Yesterday, I went into Bank of America, and closed my accounts, one of which I had held for 29 years.

Why? Fees, fees, and more fees, plus low interest and asinine policies. They got a bailout, I just bailed.

I now have a credit union account, with online access and bill pay. I will save nearly $20 a month.

When I get a new job, my credit card will get moved to the credit union too, since Chase is being abusive to people. Even the highest credit union interest rate is 5% below Chase.

All I needed to qualify for my credit union account was to live in San Jose, CA.

If you are sick and tired of your bank treating you like an ATM to be squeezed when they can't avoid playing with high risk derivatives and junk paper, check out your local credit union.

They actually define "fiscal conservatism" better than any megabank mogul ever could.
ravan: (451F)
( Apr. 3rd, 2009 04:00 pm)
Lawmaker sees Fannie, Freddie bonus "insult"

When are these fucking jackasses going to get it:
If a company loses money, and has to be bailed out, no bonuses should be paid, period. They're lucky to still have jobs!

Retention? So what? These fucking entitled people should just be glad they still have a company to work for. That's their retention bonus from us, the taxpayer. We don't need to give them extra to convince them to stay. There are plenty of people willing to take their jobs from all the banks that have failed.

In every other sector, if your company loses money, you don't get any performance or retention bonuses. The only bonus you get is being spared the layoff axe. What the fuck makes these vultures think they are so fucking special that they should get bonuses on the taxpayer dime just for not quitting?

Seriously, if the manufacturing sector can rip up union contracts to avoid bankruptcy, then these jackals can rip up their precious bonus contracts for their pampered employees. Seriously, banks, it's time to put on your big kid panties and suck up the pain like the rest of us have been for years.
Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980: While this allowed a few better banking services (for higher fees), it is also why savings account interest rates dropped like a rock (from 5% or 0.5%) while credit card rates rose. Where'd the money go? Into shareholders' pockets! The customer got screwed coming and going.

< href="">the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982: This piece of work was a Reagan Administration pet, and led almost directly to the Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s - after Reagan was no longer in office, but his ideological heirs were still going strong. The S&L problem was chalked up to an anomaly, a few "bad actors", and the Republicans were never held accountable.

Instead, they dismantled *more* of the depression era regulation that was designed to prevent our current crisis with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. A pile of Republicans, riding high on their "Contract OnWith America" and their ongoing witch hunt of the Clintons, pushed this doozy through with enough votes to override a veto, even if Clinton could have with them digging into his private sex life.

Because of this, the Republicans and their corporate sponsors (and the Democrats that sold out to the megacorps) undid all of the Depression era legislation that was put in place after the last great financial meltdown (which was global then, too) to prevent it from happening again.

They all knew why the legislation had passed, they just either a) didn't care, as long as they and theirs got rich, or b) assumed that it couldn't, wouldn't happen again. I'm inclined to believe "a)" out of the Republicans, and "b)" out of the Democrats. (Yes, I'm saying Republicans are avaricious and Democrats are stupid.) But the majority behind this crap were Republicans.

Yes, some of the regulations were dated, but they threw out most the meat with the bones in the stock.

So, when the financial ship of state runs aground, the Republicans put up up washed up candidates for election, hoping that they won't be stuck holding the bag. It worked. Even if Obama was a Saint, with the capital S and all, he would not be able to stop the meltdown. The seeds for the disaster were sown by the Reaganites in the 80s, and watered very, very well by the Gingrich cohort and their Contract On America.

IMO, any institution that requires bailout money that exists because of these deregulations should be denied. They asked for this, they wanted it, they should bear the consequences.
In the world of common sense, this statement would be obvious: "Too Big To (allow to) Fail" is "Too Big To (allow to) Exist". Otherwise, you are always on the hook for bailouts and concessions to these institutions. Simple, no?

But Washington, DC and Wall Street don't live in the land of common sense. They live in the land of automatic welfare for megacorporations, but no welfare for the poor or out of work. They live in the land of socialized corporate losses and bailouts, but no "socialism" for the citizen regardless of the social good. They live in the land of what's good for big business is good for everybody, even when it isn't. They live in a land where obscene profits are a "right", but a roof over your head, food in your belly, and care for your health are unearned "entitlements" and "privileges", to be doled out by your corporate masters for good consumer behavior.

When they repealed Glass-Stegal, (look up Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) they lined their own pockets, created the "too big to fail" (or be regulated) monster, and doomed us and future generations to indenture to international corporate interests. The "Reagan revolution" had "succeeded", for those who were behind the revolution. The rest of us a stuck paying the bill.

I have nothing against real businesses, that either produce real goods or real services. But when corporate quarterlies are more important than giving value to customers for money, it's not a real business any more, it's a leech on society.

When the average person can't understand "complex" securities, it indicates that those financial instruments are probably funny money, and possibly fraudulent. The kind of companies whose "lifeblood" is trading paper and promises need to be eliminated - broken up, regulated,or closed with their corporate charter revoked. Enron, WorldCom, AIG, and others like them need to be stopped before they suck more of our real wealth into their maw.

Those who trade in pure paper (CDOs, SIVs, futures, etc), not backed by real goods or real services, need to be run out of business (and out of town) on a rusty rail.

Paper burns at 451° F - phony, made-up "securities" aren't even worth the paper they're printed on. Burn them for fuel.
OK. I hate AIG, and all their ilk. I feel they should never have received a single red cent of taxpayer money, and said so last year. But they got a ton of money at the chicken little demands of the Bush administration. Yes, they've received more from the Obama administration, trying to salvage a crap investment of taxpayer funds that was rammed through in the same manner as the putrefied "Patriot" Act.

But the bonus contracts, and the funneling of money in spite of their contractual presence, started with the Bushies. AIG and Goldman Sachs are practically sleeping with that crowd.

So not, this farce isn't Obama's fault. He's playing the hand he was dealt by a spiteful and incompetent lame-duck administration.

AIG Delenda Est, but Obama shouldn't be judged by the pigs at the trough.
When Mr. & Ms. Main Street had problems with unemployment, insolvency, medical costs and debt starting in 2000 and onward, you told your flunkies in Congress "Tough. Let the Market™ Decide". You bade them pass legislation making it harder for individuals to file a clean bankruptcy, and they bowed and did it. You told me "It doesn't matter if you're unemployed, you still owe us money. Borrow from family, get a loan, yada yada". When Citi fucked me over on the one card I was keeping current because of other cards deliquent, they said "Touigh. It's just business. It's our rules. Pay your bills now."
Read more... )
Wells Fargo Assails TARP, Calls Stress Test ‘Asinine’ (Update1)

Well, asshole, if you don't need the money, then give it back. You don't like the government conditions, don't stick your fucking snout in the government trough, pig.
ravan: by Ravan (Default)
( Mar. 16th, 2009 10:31 am)
These guys have chutzpah. Bailout upon bailout, but they pay "retention bonuses" to the same whackadoodle traders in phony paper (Credit Default Swaps, securitized mortgages) that caused this mess. Then they take the bailout money and pay foreign banks and Golman Sachs (a very politically connected bank, especially with Republicans.)

The thing that chaps my butt is the payouts to foreign banks. Why the fucks should American taxpayers be essentially bailing out foreign banks that got greedy and bought crap? Caveat Emptor, fuckers. We are taking the hit, both in our investment portfolios (most 401Ks have junk CDOs and CDSs in them), and in our taxpayer debt.

We are NOT bailing out the entire fucking world, damnit! We can't afford it!
ravan: (At Well Weaving Wyrd - lwood)
( Mar. 3rd, 2009 11:13 am)
Bernanke defends AIG rescue, says U.S. had no choice.


AIG must be broken up, and the business units that are rotten must fail. No more sucking at the public teat for this INSURANCE company.

Any company that is "too big to (allow to) fail" must be broken into smaller, leaner, more efficient units. If it's "too big to fail", it's "too big to exist".

Mitigating risk by removing the "all your eggs in a few huge, incestuous baskets" problems sounds like good fiscal management to me.

No choice? A steaming pile of horseshit. Someone needs to find where they've got the leash on Bernanke to make his say crap like that.


ravan: by Ravan (Default)


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags