Footwedge;923383 wrote:If you think for one lousy minute that these bank fees being implemented under so called free market pressures, invisible hand control and laissez faire principles....you are so sadly mistaken. As BoatShoes succinctly put it....the federal as well as investment banks are no different that what OPEC was in the 70's. Boat calls them a cartel....I call them collusionist oligarchs.....which is ALWAYS the end product of unbridled capitalism.
Adam Smith was very clear in pointing this out in several chapters of his book Wealth of Nations.
Clearly, I need to type slower. My apologies.
The point is that he and his conspirators believe they should regulate, control, and deem "reasonable" profits for companies. The fact Bank of 'Murica is charging $5/month to use their services is NONE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES' BUSINESS. But, you and Boat want to obfuscate, deflect, and pivot away from this major point because you can't defend it. It's easier to paint Bank of 'Murica as the evil bogeyman who must be slayed to make 'Murica fairer for all.
If a bank wants to charge a fee for services...IT'S THEIR RIGHT to charge whateverthefuck they feel is necessary to remain in business. There are literally dozens of other banks to consider should a consumer wish to not pay Bank of 'Murica's fees. If enough people choose to leave them, then they'd have to reconsider their fee-for-services position. Up until Jan 20, 2009, this is how business was supposed to be conducted in 'Murica.