't charge more that you can afford.....paying for things with cash or debit doesn't make sense - I am all about rewards, that's why I have chase freedom, penfed plat and discover more cc's..
VK.. |
|
The exact opposite is happenning in my field. I know of several trading firms planning on moving their operations overseas because of all the expected regulations... I doubt they'd be willing to send Americans over to take up those jobs. They'd hire locally..
Oh and 1 more thing.... True story, and I'm not making any of this up.. I've interacted with regulators from the CFTC, and they're complete morons (I wouldn't even hire these people to balance my checkbook). They can't even spell "derivatives", let alone know how to come up with rules to manage systemic risk, and it just scares me to know that they will be the ones coming up with the regulations... |
|
I was transferring my paycheck to USAA using their transfer from a debit card feature. I did this for many YEARS without a fee, and was very convenient to get money to USAA instantly.
Until I did it one time and received an overdraft notice about a week later. Try 3% fee on over $5,000!. Of course, this was not "grandfathered in" from WaMu, so they could not credit this back even one time. I asked the bank rep how she could go from super friendly one day to super unhelpful after putting on the Chase shirt. I thanked her for teaching me a valuable lesson, and to go ahead and cash out my other accounts now ($40,000). Next day I refi'd my truck and made sure she personally posted the check. Not that they really care, but made me feel better. A year later my mother followed suit, but pulled out much much more... |
|
Randb, it's unfortunate, but regulations always mean restrictions (or costs).....there are many articles/studies that calculated the cost of Sarbanes Oaxley act (SOX) on business in US, and how many companies chose to not list their shares on the Nasdaq/NYSE and instead listed in London, Hongkonk or stayed private..
I don't know much about CFTC....but I have seen SEC doing audits of accounting big 4 ...and those guys were pretty good. I dont' know much about trading...but CFTC, commodities, right? don't you have to still have trading on the floor in Chicago, and don't you need to interact with customers?. VK.. |
|
Some of that may very well happen. Which is fine. They won't have to play by US rules, but the US won't have to assume the risk either.
Ps: don't move to Iceland. They're still mad... |
|
Nice!.
Well, you closed your accounts - I didn't, just for convenience....I just no longer have any significant holdings there.... Can you elaborate on the 3% fee? Was it a simple ACH transfer from Chase acct to USAA? why a fee? I still have a checking at Chase, and now savings and checking at Alliant.....and I would hate to get hit with that kind of a fee.....sorry you were.. VK.. |
|
There was (is?) an option at USAA where you can transfer money into your checking using a debit card. (Not ACH). It was convenient because it was instantly there when you clicked submit and it authorized. I am not sure if USAA even offers it anymore.
I closed all my accounts at the bank, and refid truck. I kept the cards, but have not used them. Had WaMu cards converted to Chase, as well as having Chase cards so I have a few. If I am not using a bank, then no reason to keep accounts open... |
|
I'm not sure if they still offer that. I've never used it as ACH transfers from my CU into USAA are instant- the money is available right away even though the ACH itself doesn't clear for a couple of days...
|
|
I think back before I used the debit I tried the ACH, but it took a couple days (Thinking 2006). It may have changed since then and is instant now. I use Navy Federal for primary checking now as I have the NavChek in case I cannot add that day or don't feel like calculating...
|
|
Yeah, commodities, and some other derivatives. Unfortunately, they're trying to kill that, to save on costs. Electronic is so much cheaper. But, I love the floor atmosphere, and this is one of the reasons I don't want to leave Chicago.
The SEC didn't catch Madoff. Obviously they're not doing a great job. And SOX was failed regulation. Plenty of analysts predicted Enron's collapse. Maybe, the public should have listened to them? That's how it is supposed to work. Survival of the fittest. And all that money isn't going towards capital spending. It just goes into paperwork. A total waste.. Same with cash for clunkers and all that other non-sense. You're spending a lot of money processing paperwork.. Would have been more efficient to give everyone a tax cut. Just the idea that the govt is encouraging people to spend money at a time when the savings rate is extremely low shows their intentions. Sorry for going into a completely different dimension. I'm pissed!.. |
|
You should really go back and look at economic history, and see what has worked and what hasn't. Several countries tried bailouts and it has never worked. Japan is the best example. They're still suffering.
Several others let their entire banking industries collapse, and they had horrible conditions for 1-2 yrs. But soon, they prospered. South Korea, a lot of Latin American nations, and the good old USA in 1921. But, a few years down the line, if the US economy still doesn't recover, you'll find someone else to blame other than the government. Maybe, hedge funds this time around.... "They are driving down the US dollar and this is having ripple effects in the real economy. We should regulate them, and tax their huge profits, and force HF managers to cut bonuses." I'm not trying to argue, because neither of us is going to change our position on this. Just read up on a little bit of economic history and you'll see for yourself.. It would have gotten a lot worse than right after Lehman if we let them all fail. But, plenty of firms would have survived, and the small community banks would have prospered. By now, we'd be growing again, without the trillions of extra debt we racked up... |
|
They won't have to play by US rules, but they will do business with firms here. And when they go bust, firms here will be affected in the same way we had ripple-effects in the credit crisis. So, the risk hasn't really been reduced for the US, but all the jobs are gone. Maybe the US is banking on those firms being bailed out by the country they're located in. Not sure if The Cayman Islands or Aruba would be able to bail out Goldman Sachs......
|
|
I understand your frustration on the government/regulation side, but there were a lot of analysts that rated most of this stuff great all the way down. There has to be some middle ground. Leaving the system unregulated played a big part in what got us here (IMO), so a system without regulation and oversight probably does not work...
|
|
Yeah, Japan is the best example of how long it takes when your monetary system totally collapses. But I take issue with some of your other examples. Many of those Latin American nations are still a mess today. And the track record here in the USA is not a particularily great example. While the "Roarin' 20s" was a very prosperous decade, GNP basically managed to recover it's previous losses by the end of the decade. And we all know what happened next.....
|
|
That's exactly it. Whenever the regulatory system swings to the extremes of too much or too little, things go to heck, lol. Too little and the unregulated businesses go nuts. Too much and the regulators go off the deep end. Problem is our system doesn't easily allow for middle ground, it's a herd mentality where either all regulation is bad- or everything has to be regulated. So we end up going back and forth from one extreme to the other.
IMO all that's really needed is more separation between arms of the financial system, so that a collapse of one doesn't topple all the others- and a more aggressive stance on fraud. Rating firms shouldn't be rating products they can't cleary dissect, borrowers shouldn't be borrowing with "stated" financials, nobody should be leveraged 30:1. I don't think the answer needs to be all that difficult... |
|
Radi, randb,.
I think with regards to SOX, we are almost there - i.e middle ground.....I saw how much effort and fees went into implementation and testing of SOX for public companies in 2003/2004....and I think the fees and hours have peaked sometime in 2005/2006, and it's been on a downward spiral every since......In examples I have seen, for small to mid size public companies, the initial fees were in the 2-3M range, and have since went down under $1M.. Up next - financial industry overhaul and regulations....who knows what it will bring. VK.. |
