[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally Blue CA Ad Network

Bank of America - A Unique Display of Corporate Greed

by: California Labor Federation

Tue Oct 04, 2011 at 14:13:35 PM PDT


by Mitch Seaman, California Labor Federation

Forbes magazine as gutsy consumer advocate? Well, not really, but even the favored rag of corporate shills everywhere seemed stunned by Bank of America’s $5 debit fee announcement on Friday, accusing the banking behemoth of committing

a common mistake large corporations make: taking the customer for granted, holding the belief that whatever products or services they offer are unique and indispensible, so their customers will always be there.

While we agree that Bank of America’s incompetence runs rampant throughout the banking industry, by several measures of greed and arrogance, this troubled corporation stands alone. Allow us to present Bank of America with the following uniquely dubious titles:

Greediest TARP recipient: Bank of America took tens of billions of taxpayer dollars from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in 2008. This bailout was supposed to help shore up the entire US financial system—as banks can be too big to fail but never too big to take free taxpayer money. Anyway, the terms of these loans required recipient banks to individually maintain sufficient cash to ward off a broader Wall Street meltdown. However, as last week’s Special Investigator General (SIGTARP) report confirms, Bank of America lobbied heavily to escape the program before they’d achieved the required financial reserves. Why? According to the report, Bank of America cited “…concerns including market perception and restrictions established by the Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation.” In other words, a shaky Bank of America weaseled out early to polish its image and pay executives more—jeopardizing the fiscal health of their company and the stability of our country.

Downsizer of the year: This one wasn’t even close. On September 12th, Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan announced 30,000 layoffs—that’s more than twice the number of layoffs (13,000) declared by 2011’s second-place downsizer, pharmaceutical titan Merck & Co. Bank of America’s bombshell dropped just one month after Moynihan informed investors that “our capital levels are among the highest they’ve ever been in this institution’s history.” Maybe he’s confusing “our” capital levels with his capital levels: last year, Moynihan collected $2 million of his $10 million 2010 total compensation package. Other executives, in some cases, collected even more. Thomas Montag, head of investment banking and capital markets, will rake in $16 million for his work in 2010. Not bad for tanking one of the biggest banks the world has ever seen, though we have to wonder, how many jobs could be saved by firing these two alone?

#1 Tax Cheat: If you paid any federal income taxes at all last year, you paid more than Bank of America. In fact, unless you got a refund check bigger than $1 billion, you paid more taxes than Bank of America. It gets worse: these freeloaders paid no taxes last year and likely won’t for a long time. Chew on that next time pro-banker legislators demand we balance the budget through Social Security and Medicare cuts from middle class families.

First in Fees: All of which leads up to the latest Bank of America gaffe: the unprecedented $5 monthly debit fee slapped on any customer guilty of using his or her debit card for its intended purpose of buying things. This charge comes courtesy of a bank that for years encouraged frequent use of and zealous devotion to debit cards—mainly to help the bank rack up sky-high “interchange” fees from merchants on every card swipe. The company changed their tune, however, following federal legislation requiring that fees be “reasonable and proportional to the cost incurred by the issuer with respect to the transaction.” Apparently, despite final federal rulemaking that more than doubled the fee limit set by Congress, reasonable and proportional profits just aren’t enough for this champion profiteer—hence the shocking new fee.

While we applaud the furor over the monthly debit charge, be sure to consider this fee just the latest of many anti-consumer and anti-worker moves from the king of both. We’ll go to another surprising Forbes magazine masterpiece for the final word: “Banks aren’t our friends.” From one friend to another, we couldn’t agree more.

California Labor Federation :: Bank of America - A Unique Display of Corporate Greed
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

BofA Sucks (4.00 / 1)
They rely on having a large Brick & Mortar and ATM network to offer convenience that the fee prices never justify.  They bought up Countrywide FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE of becoming bigger than To Big to Fail.  You may not agree with him on many things but all you lefties should read Ron Pauls statements on the banking cartels (which your favorite liberal teddy-bear Barnie Frank serves without question :-).

There is a CLEAR difference between capitalism and fascist corporatism.  There can never be an honest dialogue until more people understand this.

They do get the tax issue wrong though.  BofA is a Dividend paying stock that's down to a penny.  They have taken losses and will continue to.  You can't tax a profit that isn't there.

Hi. I'm Charles.  I worked my way from homelessness to a business owner.  Be what you have it in you to be!


BULL (0.00 / 0)
Let me just say that that trying to blame Barney Frank for banking problems is BULL !!!

I do Blame Slick Will Clinton and Lying Al Gore for allowing the Repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act that put strict limits on banks (see: Bliley-Gramm-Leach all Republicans)

(I would also blame the whole 'De-Regulation Cword' Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush for ending all restrictions on banks (see Reagan S&L scandal) short of human sacrifices

Try not to divert attention
The crisis actually built up under 'Fredo' Bush
It exploded under Fredo

Not try
(you probably consier it a 'beautiful lie')

I gave up on B of A in the 80's and moved to Wells fargo
A little better and they're still a SF bank
I'd switch to a credit union if they had any branch networks


[ Parent ]
Wikipedia on Fank's ties to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (0.00 / 0)
In 2003, while the ranking minority member on the Financial Services Committee, Frank opposed a Bush administration proposal, in response to accounting scandals, for transferring oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from Congress and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to a new agency that would be created within the Treasury Department. The proposal, supported by the head of Fannie Mae, reflected the administration's belief that Congress "neither has the tools, nor the stature" for adequate oversight. Frank stated, "These two entities ...are not facing any kind of financial crisis ... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."[62] In 2003, Frank also stated what has been called his "famous dice roll":[63] "I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness [in the regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] that we have in the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidised housing.

Sorry you can't see through the fake populism.  He supports bigger than to big to fail financial institutions.  Look at the results of the regulatory changes and legislation he has supported.  It has made the financial institutions larger and more intertwined with government.

If you have facts to the contrary I'd be glad to read them.

Hi. I'm Charles.  I worked my way from homelessness to a business owner.  Be what you have it in you to be!


[ Parent ]
NO DICE (0.00 / 0)
How easily you slid from the 'Banking industry' to Fannie and Freddie (bait and switch?)

That said, giving Fredo Bush's Admin oversight of Fannie and Freddie was impractical
Fredo was too busy finding Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq

WHAT makes you think that Bush would have provided honest oversight of Fannie and Freddie ?

Wasn't he a De-Regulator ?

How did White House oversight work for the big banks, anyway ?
How'd Fredo's oversight work for Wall Street ?
The Housing market ?

Capitalism, the God that FAILED


[ Parent ]
One more thing (0.00 / 0)
'...In 2003, while the ranking minority member on the Financial Services Committee, Frank opposed a Bush administration proposal...'

minority member ?
minority member ?

HOW DOES A MINORITY MEMBER HAVE ANY INFLUENCE ?

Fredo Bush CONTROLLED the White House, the House of Representatives and the Senate

SO HOW COULD BARNEY FRANK STOP ANYTHING FREDO WANTED TO DO ??

Please clarify

'I keep workin' my way back to you babe
with a burning love inside'


[ Parent ]
Barney Frank - as smart as they come... (0.00 / 0)
... and a very big player in the Mortgage Crisis.  His defense of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was wrong and his campaign contributions in the 2008 cycle show his "ownership" with over 50% of all his campaign funds raised being from the finance, insurance and real estate sector.  Of 435 members of the House, Mr. Frank ranked #1 in donations from Mortgage Bankers & Brokers; #3 in donations from Savings & Loans  (opensecrets.org).

He did not cause the Banking Crisis but his touch on the mortgage side was certainly not Midas, and did contribute to(not cause) the banking mess.

That said, this string is about Bank of America and I have to agree with everyone here.... Bank of America is a shadow of its former self.


[ Parent ]
Someone with perspective... (0.00 / 0)
Thank you for an interesting fact based response not filled with juvenile cinema references.  Frank is a political tool (as are most of our congressman) who wants the Federal government to be essentially the only mortgage provider for single family residences.

As if Quasi government Fannie and Freddie weren't bad enough...

As to BofA, get ready for another bailout...  Buffet will profit handsomely off the taxpayer once again.

Hi. I'm Charles.  I worked my way from homelessness to a business owner.  Be what you have it in you to be!


[ Parent ]
I'm waiting (0.00 / 0)
You STILL don't explain how Barney Frank is responsible for the mess at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

He is a DEMOCRAT

The Republicans controlled the House of Representatives
The Republicans controlled the US Senate
The Republicans controlled the White House
They DIDN'T COMPROSMISE with Democrats much less allow them any input into policy

So HOW did Barney Frank have ANY control over banking or Quasi banking regulations ??
HOW does he bear ANY RESPONSIBILITY for the mess that occurred

Work your way up from that little lie

I'm STILL WAITING for your explanation

ANY ANSWERS ??


[ Parent ]
I'll ask you (0.00 / 0)
HOW could a DEMOCRAT have ANY influence on banking regulations during the Bush Admin ?

Simple question

The Republicamns CONTROLLED the House, the Senate and the Presidency
So HOW cold Barney frank influence policy ?
How could he prevent Bush from doing anything he wanted to do ?
Did the Republicans allow the Democrats to have any influence when they had majorities in Congress ?

I think you been following a Fixed Noize meme a little too closely

WON UP to the BUSH FIASCO

George Bush was the DECIDER during the Banking meltdown


[ Parent ]
And they cut lending (0.00 / 0)
BofA bought up my second mortgage when they bought Countrywide. Now they've "suspended" it because of the lower value of my home. I can still keep paying them on the small balance. But I can't use it, even if I pay it off. They're doing this to everybody I hear. Plus they announced today that they're closing down the division that used to do mortgages to credit unions and other small lenders--further limiting access to credit. So, aside from paying their executives way more than they deserve for their dismal performance, what are they doing with all the money they get from us as customers and as taxpayers?

I assume (0.00 / 0)
That by frozen you're talking about a second HELOC that they won't let you draw from anymore.  That has been happening to a lot of people.  It's part of the end of MEW (mortgage equity withdraw).

[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads


Support Calitics:

Get discounted bestsellers at Barnes & Noble.com!

Advertisers


-->
California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary


Powered by: SoapBlox