tellers are assholes. my bank is filled with a bunch of bitches who hate their jobs and treat everyone else like crap. they should be happy they have a job!
@fataxe1 Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
The banks don't mind any of this 'Legislation'. They just comply, and adapt. Actually, all the Regulation is feeding into the consolidation of banking into a duopoly. Finance departments in banks are obviously key, but the up and coming powerhouse department is legal. That's overhead and lots. Profit margin becomes lower, but more spread out. Voila.. duopoly. Only massive entrenched organizations can survive let alone thrive in that atmosphere.
Interesting HTWW (pretentious fap) ignores the meat of the How the Middle Class Got Screwed video. The focus was on the declining standard of living for the majority where even two income households can't secure a lifestyle that one income used to. Also the grossly unbalanced tax system. Maybe HTWW (pretentious fap) thought he covered it with his "class envy" comment. Wrong. He ignored it hoping most of his little followers would actually watch the video.
When he is talking about free checking and the new costs for checking accounts, it sounded like he had to correct himself from saying "Banks can'f afford..." But they can afford the new Dodd Frank laws, it would cut into their profit margin so instead they charge regular people.
He is not only focusing on the ATM you idiots! That guy wants price control (a very stupid idea and people for it are stupid) and is explaining why we can't do that.
I think banks should charge more in fees OF ALL KINDS!!!! Just like this: Bank of America's Debit Card Fee Disaster Nov 9, 2011 – A public relations specialist says Bank of America should have listened to its customers' concerns before introducing a change. OOPS... I think banks should also offer lots of subprime mortgages!!! and cause another housing bubble
You lose dude. I have worked and know for a fact that these ATMs cost .03 cents per transaction. Yet $3.00 is charged, this is theft at least. 68 cents would be 100% over charged. You ignore that Banks are sitting on 14 trillions dollars of cash that if them loaned out at a very low interest rate would help pull the nation out of this mess. But instead they have to pay the CEO 1 billion per year, something else you again totally ignored jackass.
Your are pretty stupid. The reason why banks are raising prices is because the federal reserve along with many other central banks globally are doing quantative easing and making interest rates negative. You are in the cult of junk economics.
Not sure how I feel about this... I guess if you don't like ATM fees you can always go to your banks ATM. This is the least of our problems right now...
Liberal here. Couldn't all of this guy's problems be solved if he just used a credit union instead of a bank? Credit unions are non-profit, so all of the proceeds from the lower intrest loans are put into higher intrest savings and no surcharge ATMs. Mind you there are some benefits to using banks of CUs, but that dude from MoveOn probably is a prime candidate for not using a bank anymore.
$3-5, lol, you are getting screwed. In Canada the ATM's are either free or $1... and they are everywhere. I bet there's some regulations/barriers to entry that are responsible ($3-5 is clearly unreasonable): 'regulatory capture', 'rent seeking', etc... the cost is probably not the ATM itself (think cost of pay washing machine for example, which should be more expensive), but the cost of plugging into the bank network (in the same way that credit card merchant fees are outrageous).
@wistals2deniks Nothing is "free"...Redistribution of wealth is what you are referring to. By no means is an ATM anywhere "free"... They cost money to run and maintain...
@imax1971 Sure.. I pay 3 euro something every year in service costs. For you to say it costs 3 dollar per transaction to pay for a machine that lasts a very long time and a weekly fill with new bills by a minimum wage team of two is just plain stupid. Thats not redistribution, its a nice profit. There are 8 different atm's in front of the city centers main entrance alone in my city of 164.540 people. None of witch are from my bank, but they are all free.
@wistals2deniks The cost and maintenance of the machine, the real estate it sits on, the communications line it uses and the armed personnel it requires to keep it stocked, costs money... I don't know what country you live in, but a company that provides an expensive service like an ATM isn't doing it out of good will. They do it to turn a profit. Who do you pay the 3 euro fee to? I'm curious.
@imax1971 Armed personnel? HAHAHA! You are funny. I live in the Netherlands and i pay the yearly 3 euro service fee to ING bank. Or at least I would do that if i did not have a student account with them, those do not charge any fee! HAHAHA! Here they like to call that customer service and they try to bond the future upper middle class to their bank.
Thank you, Lee! Here we go again with the ATM. First Senator Harkin, then the president, now "Big Mike". ATMs have created an industry which employs people from machinists and repair guys to administration and customer service. Those ATMs in convenience stores are called CONVENIENCE ATMs for a reason. A person can go to their bank if they are more organized. The store owner pays to have ATM maintained and they will remove it if it is not profitable destroying an entire industry.
Moveon.org is funny. Obviously they think it's worth $3-$5 because they are getting screwed making the economic decision that it's worth it to them at that moment to use it. If it's not, then don't use it. They can charge $100 if they want to, but they probably will not make any money...
Well, for one, middle class is just as ambiguous as something like "the rich". I guess if you definitely define middle class as something like incomes between $70,000 and $199,999 then that would be a start, but it still doesn't cover the many different ways to earn incomes, number of dependents ect. Terms such as "the rich" and "middle class" ultimately end up being ambiguous and deceptive because people think they are talking about the same thing when they actually are not.
This is how "the left" attempts to solve the economy... Whatever Lee - There is no left or right, they are all corrupt and pretty much beholden to their doners who get them re-elected. "The right" completely destroyed the economy the last two times they have been in charge. I realize these points are debatable, but you still sound like an idiot to me, and I am just an average dumbass who doesn't have time to research these things. Your argument is WEAK. Step up your game.
@Mree4u I think most people who would watch this video consider "the left" to be more government and "the right" to be anti-government. If Republican politicians increase the government's power, they are part of the left.
It just occured to me that it has been almost six years since I used an ATM that wasn't one of my banks. The only ones I have used since then didn't charge for checking your balance, and I really only use bank ATMs a few times a year. Partly because I balance myself well, partly because you can get money back at all the stores these days making most ATMs useless, and partly because I like going inide my bank since the tellers are cute.
@ignbtd Are you serious? Of course because operating an ATM in Europe is SO much less expensive right. They couldn't possibly afford to do that here(sarcasm). How exactly is it a different enviroment?
@bobbytiger thats great I got an idea ... instead of gouging people with a poor credit rating for ~1.00 in overdraft with the hopes of gouging with a $35-$40 fee, they just reject the debit charge, they know when it seeks approval. Under the new legislation they cannot approve that unless you have it set up, and that is the fair way to be. It's not like the old days with check registers. I do not allow overdraft on my accounts, even though I am approved for loans of large amts I dont want it.
Also instead of just being a loud mouth dumb ass who is "big on industry and business rights" why not just suggest people open an account with a provider like ING Direct who due to their direct banking nature, has ATM's all up and down the USA in a network. Instead of providing real advice to people you are just a loudmouth smartass.
Who the FUCK believes anything this right wing lunatic says? So $5 for using SOMEONE ELSES ATM? So offering THEIR OWN customers *FREE* IS COST EFFECTIVE yet if you offer someone elses customers AS WELL well that's SO expensive that the ATM must be removed - THAT IS INSANE. And there is a simple solution ALL banks DONT CHARGE OTHER BANKS a fee - ta da - problem solved... Sheez.
And if banks cannot afford to service the poor - because I'll hit profits - then NATIONALIZE them - PROBLEM SOLVED!
@StunnedByStupidity: “...if banks cannot afford to service the poor... NATIONALIZE them...”
Typical liberal-twat response: government is always the answer even for a mundane issue like, ahem, ATM fees! ...Please do the world a favor and off yourself.
@PoliticallyBlazed I have a bigoted 'right wing authoritarian' (GOOGLE IT) on the hook. How sad. BTW BIGOT tell me where the middle class came from, why there has been little or no pay rise for the middle and working classes (for 30 EFFIN years), why the global economy just went pop, and why THE WORLDS BEST SOCIETIES are the HIGH TAXED 'socialist' Scandinavian countries - to quote a bigot 'TYPICAL' right wing twat - incapable of dealing with REALITY...
@PoliticallyBlazed So could answer NOTHING of what I said. And instead tried a DESPERATE bear trap. See we now have a problem apparently when the top rates of taxes were at 90% you are saying that the libertarian scum should have just moved country rather than build think tanks, buy up the media, corrupt democracy and build a lobbying army? Is that what you are saying? And RIGHT NOW 92% of ALL Americans want a system like Sweden so it is YOU that want something other - so?And dont come back...
Because thus far, EVERYTHING you’ve stated is utter nonsense; aimed at distracting from the FACT you believe banks should be, ahem, “nationalized” because of perceived high ATM fees!
Find a mind, Braintrust, somewhere in the abyss you call a skill.
@PoliticallyBlazed Ah the bigotry and double standards of the right wing. I thought you were going to get a plane ticket to a government free country like Somalia? And EVERYTHING I have said is true.YOU mentioned GOVERNMENT. And since nationalizing health care wipes out all long term debts why not do it with THE largest financial corporations?But logic was NEVER a right wingers strong point. Now, scum bag, were did the middle class come from and why shouldn't 92% of ALL Americans have their way?
@StunnedByStupidity: “Ah the bigotry and double standards of the right wing.”
Find a dictionary, Braintrust; look-up the word “bigotry” (if not the term, TWAT)? Thus far I’ve stated nothing, not a stitch that could be remotely construed as bigoted. But then, I’m clearly dealing with a defective mind.
Do try not to stare so hard in that mirror? You’ll go blind.
@StunnedByStupidity: "Bless, you out of your depth bigot? All kinda scared and lacking any facts?"
Reread the last sentence of my last post to you, Braintrust. Only this time move your lips while mouthing the words. Otherwise, I’m debating a child with the subtextual grasp of a flea.
@StunnedByStupidity filthy liberal scum, fuckers like you are the reason why we need to have Social Darwinism.we need to weed out the unproductive liberal parasites like yourself.
@hayden50 ACTUALLY, Hitler was a fascist. You know, the whole "third way"; neither socialist, nor capitalist. Of course, right wingers like to reinterpret history such that Hitler ends up a socialist. Communists and socialists were two of the biggest groups targeted by Hitler. Just because he called himself a national socialist, doesn't mean he was socialist. Kinda like how the DR Congo isn't democratic.
Social darwinism, weeding out "parasites", all things repeatedly referred to by Hitler.
@Formosus111 Hitler hated free market capitalism,he believed in big government & centrally planned economy..the same principles championed by most liberals.
you see, the parasites today are the progressives.Socialist policies ensure the survival of the unfittest,which is not the way it was meant to be.
@hayden50 Did he hate free market capitalism, yes, but that doesn't mean he was a socialist.The problem you have to deal with is that Hitler's economic policies worked. So you can continue to call him a socialist, but he reduced unemployment and the German GDP greatly increased during his time as Chancellor.
Nonetheless, his social policies were horrific and have nothing to do with socialism. You are literally parroting him and his social policies with regards to social darwinism.
@Formosus111 lol,you should read history..Hitler didn't really create jobs, he benefited from an economic recovery which had started before he became chancellor. While he was in office, salaries went down (in some cases, Gestapo had to be sent to occupy factories to keep the workers from going on strike) and foreign debts increased massively (by 1938, germany was almost bankrupt). most of the jobs were in weapon and munition factories.Hitler spent everything available to finance his military.
@hayden50 After the 1936 economic crisis, he focused on military (ironic how you're bemoaning this fact while Republicans are bemoaning the decreases in military spending). Before he took office, the GDP was in a state of decline for four years, so, no, there wasn't a real recovery before he took office.
Strikes took place among the working class because of conditions for the working class, a class that a socialist would favor rather than oppress.
@Formosus111 Germany got massive loans from American banks in the 1930s to pay for Hitler's so called economic miracle. In 1939 he told his Generals that Germany would be bankrupt by 1942 because the loans would be due for repayment and Germany would default unless they had a war of conquest. One week later Germany invaded Poland.
Btw, i'm against the military industrial complex. we need drastic cuts in military expenditure.
Don't get me wrong, i'm not advocating Violence..but like i said,socialist policies ensure the survival of the unfittest.the progressives parasites are more trouble than they're worth,they need to be weeded out. And Capitalism works because it weeds out the weak....
In Europe, we have a monthly transaction of 1-2 euro's for using ATM's. They are located near every mall and available without any problems. You're the pro-capitalistic drone here Lee. You obviously oversimplify your responses.
The top 1% own 26% of the wealth in America and pay 40% of all the taxes.
The top 5% of wage earners pay 70% of all the taxes.
I'm tired of hearing that these top earners need to pay their "fair share" when what is truly "fair" is having EVERYONE have some sort of "skin" in the game.
If you don't want your taxes raised, then don't wish (or require it) on others.
Actually, the standard of living in Sweden is not terrible, if you think that you are a moron. Suffer. This man is a clone of George Bush. Also, he wants all wildlife to be decimated by oil spills, then he wants you to pay for the cleanup.
Remember that this guy's authority on any subject is ZERO because he denies obvious facts like global warming and he thinks pesticides are more helpful than water. He is also a retard when it comes to economics. He thinks you would become poorer if the rich payed higher taxes and if less money was spent on the military. He has never heard of Sweden or any of the countries that succeeded by following the exact opposite of everything he says.
@StateExempt I concur, Sweden had mass economic expansion after ww2. By the 1970s, they had become an economic powerhouse. They were like estonia. When social "reforms" happened, Sweden had faced decades of economic sluggishness. Sweden is now trying to get rid and eradicate their socialism by passing free market and liberal (classic use) reforms. Although they still have a long way to go to become the first european economic tiger, they are slowly going in the direction of liberty and freedom.
Can you explain to me why I need to be concerned over a 2/3rds of a degree change in average surface temperature over the last twelve decades? Can you also tell me which video you are referring to as your straw man in terms of his views on pesticides?
And why would anyone want to produce more if they would be punished for it via a progressive tax?
@HorrorIllogium if you read some kevin williamson. You would learn that sweden is trying to distant itself from socialism. Also, sweden got rich by using capitalism.
Lee, I love your stuff but disagree with your ATM explanation on this video.
We need to demand transparency from our banks. They should post how much profit an ATM makes if they want to win the confidence of consumers and dispel the perception that banks are gouging their clients.
Corporate abuse thrives where ignorance abounds.
Ignorance also provides fertile soil for communist social engineers to stir up feelings of resentment in the masses.
If we really were close to running out of oil the price would be much higher. "Peak oil" predictions have been being made, and been wrong, for more than a hundred years - by the people who don't understand the real source (and destroyer) of values is not material, but human.
Human ingenuity constantly finds new energy sources, including new sources of oil - and the limits are created by the governments that want to restrain then.
Read Atlas Shrugged and look up thepursuitofenergy on facebook
Actually, Dr. M King Hubbert did the math back in the 40's and predicted that US domestic oil production would peak in 1970 and it did exactly that. In 1970, the US peaked at just under 11.3 million barrels a day and has been in decline ever since. They are now producing 35% less
In fact, the only significant oil producers that have yet to peak are China, Saudi Arabia, Canada and the United Arab Emerites. There have not been any large oil field discoveries in decades.
I don't understand why the people who are worried about peak oil also hate speculators. Speculators are the market's natural means of conservation - if oil is really going to run out soon, there is a huge market incentive to buy it now (from people who are only using it for less important things because it's cheap) and sell it when the prices goes up (hence making the price go up earlier and better conserving).
@thinkingisawesome - I never got the critique of speculators either. If speculators really were counterproductive, how are they able to convince others to pay them a salary in the first place?
The ATM argument is such a non-issue. I don't carry much cash anymore and when I do need cash, I only go to one of my bank's ATMs and pay $0 per transaction. Not exactly rocket science.
Does no one remember / remember reading about the huge lineups for gas in the 70s? Why would ATMs be any different from gas? Price controls lead to shortages because they interrupt the market incentive to produce and conserve. It's simple economics.
But the economic argument is never enough for people, because they think it's their moral right to enslave others at whim. Until you argue from the perspective of the property rights of the banks, you'll fall on deaf ears.
The gas lines in the 70's had absolutely nothing to do with price controls. It was due to the OPEC boycott coupled with the peak of US domestic oil production. That's why there were shortages and long lines at the pump.
Anyone that says drill baby drill is an idiot. Just as scientists predicted, US oil production peaked in 1970. The country has never and will never produce as much oil as it did then ever again.
@yeebuddeh1 you're completely ignoring prices and effiencies, there is so much untapped oil that is available that isn't touched becuase the price isn't high enough to justify the cost to retrieve it and when prices rise, new wells that were not profitable then become profitable. we will not run out of oil, it will eventually become to expensive people will volentary change to another energy source.
The problem is that alternative energy sources use a ton of oil to mine and extract the materials, transport them, manufacture them, transport them once again and set up the infrastructure. A windmill takes something like 200 years to produce the amount of energy it took to make it.
As of right now, there is NOTHING that can power what the planet's doing without oil. Not saying innovation won't produce some new technologies, but it will have to produce them very soon
@yeebuddeh1 That caused the price increase, not the shortage. When supply increases relative to demand, price goes up, and the market regulates consumption without the need for a "shortage." The "shortage" - i.e. needing pull or to wait in line to buy something, at any prince - was because of the price controls and rationing the U.S. government instituted, and can only be because of price controls and rationing.
Anyway, the point of this video is not about ATM overhead, and who is lying about how much it costs to run an ATM as a service; it is about peoples personal responsibility and consequences within a free market. If they tried to charge you a hundred dollars for a transaction, then nobody would be fucking doing it. Apparently 3 dollars is about the maximum that a business can charge before enough people start changing their behavior in a way that reduces their profits.
Hood rats get no sympathy from me if they choose to keep throwing their money away every day at the little indian gas station with the three dollar surcharge ATM. People who so willingly choose to throw their money at slum-lord type figures will get nothing even remotely close to sympathy, because they're not even attempting to take responsibility for the money that they worked for, or to help limit the money that people make from profiting off of people like themselves. DON'T PAY!!!
@yeebuddeh Bill make the rules, so he has to comply with those rules, as unfair as they might be. However, instead of just moving to a new neighborhood (he likes his neighborhood, it has nice shrubbery), Bob decided to convince Bill to change the rule. Perhaps, eventually, he can convince Bill to make it so that it doesn't matter if he has more stuff than Fred. Perhaps he can show Bill he would be happy to give the car to Fred if Fred were to work for him for a while. We can always hope...
@yeebuddeh think we should get Bill over there to make some fair rules about this neighborhood." Bob says, "That seems like a good idea to me, ok, let's do it." So that's what they do. Except, Bill is friends with Fred, so Bill makes a rule: If you have more cars than you need, you must give your cars away to other people who don't have enough cars. Bob doesn't like this rule, but he has no choice.
So my question is, what changed? Well, Bob agreed to go along with having (cont...)
@yeebuddeh it were just one man (Bob) and his neighbor (Fred), things are simple. Fred has no cars, Bob has two, so Fred takes one. Fred needed a car, Bob didn't need two, so it was only fair (in Fred's eyes) that he would just have to take it, since Bob wouldn't give it to him. Sadly for Fred, we know this as stealing. Everyone agree that it is stealing to do that.
However, with the introduction of a third party (the govt.), things become more complex. Fred says to Bob, "Hey, I (cont...)
@yeebuddeh Sadly, people do not seem to realize this. They seem to believe that if there are others who have more than them, those others should pay more. Now, while I think it is the moral and ethical responsibility of those well-off to take care of those less fortunate, it is simply immoral for people who have less to by law FORCE people who have more to give it to them. Now, I understand that things become confusing when a third party becomes involved. You see, if... cont...
@yeebuddeh having been more gives them a free pass to things in life. It is a perversion of the meaning of equality; equality DOES NOT mean that everyone should have the same stuff, it means that if a rich guy buys a brand of toothbrush for $2.50, he will get the same toothbrush as the poor guy who buys from the same brand. It means that if you call the police because someone just mugged you, they will respond, regardless of how wealthy you are. Cont...
@yeebuddeh I would probably need to make my own critique to debunk the entire thing, I couldn't just do it in the comments. I don't know if I want to spend the time doing that. Perhaps, though, perhaps.
However: "skyrocketing income inequality that's taken place in the US"... that phrase is so bothersome. It speaks of the consistent deeper mentality of entitlement that has become so pervasive within our culture. For some reason, people seem to think that... cont...
I don't think this video is right, there weren't any recessions when Glass-Steagal was in tact and then in the 80s and on (after MASSIVE deregulation) financial crisises happen all the time.
They probably had higher costs too but no recessions
Call me crazy but maybe this is just in my area but the ATM fee is only on ATMs that were not issued by your own bank. I can go to any US Bank ATM and withdraw cash for free. It is a perk of having that bank. Now a person from Bank of America will be charged 3.00. So perhaps if they can't charge as much as they would like they would simply not allow anyone that doesn't have an account with them to withdraw. Fact: You are not forced to use ATMS!
force them to lower the transaction fee is because the govt. has no right to do so. Banks can charge what they like. If you don't like it, don't use that ATM. If you are put in the situation where you MUST use it, you have no other option, well, guess what, you are going to have to pay the Stupid Tax (the transaction fee). The point is, the govt. simply does not have the right enact a law restricting how much a company can charge for a service.
Look, Lee, I think you're really smart and all. Really I do. But you've got this one wrong.
For one thing, you shouldn't have focused so intensely on such a small part of that video. It had so many things wrong with it, and you chose one that simply doesn't matter that much. And then you defended it for the wrong reasons.
Lee, banks could charge a smaller transaction fee for using ATMs. It would just lower their profit margin. It would not bankrupt them. The reason that we should not...
Please give examples of the "so many things" wrong with the video and explain why they're wrong.
Personally, I think Lee decided to focus entirely on the meaningless ATM point because the skyrocketing income inequality that's taken place in the US over the past 30 years is an undeniable fact. That and the rich paying the lowest tax rates since WWII.
Most people watching Lee's video won't even take the time to watch the other one because Lee debunked the ATM point.
@yeebuddeh1 Because of your comment I watched the video. It was worthless. There ARE SO MANY THINGS wrong with Mike's assumptions that Lee (or anybody) could rip the entire thing apart.
But hey, I loved how Mike spent the entire time directing our rage at the rich, then ends with "let me know how YOU want to fix things". It's classic sheep herding that goes completely unnoticed by liberals. In fact, any liberal finishing that video would think "let's get those rich bastards!", nothing more.
Actually, its important for interest rates to be low, precisely because not everyone will get loans. Giving out loans to people who can't handle the responsibility of paying it back and sticking them with skyrocketing interest rates pushes them into a downward spiral towards bankruptcy. Yes, jobs need to be created and we need to strengthen our economy in other ways, but regulation of what banks and investment firms are doing can help prevent irresponsible behavior that can damage the economy.
You forgot one thing with the ATM charge and the overhead cost. A lot of that three dollars is fees from the government! The same government he wants to regulate the cost of the fees.
What some people don't seem to understand is that many ATM's in convenience stores and restaurants are not operated by a bank, but are serviced by private vendors. These vendors are small business owners and they are charging the fees. Your bank may only charge you $1.50 to $2 a transaction on a "foreign" ATM, and the vendor will charge an additional $2 to $3.
T you just buy your own ATMs and park them next to the $3 cost ATMs and undercut them at $2.50, or whatever price that you think you can afford to get away with operationally. Prove it with facts and number Mike, not blabber and ignorance.
Original Mike video has comments disabled. Probably got sick of how many people pointed out the ignorance. Okay, let me poke just one more hole in stupid Mikes boat. Mike, if you are so offended by the higher ATM fees, and you think that the prices shoud be lower, then why don
I'm sorry, but this video is obviously completely biased. He didn't mention at all about how banks who kept their ATMs would get extra business because people often DEPEND on them.
Oh and the guy who's saying people who use ATMs are lazy is dumb as hell. Sometimes the banks are closed and you need the money, others it's just much quicker and helps you get along with your day.
@LogicBeforeNorms How do people depend on atms? You just need to go at your free time when the bank isnt closed to get money for later. obviously they are helpful, but if its that important to you stop complaining or you wont have any atm at all. Banks are providing a servicve that they dont need to give you.
@peanutman5240 First of all, me complaining isn't going to get it taken away, that's ridiculous. Secondly, if they didn't give me that service I would take my business to another bank.
@LogicBeforeNorms Then do that. If you don't like having to pay the atm charge then go to aa bank that has better services and stop complaining because it will take it away. Some liberal will pass a stupid law about something to do with atm charges and all the banks will get rid of their atms. This is what happens when liberals always try interfere and try to regulate buisness and things get screwed up. The privare sector will fix its self.
@peanutman5240 My complaint was that the video was biased, and that he never looks at both sides. I don't give a crap about ATMs. If I did I'd complain to the bank, and not a bunch of republicans who can't do anything about it, on youtube.
BTW The private sector and Wall Street had pretty big contributions to the great depression. Regulations were put in place afterward, and taken off after bank CEO's started getting put in office.
@LogicBeforeNorms If you really need the cash that bad, then you can afford to pay the fee. There are many alternatives to withdrawing money from an ATM that charges you a fee: credit cards, debit card, personal check, ATM for the bank you have an account with, withdrawing the money in advance when the bank IS open. A lack of preparation on someone's part does not constitute a necessity. Nobody DEPENDS on ATMs, period.
It costs money to withdaw cash from ATM's not owned by your banks in america? Wow. We have those in the UK, but these are independent ATM's owned and operated by whoever contracted them from the makers. The rest of all ATM's are connected by the LINK system, which means that all ATM's are covered. This includes pretty much every bank, so there's no risk to the banks and no charge fees for consumers. I imagine this will be difficult to implement in a system vested in nickeling and diming.
You make the huge assumption (ass) that lowering the atm charge would make an atm unaffordable. You didn't provide any data to back up such a statement, and if I use a little bit of logic.... I don't think the banks have a very large upkeep cost at all. What do they have to do? Pay some guy to put money in once a week? They make $3.50 per transaction? How much is that per day? I wouldn't be surprised if they ran a profit off of $0.10 per transaction.
@backchodes I am not saying you are wrong but I am saying that if you don't know what it costs to keep up an atm, thats a problem everyone does, everyone thinks they know have everything. I am not saying you cant be right but I am saying if you dont know you dont know.
@backchodes Upkeep costs? Try; Bank employees, electric bill, water bill, rent, property taxes if the building is owned outright, security, maintenance of the grounds outside, business taxes from your dear old Uncle Sam, and insurance. There's probably a few I missed but you have to realize, businesses aren't charities. Nobody creates a business so that poor Joe Schmoe can have a job.
@backchodes Here is another genius. Say they made $1 Million on every transaction, you could take yourself into your Bank and wait then. Moreover, competing ATMs in areas have to get customers. Also, say they made .50 per transaction, that cost then gets passed to consumers in other areas, like free checking (now gone) and other perks.
@HowTheWorldWorks I just use the ATM at my bank. Depending on which bank people use, there are convenient locations from which you can withdraw your money for free.....no conflict, then.
@HowTheWorldWorks It's annoying how often you use the word genius, and if you haven't noticed, we want the banks to suffer, and you as well. It does please us. Thank you.
@backchodes As far as actual bank ATMs... For a single machine, rent is the highest cost of upkeep. Rent to put an ATM in a high-traffic retail location is higher than what most people pay for their apartment/home. Electrical and data is probably second as most contracts are going to break that out separate from rent. Salary for armored transport personnel and repair techs is distributed over many machines. Insurance for ATM machines is not free either.
@backchodes The basic argument is this, ATM fee's = 0, banks make no money therefore no more ATM's. ATM fee's =3.00 the banks make money and put ATM's all over the place. We have no idea what the banks "break even" price is, but we can assume that at some level between 0 and 3 dollars, the banks will no longer make money. Hence, the argument of legislation limiting ATM fee's will hurt profits limiting the number of ATM's, and quite possibly driving banks out of the ATM market. Pretty simple.
@backchodes Those 3rd-party ATMs that you see in convenience stores are there for profit ONLY. If you don't like the idea of paying fees, get your paycheck cashed or put your money in a bank with a higher number of their own ATMs in your immediate area. If the bank that you choose charges money to use their own ATMs, then go inside and withdraw or use the ATM as infrequently as possible. People really don't like taking credit for throwing their money away, do they?
Sorry Lee but this is what I herd from watching your video dispite what you tried to convey.
"Dems pass legislation to help consumers, but the bank becomes an asshole, and insted of simply taking the small hit to their income the Bank shifts its numbers around so they can make the same amount of money as before by pissing in their customer's cereal"
@BL3KVTP You would hear that because you're an economic illiterate drone who never created a business in your life. If it requires X amount of resources to justify you providing a service for someone, and the government says you cannot charge more than X minus 1, you lose money on every transaction and go bankrupt genius.
@HowTheWorldWorks You know. I just think it's funny how banks illegally foreclose on people's homes, wrongly put people in jail, charge insane amounts of interest, and have no remorse for ruining peoples lives to make a few extra buck. Then you come along and try to find what ever way you can to stand up for them.
If you're still wondering what liberals are thinking when they say too many republican spokes people sell their souls for cash. This is a small fraction of it.
@LogicBeforeNorms Banks don't have the authority to illegally foreclose on anyone's home, it is by your own definition illegal, and it wouldn't be in any banks favor to conduct such an activity if it isn't going to hold up under the scrutiny of law. The truth is that nobody is guaranteed a particular standard of living; and those who engage in living beyond their financial means might pay heavily if they put themselves in a particular situation with banks, loans, interest rates and such.
Your argument is flawed Lee because the amount to "justify providing a service" is arbitrary. Lets say the bank only makes 85 cents insted of 1 dollar per transaction in finacial gain. They are still making 85 cents worth of raw profit but they start removing mechines to cover the 15% drop? NO.
What they should so is lick their wounds, get over it, and improve the quality of their service to attract new consumers insted of punishing the people who already fallow them.
@HowTheWorldWorks Wait, don't businesses engage in practices which may be directly unprofitable, but overall indirectly profitable? Offering free checking or lower ATM fees seem like nominal losses with consideration of brand loyalty and what that means as far as loyal customers going to their banks for loans. Isn't that where banks make the big bucks?
@HowTheWorldWorks Just how much profit do you think the bank makes every transaction. It must be an enormous amount. and your telling me they can't afford to pay for an ATM if they wanted to? Probably this person is right. The people demanded better conditions, so the corporation moved out. Not because it wouldn't make a profit, but because it wanted to punish people for daring to want a better deal.
@BL3KVTP They can piss all they want, but it sounds like you are one of the people who complains while drinking it. No bank has ever put a gun to my head, and DEMANDED that I bank with them and pay outrageous fees. No shit dude; everyone knows that big business is nothing but assholes. That's why you gotta vote with your dollar. Food Lion can't put a knife to my neck and force me to pay 2 bucks for a 2 liter pepsi; I'll go to wal-mart and pay $1.25.
Only morons use ATM's. Why the fuck do you idiots go to ATM's? Just carry some money in your wallet and pay cash you dumbfucks. Get some willpower and don't spend money on things you don't need.
This country is full of dumbfuck morons. All you people that walked away from your houses should be in jail. All you idiots that live paycheck to paycheck are just that...idiots.
I've watched you critique a lot of videos in the past few years I've been subscribed to your channel. It seems as though these people focus more on animated graphics to get their invalid points across than actually investing time to get their facts straight. Keep up the good work on your rebuttals as usual, Lee :)
tellers are assholes. my bank is filled with a bunch of bitches who hate their jobs and treat everyone else like crap. they should be happy they have a job!
fataxe1 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fataxe1 Do you know that Christianity is correct? The world around us reveals that G-d DOES exist, and the historical evidence reveals that Jesus Christ really did come to this earth and there is overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ really did physically rise from the dead. Jesus is coming again and the signs of the end times that were foretold in the Bible are coming to pass.
marionetemanJ 1 day ago
blame dick durbin aka the durbin amendment.
mandy26lez 3 days ago
I love your videos, Mr. Lee Doren, but I need to see a step by step rebuttal to this video. Not just a critique on one segment.
Redrio 4 days ago
The banks don't mind any of this 'Legislation'. They just comply, and adapt. Actually, all the Regulation is feeding into the consolidation of banking into a duopoly. Finance departments in banks are obviously key, but the up and coming powerhouse department is legal. That's overhead and lots. Profit margin becomes lower, but more spread out. Voila.. duopoly. Only massive entrenched organizations can survive let alone thrive in that atmosphere.
Brajabu74 5 days ago
Interesting HTWW (pretentious fap) ignores the meat of the How the Middle Class Got Screwed video. The focus was on the declining standard of living for the majority where even two income households can't secure a lifestyle that one income used to. Also the grossly unbalanced tax system. Maybe HTWW (pretentious fap) thought he covered it with his "class envy" comment. Wrong. He ignored it hoping most of his little followers would actually watch the video.
Another failure HTWW (pretentious fap).
colddrake80 6 days ago
When he is talking about free checking and the new costs for checking accounts, it sounded like he had to correct himself from saying "Banks can'f afford..." But they can afford the new Dodd Frank laws, it would cut into their profit margin so instead they charge regular people.
gootsg0tmilk 4 weeks ago
He is not only focusing on the ATM you idiots! That guy wants price control (a very stupid idea and people for it are stupid) and is explaining why we can't do that.
macy725 1 month ago
Complaining about overdraft fees is like complaining that it hurts when you cut yourself.
KittenKoder 1 month ago
Nice production values bad human values.
ZenofKen 1 month ago
This guy is retarded.
Zheetz 2 months ago
Class Envy??? how do you explain this: Patriotic Millionaires Uploaded by karinmoveon on Jul 1, 2011
Patriotic millionaires with a simple message: "tax me."
Ralphdraw3 2 months ago
I think banks should charge more in fees OF ALL KINDS!!!! Just like this: Bank of America's Debit Card Fee Disaster Nov 9, 2011 – A public relations specialist says Bank of America should have listened to its customers' concerns before introducing a change. OOPS... I think banks should also offer lots of subprime mortgages!!! and cause another housing bubble
Ralphdraw3 2 months ago
You lose dude. I have worked and know for a fact that these ATMs cost .03 cents per transaction. Yet $3.00 is charged, this is theft at least. 68 cents would be 100% over charged. You ignore that Banks are sitting on 14 trillions dollars of cash that if them loaned out at a very low interest rate would help pull the nation out of this mess. But instead they have to pay the CEO 1 billion per year, something else you again totally ignored jackass.
CarbonicHolyPally 2 months ago
Americans worship money.
ContemptYC 2 months ago
Cash is king...forget about ATM's.
mosaicmaster1 3 months ago
This is what you focus on, out of the whole video? ATMs? You're a fag.
hankhhh12 4 months ago
Right wing policies have been Obamas whole presidency. What the fuck
ianhowe007 5 months ago
In your idea your right, but i am not in favor of your system thinking. Your system thinking failed over and over.
Tapasta 5 months ago
Your are pretty stupid. The reason why banks are raising prices is because the federal reserve along with many other central banks globally are doing quantative easing and making interest rates negative. You are in the cult of junk economics.
Ukweli93 5 months ago
I figured right away that this was a laissez-faire libertarian perspective. "Free markets always right, guv'munt always wrong!"
KarlBonner1982 6 months ago
I can tell you that this bears no relation to how banks assess the viability of ATMs. That ain't how the world works at all.
But it was such a minor point in the vid he's supposedly critiquing, it's pretty much irrelevant anyway.
Muwt 6 months ago 3
@Muwt
How does it work then?
adamkajones 5 months ago
Not sure how I feel about this... I guess if you don't like ATM fees you can always go to your banks ATM. This is the least of our problems right now...
xmtc87x 6 months ago
Liberal here. Couldn't all of this guy's problems be solved if he just used a credit union instead of a bank? Credit unions are non-profit, so all of the proceeds from the lower intrest loans are put into higher intrest savings and no surcharge ATMs. Mind you there are some benefits to using banks of CUs, but that dude from MoveOn probably is a prime candidate for not using a bank anymore.
ebaumsdidit 6 months ago
$3-5, lol, you are getting screwed. In Canada the ATM's are either free or $1... and they are everywhere. I bet there's some regulations/barriers to entry that are responsible ($3-5 is clearly unreasonable): 'regulatory capture', 'rent seeking', etc... the cost is probably not the ATM itself (think cost of pay washing machine for example, which should be more expensive), but the cost of plugging into the bank network (in the same way that credit card merchant fees are outrageous).
jordan567890 6 months ago 2
The fact that this is even being discussed is absurd.. Goes to show that part of society wants a service at no cost.. Welcome to our welfare state..
imax1971 6 months ago
Or you could get a pack of gum and get cash back...
LoudlySurreptitious 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Poor banks. We must help them! They are so vulnerable. Humans are there to serve the bank.
Guildhelm 6 months ago
Hey i know a place with more ATM's then you have in America. THE WHOLE OF EUROPE where you take money out of the other banks machine for FREE!
wistals2deniks 6 months ago
@wistals2deniks Nothing is "free"...Redistribution of wealth is what you are referring to. By no means is an ATM anywhere "free"... They cost money to run and maintain...
imax1971 6 months ago
@imax1971 Sure.. I pay 3 euro something every year in service costs. For you to say it costs 3 dollar per transaction to pay for a machine that lasts a very long time and a weekly fill with new bills by a minimum wage team of two is just plain stupid. Thats not redistribution, its a nice profit. There are 8 different atm's in front of the city centers main entrance alone in my city of 164.540 people. None of witch are from my bank, but they are all free.
wistals2deniks 6 months ago
@wistals2deniks The cost and maintenance of the machine, the real estate it sits on, the communications line it uses and the armed personnel it requires to keep it stocked, costs money... I don't know what country you live in, but a company that provides an expensive service like an ATM isn't doing it out of good will. They do it to turn a profit. Who do you pay the 3 euro fee to? I'm curious.
imax1971 6 months ago
@imax1971 Armed personnel? HAHAHA! You are funny. I live in the Netherlands and i pay the yearly 3 euro service fee to ING bank. Or at least I would do that if i did not have a student account with them, those do not charge any fee! HAHAHA! Here they like to call that customer service and they try to bond the future upper middle class to their bank.
wistals2deniks 6 months ago
Thank you, Lee! Here we go again with the ATM. First Senator Harkin, then the president, now "Big Mike". ATMs have created an industry which employs people from machinists and repair guys to administration and customer service. Those ATMs in convenience stores are called CONVENIENCE ATMs for a reason. A person can go to their bank if they are more organized. The store owner pays to have ATM maintained and they will remove it if it is not profitable destroying an entire industry.
carolyncriss 6 months ago
wow......feel like you are always disagreeing ......
o2010o 6 months ago
Dude shut up ure terrible u don't no why ire talkin about
justXjerkin 6 months ago
Moveon.org is funny. Obviously they think it's worth $3-$5 because they are getting screwed making the economic decision that it's worth it to them at that moment to use it. If it's not, then don't use it. They can charge $100 if they want to, but they probably will not make any money...
gotitans999 6 months ago
94 people think an economy is a side dish.
bricool4 7 months ago
Both parties are fighting for the the middle class vote.
BorgKing001 7 months ago
yeah how does this have only about 2000 views?
bocanutz 7 months ago
couldn't agree with you more, you should make videos like this about every political topic that you have time for, it is what the world today needs.
OffwagoBros 7 months ago
89 people came to this video and didn't watch it.
friendlyfire53 7 months ago 27
I'm glad someone else actually finds the term "middle class" ambiguously deceptive and misleading.
insidetrip101 7 months ago
@insidetrip101 How so?
MurphyMonster 7 months ago
@MurphyMonster
Well, for one, middle class is just as ambiguous as something like "the rich". I guess if you definitely define middle class as something like incomes between $70,000 and $199,999 then that would be a start, but it still doesn't cover the many different ways to earn incomes, number of dependents ect. Terms such as "the rich" and "middle class" ultimately end up being ambiguous and deceptive because people think they are talking about the same thing when they actually are not.
insidetrip101 7 months ago
This is how "the left" attempts to solve the economy... Whatever Lee - There is no left or right, they are all corrupt and pretty much beholden to their doners who get them re-elected. "The right" completely destroyed the economy the last two times they have been in charge. I realize these points are debatable, but you still sound like an idiot to me, and I am just an average dumbass who doesn't have time to research these things. Your argument is WEAK. Step up your game.
Mree4u 7 months ago
@Mree4u I think most people who would watch this video consider "the left" to be more government and "the right" to be anti-government. If Republican politicians increase the government's power, they are part of the left.
shamgar001 7 months ago
It just occured to me that it has been almost six years since I used an ATM that wasn't one of my banks. The only ones I have used since then didn't charge for checking your balance, and I really only use bank ATMs a few times a year. Partly because I balance myself well, partly because you can get money back at all the stores these days making most ATMs useless, and partly because I like going inide my bank since the tellers are cute.
mastersirk 7 months ago 22
@ignbtd Are you serious? Of course because operating an ATM in Europe is SO much less expensive right. They couldn't possibly afford to do that here(sarcasm). How exactly is it a different enviroment?
trademark6 7 months ago
Got an idea.
Don't overdraw your account
Don't use the ATM, if you don't like the fee, and
if paying a 4% interest rate for a home loan is considered too high, rent.
bobbytiger 7 months ago
@bobbytiger thats great I got an idea ... instead of gouging people with a poor credit rating for ~1.00 in overdraft with the hopes of gouging with a $35-$40 fee, they just reject the debit charge, they know when it seeks approval. Under the new legislation they cannot approve that unless you have it set up, and that is the fair way to be. It's not like the old days with check registers. I do not allow overdraft on my accounts, even though I am approved for loans of large amts I dont want it.
OIObserver 7 months ago
Also instead of just being a loud mouth dumb ass who is "big on industry and business rights" why not just suggest people open an account with a provider like ING Direct who due to their direct banking nature, has ATM's all up and down the USA in a network. Instead of providing real advice to people you are just a loudmouth smartass.
OIObserver 7 months ago
The amount of derp that this guy spews is amazing.
AgtFritz 7 months ago
Who the FUCK believes anything this right wing lunatic says? So $5 for using SOMEONE ELSES ATM? So offering THEIR OWN customers *FREE* IS COST EFFECTIVE yet if you offer someone elses customers AS WELL well that's SO expensive that the ATM must be removed - THAT IS INSANE. And there is a simple solution ALL banks DONT CHARGE OTHER BANKS a fee - ta da - problem solved... Sheez.
And if banks cannot afford to service the poor - because I'll hit profits - then NATIONALIZE them - PROBLEM SOLVED!
StunnedByStupidity 7 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity: “...if banks cannot afford to service the poor... NATIONALIZE them...”
Typical liberal-twat response: government is always the answer even for a mundane issue like, ahem, ATM fees! ...Please do the world a favor and off yourself.
Thanks so much.
PoliticallyBlazed 7 months ago
@PoliticallyBlazed I have a bigoted 'right wing authoritarian' (GOOGLE IT) on the hook. How sad. BTW BIGOT tell me where the middle class came from, why there has been little or no pay rise for the middle and working classes (for 30 EFFIN years), why the global economy just went pop, and why THE WORLDS BEST SOCIETIES are the HIGH TAXED 'socialist' Scandinavian countries - to quote a bigot 'TYPICAL' right wing twat - incapable of dealing with REALITY...
StunnedByStupidity 7 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity: “...THE WORLDS BEST SOCIETIES are the HIGH TAXED 'socialist' Scandinavian countries...
And we gather you’re packing bags and moving to one. See ya! (Being obviously, STUNNED STUPID.)
PoliticallyBlazed 7 months ago
@PoliticallyBlazed So could answer NOTHING of what I said. And instead tried a DESPERATE bear trap. See we now have a problem apparently when the top rates of taxes were at 90% you are saying that the libertarian scum should have just moved country rather than build think tanks, buy up the media, corrupt democracy and build a lobbying army? Is that what you are saying? And RIGHT NOW 92% of ALL Americans want a system like Sweden so it is YOU that want something other - so?And dont come back...
StunnedByStupidity 7 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity: “...could answer NOTHING of what I said.”
Because thus far, EVERYTHING you’ve stated is utter nonsense; aimed at distracting from the FACT you believe banks should be, ahem, “nationalized” because of perceived high ATM fees!
Find a mind, Braintrust, somewhere in the abyss you call a skill.
Thanks so much.
PoliticallyBlazed 7 months ago
@PoliticallyBlazed Ah the bigotry and double standards of the right wing. I thought you were going to get a plane ticket to a government free country like Somalia? And EVERYTHING I have said is true.YOU mentioned GOVERNMENT. And since nationalizing health care wipes out all long term debts why not do it with THE largest financial corporations?But logic was NEVER a right wingers strong point. Now, scum bag, were did the middle class come from and why shouldn't 92% of ALL Americans have their way?
StunnedByStupidity 7 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity: “Ah the bigotry and double standards of the right wing.”
Find a dictionary, Braintrust; look-up the word “bigotry” (if not the term, TWAT)? Thus far I’ve stated nothing, not a stitch that could be remotely construed as bigoted. But then, I’m clearly dealing with a defective mind.
Do try not to stare so hard in that mirror? You’ll go blind.
PoliticallyBlazed 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PoliticallyBlazed Ah and STILL wont argue the FACTS. Just pretend you are incapable of doing a google search eh?
BIGOTRY:
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices...
I bet you are getting your definition from the INSANE conservipedia eh?
Bless, you out of your depth bigot? All kinda scared and lacking any facts?
StunnedByStupidity 7 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity: "Bless, you out of your depth bigot? All kinda scared and lacking any facts?"
Reread the last sentence of my last post to you, Braintrust. Only this time move your lips while mouthing the words. Otherwise, I’m debating a child with the subtextual grasp of a flea.
PoliticallyBlazed 7 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity filthy liberal scum, fuckers like you are the reason why we need to have Social Darwinism.we need to weed out the unproductive liberal parasites like yourself.
hayden50 6 months ago
@hayden50 Somebody's been reading a little too much Mein Kampf and watching too many of Hitler's speeches.
Formosus111 6 months ago
@Formosus111 Hitler was a Socialist you moron....he rejected free market Capitalism and advocated government programs to bring recovery..
hayden50 6 months ago
@hayden50 ACTUALLY, Hitler was a fascist. You know, the whole "third way"; neither socialist, nor capitalist. Of course, right wingers like to reinterpret history such that Hitler ends up a socialist. Communists and socialists were two of the biggest groups targeted by Hitler. Just because he called himself a national socialist, doesn't mean he was socialist. Kinda like how the DR Congo isn't democratic.
Social darwinism, weeding out "parasites", all things repeatedly referred to by Hitler.
Formosus111 6 months ago
@Formosus111 Hitler hated free market capitalism,he believed in big government & centrally planned economy..the same principles championed by most liberals.
you see, the parasites today are the progressives.Socialist policies ensure the survival of the unfittest,which is not the way it was meant to be.
hayden50 6 months ago
@hayden50 Did he hate free market capitalism, yes, but that doesn't mean he was a socialist.The problem you have to deal with is that Hitler's economic policies worked. So you can continue to call him a socialist, but he reduced unemployment and the German GDP greatly increased during his time as Chancellor.
Nonetheless, his social policies were horrific and have nothing to do with socialism. You are literally parroting him and his social policies with regards to social darwinism.
Formosus111 6 months ago
@Formosus111 lol,you should read history..Hitler didn't really create jobs, he benefited from an economic recovery which had started before he became chancellor. While he was in office, salaries went down (in some cases, Gestapo had to be sent to occupy factories to keep the workers from going on strike) and foreign debts increased massively (by 1938, germany was almost bankrupt). most of the jobs were in weapon and munition factories.Hitler spent everything available to finance his military.
hayden50 6 months ago
@hayden50 After the 1936 economic crisis, he focused on military (ironic how you're bemoaning this fact while Republicans are bemoaning the decreases in military spending). Before he took office, the GDP was in a state of decline for four years, so, no, there wasn't a real recovery before he took office.
Strikes took place among the working class because of conditions for the working class, a class that a socialist would favor rather than oppress.
Formosus111 6 months ago
@Formosus111 Germany got massive loans from American banks in the 1930s to pay for Hitler's so called economic miracle. In 1939 he told his Generals that Germany would be bankrupt by 1942 because the loans would be due for repayment and Germany would default unless they had a war of conquest. One week later Germany invaded Poland.
Btw, i'm against the military industrial complex. we need drastic cuts in military expenditure.
hayden50 6 months ago
@Formosus111 Cont...
Don't get me wrong, i'm not advocating Violence..but like i said,socialist policies ensure the survival of the unfittest.the progressives parasites are more trouble than they're worth,they need to be weeded out. And Capitalism works because it weeds out the weak....
hayden50 6 months ago
I still hate those damn ATM fees! haha
Itrytotestify 7 months ago
In Europe, we have a monthly transaction of 1-2 euro's for using ATM's. They are located near every mall and available without any problems. You're the pro-capitalistic drone here Lee. You obviously oversimplify your responses.
RoyvanKeulen 7 months ago
big mike would get killed by the libertariantroll in a debate. this is just my opinion
libertariantroll 7 months ago
Any idea about when you will finish your book?
audioblogs12 7 months ago
The top 1% own 26% of the wealth in America and pay 40% of all the taxes.
The top 5% of wage earners pay 70% of all the taxes.
I'm tired of hearing that these top earners need to pay their "fair share" when what is truly "fair" is having EVERYONE have some sort of "skin" in the game.
If you don't want your taxes raised, then don't wish (or require it) on others.
stratkeeper 7 months ago
@stratkeeper - Your comment was one of the best things I have seen on Youtube this month.
Normally I spend my time referring people to this video about income mobility:
watch?v=vDhcqua3_W8
But it looks like you've added yet another argument to my arsenal. Thanks man!
StateExempt 7 months ago
every critique of the class economy, HTWW dismisses as 'class envy', as to say only rich people can comment on the economy.
prafty 7 months ago
Actually, the standard of living in Sweden is not terrible, if you think that you are a moron. Suffer. This man is a clone of George Bush. Also, he wants all wildlife to be decimated by oil spills, then he wants you to pay for the cleanup.
HormaiusMora 7 months ago
@HormaiusMora you are spouting from your emotions.
cliffleong87 7 months ago
Remember that this guy's authority on any subject is ZERO because he denies obvious facts like global warming and he thinks pesticides are more helpful than water. He is also a retard when it comes to economics. He thinks you would become poorer if the rich payed higher taxes and if less money was spent on the military. He has never heard of Sweden or any of the countries that succeeded by following the exact opposite of everything he says.
HorrorIllogium 7 months ago
@HorrorIllogium - Never heard of Sweden succeeding as an economic tiger of any sort.
StateExempt 7 months ago
@StateExempt I concur, Sweden had mass economic expansion after ww2. By the 1970s, they had become an economic powerhouse. They were like estonia. When social "reforms" happened, Sweden had faced decades of economic sluggishness. Sweden is now trying to get rid and eradicate their socialism by passing free market and liberal (classic use) reforms. Although they still have a long way to go to become the first european economic tiger, they are slowly going in the direction of liberty and freedom.
cliffleong87 7 months ago
Can you explain to me why I need to be concerned over a 2/3rds of a degree change in average surface temperature over the last twelve decades? Can you also tell me which video you are referring to as your straw man in terms of his views on pesticides?
And why would anyone want to produce more if they would be punished for it via a progressive tax?
StateExempt 7 months ago
@StateExempt You are clearly a moron and not worth a real response. Thank you.
HorrorIllogium 7 months ago
@HorrorIllogium - You are clearly deficient of knowledge on these issues and not capable of a response. Thank you.
StateExempt 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@StateExempt I did state that you are a moron.
HorrorIllogium 7 months ago 2
@HorrorIllogium if you read some kevin williamson. You would learn that sweden is trying to distant itself from socialism. Also, sweden got rich by using capitalism.
cliffleong87 7 months ago
You're an idiot war pig and you don't realize that the military consumes too much money. That is obvious.
HorrorIllogium 7 months ago
Lee, I love your stuff but disagree with your ATM explanation on this video.
We need to demand transparency from our banks. They should post how much profit an ATM makes if they want to win the confidence of consumers and dispel the perception that banks are gouging their clients.
Corporate abuse thrives where ignorance abounds.
Ignorance also provides fertile soil for communist social engineers to stir up feelings of resentment in the masses.
A transparent bank would be the crowd favorite.
CatholicAmerican 7 months ago
If we really were close to running out of oil the price would be much higher. "Peak oil" predictions have been being made, and been wrong, for more than a hundred years - by the people who don't understand the real source (and destroyer) of values is not material, but human.
Human ingenuity constantly finds new energy sources, including new sources of oil - and the limits are created by the governments that want to restrain then.
Read Atlas Shrugged and look up thepursuitofenergy on facebook
thinkingisawesome 7 months ago
@thinkingisawesome
Actually, Dr. M King Hubbert did the math back in the 40's and predicted that US domestic oil production would peak in 1970 and it did exactly that. In 1970, the US peaked at just under 11.3 million barrels a day and has been in decline ever since. They are now producing 35% less
In fact, the only significant oil producers that have yet to peak are China, Saudi Arabia, Canada and the United Arab Emerites. There have not been any large oil field discoveries in decades.
yeebuddeh1 7 months ago
I don't understand why the people who are worried about peak oil also hate speculators. Speculators are the market's natural means of conservation - if oil is really going to run out soon, there is a huge market incentive to buy it now (from people who are only using it for less important things because it's cheap) and sell it when the prices goes up (hence making the price go up earlier and better conserving).
thinkingisawesome 7 months ago
@thinkingisawesome - I never got the critique of speculators either. If speculators really were counterproductive, how are they able to convince others to pay them a salary in the first place?
StateExempt 7 months ago
Pause the video at 0:00. You won't regret it!
RoryMacManus 7 months ago
The ATM argument is such a non-issue. I don't carry much cash anymore and when I do need cash, I only go to one of my bank's ATMs and pay $0 per transaction. Not exactly rocket science.
jasonmit 7 months ago
Does no one remember / remember reading about the huge lineups for gas in the 70s? Why would ATMs be any different from gas? Price controls lead to shortages because they interrupt the market incentive to produce and conserve. It's simple economics.
But the economic argument is never enough for people, because they think it's their moral right to enslave others at whim. Until you argue from the perspective of the property rights of the banks, you'll fall on deaf ears.
thinkingisawesome 7 months ago
@thinkingisawesome
The gas lines in the 70's had absolutely nothing to do with price controls. It was due to the OPEC boycott coupled with the peak of US domestic oil production. That's why there were shortages and long lines at the pump.
Anyone that says drill baby drill is an idiot. Just as scientists predicted, US oil production peaked in 1970. The country has never and will never produce as much oil as it did then ever again.
yeebuddeh1 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh1 you're completely ignoring prices and effiencies, there is so much untapped oil that is available that isn't touched becuase the price isn't high enough to justify the cost to retrieve it and when prices rise, new wells that were not profitable then become profitable. we will not run out of oil, it will eventually become to expensive people will volentary change to another energy source.
boristhepython 7 months ago
@boristhepython
The problem is that alternative energy sources use a ton of oil to mine and extract the materials, transport them, manufacture them, transport them once again and set up the infrastructure. A windmill takes something like 200 years to produce the amount of energy it took to make it.
As of right now, there is NOTHING that can power what the planet's doing without oil. Not saying innovation won't produce some new technologies, but it will have to produce them very soon
yeebuddeh1 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh1 That caused the price increase, not the shortage. When supply increases relative to demand, price goes up, and the market regulates consumption without the need for a "shortage." The "shortage" - i.e. needing pull or to wait in line to buy something, at any prince - was because of the price controls and rationing the U.S. government instituted, and can only be because of price controls and rationing.
thinkingisawesome 7 months ago
Anyway, the point of this video is not about ATM overhead, and who is lying about how much it costs to run an ATM as a service; it is about peoples personal responsibility and consequences within a free market. If they tried to charge you a hundred dollars for a transaction, then nobody would be fucking doing it. Apparently 3 dollars is about the maximum that a business can charge before enough people start changing their behavior in a way that reduces their profits.
jdubEVH 7 months ago
Hood rats get no sympathy from me if they choose to keep throwing their money away every day at the little indian gas station with the three dollar surcharge ATM. People who so willingly choose to throw their money at slum-lord type figures will get nothing even remotely close to sympathy, because they're not even attempting to take responsibility for the money that they worked for, or to help limit the money that people make from profiting off of people like themselves. DON'T PAY!!!
jdubEVH 7 months ago
Check out fringe element's channel.He's basically a radical libertarian who can explain his system intellectually without looking like a nerd.
thatkamikid 7 months ago
@thatkamikid Yeah he has a good channel I like his Anti-Statism at Light Speed series
Darkwizzrobe 7 months ago
It's those damn rich, let's git 'em!
Yours truly,
The highly educated liberal left.
augustc4 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh Bill make the rules, so he has to comply with those rules, as unfair as they might be. However, instead of just moving to a new neighborhood (he likes his neighborhood, it has nice shrubbery), Bob decided to convince Bill to change the rule. Perhaps, eventually, he can convince Bill to make it so that it doesn't matter if he has more stuff than Fred. Perhaps he can show Bill he would be happy to give the car to Fred if Fred were to work for him for a while. We can always hope...
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh think we should get Bill over there to make some fair rules about this neighborhood." Bob says, "That seems like a good idea to me, ok, let's do it." So that's what they do. Except, Bill is friends with Fred, so Bill makes a rule: If you have more cars than you need, you must give your cars away to other people who don't have enough cars. Bob doesn't like this rule, but he has no choice.
So my question is, what changed? Well, Bob agreed to go along with having (cont...)
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
Comment removed
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh it were just one man (Bob) and his neighbor (Fred), things are simple. Fred has no cars, Bob has two, so Fred takes one. Fred needed a car, Bob didn't need two, so it was only fair (in Fred's eyes) that he would just have to take it, since Bob wouldn't give it to him. Sadly for Fred, we know this as stealing. Everyone agree that it is stealing to do that.
However, with the introduction of a third party (the govt.), things become more complex. Fred says to Bob, "Hey, I (cont...)
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh Sadly, people do not seem to realize this. They seem to believe that if there are others who have more than them, those others should pay more. Now, while I think it is the moral and ethical responsibility of those well-off to take care of those less fortunate, it is simply immoral for people who have less to by law FORCE people who have more to give it to them. Now, I understand that things become confusing when a third party becomes involved. You see, if... cont...
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh having been more gives them a free pass to things in life. It is a perversion of the meaning of equality; equality DOES NOT mean that everyone should have the same stuff, it means that if a rich guy buys a brand of toothbrush for $2.50, he will get the same toothbrush as the poor guy who buys from the same brand. It means that if you call the police because someone just mugged you, they will respond, regardless of how wealthy you are. Cont...
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh I would probably need to make my own critique to debunk the entire thing, I couldn't just do it in the comments. I don't know if I want to spend the time doing that. Perhaps, though, perhaps.
However: "skyrocketing income inequality that's taken place in the US"... that phrase is so bothersome. It speaks of the consistent deeper mentality of entitlement that has become so pervasive within our culture. For some reason, people seem to think that... cont...
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
I don't think this video is right, there weren't any recessions when Glass-Steagal was in tact and then in the 80s and on (after MASSIVE deregulation) financial crisises happen all the time.
They probably had higher costs too but no recessions
tazeryoot67 7 months ago
Call me crazy but maybe this is just in my area but the ATM fee is only on ATMs that were not issued by your own bank. I can go to any US Bank ATM and withdraw cash for free. It is a perk of having that bank. Now a person from Bank of America will be charged 3.00. So perhaps if they can't charge as much as they would like they would simply not allow anyone that doesn't have an account with them to withdraw. Fact: You are not forced to use ATMS!
matt4787 7 months ago
force them to lower the transaction fee is because the govt. has no right to do so. Banks can charge what they like. If you don't like it, don't use that ATM. If you are put in the situation where you MUST use it, you have no other option, well, guess what, you are going to have to pay the Stupid Tax (the transaction fee). The point is, the govt. simply does not have the right enact a law restricting how much a company can charge for a service.
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
Look, Lee, I think you're really smart and all. Really I do. But you've got this one wrong.
For one thing, you shouldn't have focused so intensely on such a small part of that video. It had so many things wrong with it, and you chose one that simply doesn't matter that much. And then you defended it for the wrong reasons.
Lee, banks could charge a smaller transaction fee for using ATMs. It would just lower their profit margin. It would not bankrupt them. The reason that we should not...
TheJackOfFate 7 months ago
@TheJackOfFate
Please give examples of the "so many things" wrong with the video and explain why they're wrong.
Personally, I think Lee decided to focus entirely on the meaningless ATM point because the skyrocketing income inequality that's taken place in the US over the past 30 years is an undeniable fact. That and the rich paying the lowest tax rates since WWII.
Most people watching Lee's video won't even take the time to watch the other one because Lee debunked the ATM point.
yeebuddeh1 7 months ago
@yeebuddeh1 Because of your comment I watched the video. It was worthless. There ARE SO MANY THINGS wrong with Mike's assumptions that Lee (or anybody) could rip the entire thing apart.
But hey, I loved how Mike spent the entire time directing our rage at the rich, then ends with "let me know how YOU want to fix things". It's classic sheep herding that goes completely unnoticed by liberals. In fact, any liberal finishing that video would think "let's get those rich bastards!", nothing more.
augustc4 7 months ago
Comment removed
tazeryoot67 7 months ago
Actually, its important for interest rates to be low, precisely because not everyone will get loans. Giving out loans to people who can't handle the responsibility of paying it back and sticking them with skyrocketing interest rates pushes them into a downward spiral towards bankruptcy. Yes, jobs need to be created and we need to strengthen our economy in other ways, but regulation of what banks and investment firms are doing can help prevent irresponsible behavior that can damage the economy.
GuitarRocker52 7 months ago
Do you consider the minimum wage a form of price control? Would you do away with the minimum wage if you had the authority to?
Macaii 7 months ago
You forgot one thing with the ATM charge and the overhead cost. A lot of that three dollars is fees from the government! The same government he wants to regulate the cost of the fees.
Trenaway 7 months ago
What some people don't seem to understand is that many ATM's in convenience stores and restaurants are not operated by a bank, but are serviced by private vendors. These vendors are small business owners and they are charging the fees. Your bank may only charge you $1.50 to $2 a transaction on a "foreign" ATM, and the vendor will charge an additional $2 to $3.
USPatriot3 7 months ago
T you just buy your own ATMs and park them next to the $3 cost ATMs and undercut them at $2.50, or whatever price that you think you can afford to get away with operationally. Prove it with facts and number Mike, not blabber and ignorance.
rrunkle 7 months ago
Original Mike video has comments disabled. Probably got sick of how many people pointed out the ignorance. Okay, let me poke just one more hole in stupid Mikes boat. Mike, if you are so offended by the higher ATM fees, and you think that the prices shoud be lower, then why don
rrunkle 7 months ago
I'm sorry, but this video is obviously completely biased. He didn't mention at all about how banks who kept their ATMs would get extra business because people often DEPEND on them.
Oh and the guy who's saying people who use ATMs are lazy is dumb as hell. Sometimes the banks are closed and you need the money, others it's just much quicker and helps you get along with your day.
LogicBeforeNorms 7 months ago
@LogicBeforeNorms How do people depend on atms? You just need to go at your free time when the bank isnt closed to get money for later. obviously they are helpful, but if its that important to you stop complaining or you wont have any atm at all. Banks are providing a servicve that they dont need to give you.
peanutman5240 7 months ago
@peanutman5240 First of all, me complaining isn't going to get it taken away, that's ridiculous. Secondly, if they didn't give me that service I would take my business to another bank.
LogicBeforeNorms 7 months ago
@LogicBeforeNorms Then do that. If you don't like having to pay the atm charge then go to aa bank that has better services and stop complaining because it will take it away. Some liberal will pass a stupid law about something to do with atm charges and all the banks will get rid of their atms. This is what happens when liberals always try interfere and try to regulate buisness and things get screwed up. The privare sector will fix its self.
peanutman5240 7 months ago
@peanutman5240 My complaint was that the video was biased, and that he never looks at both sides. I don't give a crap about ATMs. If I did I'd complain to the bank, and not a bunch of republicans who can't do anything about it, on youtube.
BTW The private sector and Wall Street had pretty big contributions to the great depression. Regulations were put in place afterward, and taken off after bank CEO's started getting put in office.
LogicBeforeNorms 7 months ago
@LogicBeforeNorms If you really need the cash that bad, then you can afford to pay the fee. There are many alternatives to withdrawing money from an ATM that charges you a fee: credit cards, debit card, personal check, ATM for the bank you have an account with, withdrawing the money in advance when the bank IS open. A lack of preparation on someone's part does not constitute a necessity. Nobody DEPENDS on ATMs, period.
BillyWillis89 7 months ago
@BillyWillis89 First of all, that makes no sense. "If you need money that bad you can afford extra." Its self referentially incoherent.
As far as nobody depending on ATMs
1. Regardless many people would leave a bank, and go elsewhere if they lost their ATM. The business it brings in would pay for it.
2. Saying NOBODY depends on ATMs would require you to know EVERYBODY'S financial situation.
LogicBeforeNorms 7 months ago
It costs money to withdaw cash from ATM's not owned by your banks in america? Wow. We have those in the UK, but these are independent ATM's owned and operated by whoever contracted them from the makers. The rest of all ATM's are connected by the LINK system, which means that all ATM's are covered. This includes pretty much every bank, so there's no risk to the banks and no charge fees for consumers. I imagine this will be difficult to implement in a system vested in nickeling and diming.
mistermordancy 7 months ago
How come you only focused on the points about ATM's? This jackass made many more outrageous arguments.
Albyiscool 7 months ago
In Germany the "ATMs" are free !!!
LabcabinPhiladelphia 7 months ago
You make the huge assumption (ass) that lowering the atm charge would make an atm unaffordable. You didn't provide any data to back up such a statement, and if I use a little bit of logic.... I don't think the banks have a very large upkeep cost at all. What do they have to do? Pay some guy to put money in once a week? They make $3.50 per transaction? How much is that per day? I wouldn't be surprised if they ran a profit off of $0.10 per transaction.
backchodes 7 months ago
@backchodes I am not saying you are wrong but I am saying that if you don't know what it costs to keep up an atm, thats a problem everyone does, everyone thinks they know have everything. I am not saying you cant be right but I am saying if you dont know you dont know.
vegaskidd 7 months ago
@backchodes Upkeep costs? Try; Bank employees, electric bill, water bill, rent, property taxes if the building is owned outright, security, maintenance of the grounds outside, business taxes from your dear old Uncle Sam, and insurance. There's probably a few I missed but you have to realize, businesses aren't charities. Nobody creates a business so that poor Joe Schmoe can have a job.
zoomerlawns 7 months ago 4
@backchodes Here is another genius. Say they made $1 Million on every transaction, you could take yourself into your Bank and wait then. Moreover, competing ATMs in areas have to get customers. Also, say they made .50 per transaction, that cost then gets passed to consumers in other areas, like free checking (now gone) and other perks.
HowTheWorldWorks 7 months ago
@HowTheWorldWorks I just use the ATM at my bank. Depending on which bank people use, there are convenient locations from which you can withdraw your money for free.....no conflict, then.
terranceshade 7 months ago
@HowTheWorldWorks It's annoying how often you use the word genius, and if you haven't noticed, we want the banks to suffer, and you as well. It does please us. Thank you.
HorrorIllogium 7 months ago
@backchodes As far as actual bank ATMs... For a single machine, rent is the highest cost of upkeep. Rent to put an ATM in a high-traffic retail location is higher than what most people pay for their apartment/home. Electrical and data is probably second as most contracts are going to break that out separate from rent. Salary for armored transport personnel and repair techs is distributed over many machines. Insurance for ATM machines is not free either.
varan619 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@backchodes "I don't think the banks have a very large upkeep cost at all. What do they have to do?" Let's list the costs, eh...
- An armored car with guards to put money in the machine (union guys, not regular mini-wagers), including insurance, gas and health bennies
- Rent on the space in the 7-11, A&P or Piggly Wiggly
- Computer code writers and programers to keep up with federal laws
- Security (to lower muggings)
- Mechanics (more unions)
It isn't just some guy putting money in.
bsabruzzo 7 months ago
@backchodes The basic argument is this, ATM fee's = 0, banks make no money therefore no more ATM's. ATM fee's =3.00 the banks make money and put ATM's all over the place. We have no idea what the banks "break even" price is, but we can assume that at some level between 0 and 3 dollars, the banks will no longer make money. Hence, the argument of legislation limiting ATM fee's will hurt profits limiting the number of ATM's, and quite possibly driving banks out of the ATM market. Pretty simple.
2leet2cheet 7 months ago
@backchodes Those 3rd-party ATMs that you see in convenience stores are there for profit ONLY. If you don't like the idea of paying fees, get your paycheck cashed or put your money in a bank with a higher number of their own ATMs in your immediate area. If the bank that you choose charges money to use their own ATMs, then go inside and withdraw or use the ATM as infrequently as possible. People really don't like taking credit for throwing their money away, do they?
jdubEVH 7 months ago
@backchodes
why should a company be forced by laws of an oppressive government to become less profitable, or unprofitable?
DoubIeRose 7 months ago
Sorry Lee but this is what I herd from watching your video dispite what you tried to convey.
"Dems pass legislation to help consumers, but the bank becomes an asshole, and insted of simply taking the small hit to their income the Bank shifts its numbers around so they can make the same amount of money as before by pissing in their customer's cereal"
BL3KVTP 7 months ago 2
@BL3KVTP You would hear that because you're an economic illiterate drone who never created a business in your life. If it requires X amount of resources to justify you providing a service for someone, and the government says you cannot charge more than X minus 1, you lose money on every transaction and go bankrupt genius.
HowTheWorldWorks 7 months ago 15
@HowTheWorldWorks You know. I just think it's funny how banks illegally foreclose on people's homes, wrongly put people in jail, charge insane amounts of interest, and have no remorse for ruining peoples lives to make a few extra buck. Then you come along and try to find what ever way you can to stand up for them.
If you're still wondering what liberals are thinking when they say too many republican spokes people sell their souls for cash. This is a small fraction of it.
LogicBeforeNorms 7 months ago
@LogicBeforeNorms Banks don't have the authority to illegally foreclose on anyone's home, it is by your own definition illegal, and it wouldn't be in any banks favor to conduct such an activity if it isn't going to hold up under the scrutiny of law. The truth is that nobody is guaranteed a particular standard of living; and those who engage in living beyond their financial means might pay heavily if they put themselves in a particular situation with banks, loans, interest rates and such.
jdubEVH 7 months ago
@jdubEVH You're saying all this like there isn't proof of it happening. There is. I dare you to google for 10 minutes and not find some.
LogicBeforeNorms 7 months ago
@HowTheWorldWorks
Your argument is flawed Lee because the amount to "justify providing a service" is arbitrary. Lets say the bank only makes 85 cents insted of 1 dollar per transaction in finacial gain. They are still making 85 cents worth of raw profit but they start removing mechines to cover the 15% drop? NO.
What they should so is lick their wounds, get over it, and improve the quality of their service to attract new consumers insted of punishing the people who already fallow them.
BL3KVTP 7 months ago
@HowTheWorldWorks Wait, don't businesses engage in practices which may be directly unprofitable, but overall indirectly profitable? Offering free checking or lower ATM fees seem like nominal losses with consideration of brand loyalty and what that means as far as loyal customers going to their banks for loans. Isn't that where banks make the big bucks?
beenz07 7 months ago
@HowTheWorldWorks please tell us about your experience in running businesses, mister ~armchair economist~
thebsdguy 7 months ago
@HowTheWorldWorks Just how much profit do you think the bank makes every transaction. It must be an enormous amount. and your telling me they can't afford to pay for an ATM if they wanted to? Probably this person is right. The people demanded better conditions, so the corporation moved out. Not because it wouldn't make a profit, but because it wanted to punish people for daring to want a better deal.
trademark6 7 months ago
@BL3KVTP They can piss all they want, but it sounds like you are one of the people who complains while drinking it. No bank has ever put a gun to my head, and DEMANDED that I bank with them and pay outrageous fees. No shit dude; everyone knows that big business is nothing but assholes. That's why you gotta vote with your dollar. Food Lion can't put a knife to my neck and force me to pay 2 bucks for a 2 liter pepsi; I'll go to wal-mart and pay $1.25.
jdubEVH 7 months ago
Only morons use ATM's. Why the fuck do you idiots go to ATM's? Just carry some money in your wallet and pay cash you dumbfucks. Get some willpower and don't spend money on things you don't need.
This country is full of dumbfuck morons. All you people that walked away from your houses should be in jail. All you idiots that live paycheck to paycheck are just that...idiots.
RapIsDeadly 7 months ago
I've watched you critique a lot of videos in the past few years I've been subscribed to your channel. It seems as though these people focus more on animated graphics to get their invalid points across than actually investing time to get their facts straight. Keep up the good work on your rebuttals as usual, Lee :)
sudacide 7 months ago
The only comment Big Mike had is that the cost to the banks is pennies per transaction. What I don't underst