This is why Democrats lose. They act like they want to do stuff like this for political games. Biden really has no intention or ability to do this without an act of Congress. And certainly not in a few weeks... The Biden Administration is ‘cracking down’ on banks by imposing a $5 cap on overdraft fees, calling them ‘junk fees’ Overdraft transaction charges could drop to a maximum of $5 from the current ceiling of $35 as of Oct. 1, 2025, if the current iteration of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) gets its way. The limit on fees that banks and credit unions impose on clients whose account balances are insufficient to cover transactions would save U.S. consumers $5 billion every year, the federal agency said in a Dec.12, 2024, press release announcing its final ruling on the overdraft policy. Read More
That's nothing. I drink my beer on the rocks, literally. I used to have to fight off my ex-wife at night when I got up to take a piss. And there are no pets living in my neighborhood, for long, anyway.
What the fuck is Jesse Watters doing hanging out on a podunk, basketball message board hidden away up in Liberal Land?? We are not worthy........
No. It might not survive the Trump administration, but that doesn't make it 'an act'. You assume everyone acts in bad faith, but this has been in the works since long before the election. Had Trump not gotten elected, these rules would survive for at least 4 years. Maybe longer. barfo
If it were serious he wouldn't have proposed it with 20 days left on the job. If it was legit we would have enjoyed the benefits for the last 4 years. Yes, I look at anything proposed the way this was as a bad faith act. Because it very obviously is.
"He" didn't propose it. Nor was it proposed at the end of the administration. The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau proposed it, last January. Then, of course, there was a bureaucratic process for approving it. Could they have proposed it in 2021 instead of 2024? I imagine so. Did they wait to propose it until 2024, knowing that 10 months later, Biden would lose the election to whomever the Republicans might nominate, and therefore it would never go into effect? I'm thinking maybe that's not a reasonable interpretation of the facts at hand. barfo
Right. Biden didn't do it all by himself. Which is why I specifically called out Dems in the original post. They've made similar proposal in the past. But Democrats were afraid to lose campaign contributions by instituting changes that would actually stick around. No doubt if Dems would have won this would have been shelved.
You, sir, are more cynical than even these times call for. Not everyone in government is a bad actor 100% of the time. Are there any laws, proposals, regulations, or other actions of government during the Biden administration that you don't believe were made in bad faith? barfo
Do you charge too much or is there a reason the Democrats haven't hired you as a consultant years ago given your deep understanding of the nation's psyche?
Because if they were listening to me they wouldn't be making decisions based on how much money they can get out of corporations, or letting corporations write their policy. Since the money the Democrats have comes from corporations those corporations wouldn't want them to hire somebody like me.
The Democrats do business in bad faith. So do the Republicans. That's how our political system is set up. Every state level or higher congressperson has to spend 3/4 of their time in an office making phonecalls to a party approved list of corporations and wealthy people to make promises and raise money in order to have the support of either party. If they do not do that, they will not be given support and the party will run somebody against them. The difference is that Republicans are typically voting in their own best interest (or based on personal religious or other biases). Many Democrats and many of the people in the middle want to vote for somebody who put the greater good ahead of themselves. They want to vote on smart policy. So when Democrats act like Republicans they lose the support of these people who aren't "Dems by default".
So you're saying (a) you know why Democrats don't win, and (b) Democrats don't care to know this because they're in the pocket of corporations. So you're saying the corporations don't want the Democrats to win? So what outsider candidates are you giving your priceless information to?
This isn't some new revelation. It's pretty well known. Corporations don't care whether Republicans or Democrats win. They're both in the pockets of corporations.
To some extent, this is true. But not nearly to the extent you claim. I'd like to see the hard evidence for this. Certainly they spend some time fundraising. But 3/4? As far as I can tell they spend 3/4ths of their time on vacation. And when was the last time 'the party' ran someone against an incumbent as punishment for lack of fundraising? Has that ever actually happened? But even if it was true, that hardly explains why you think the CFPB, which isn't elected, and whose members don't need to fundraise, is operating in bad faith. barfo
As far as I'm concerned Biden has been a bad faith politician most of his career. The DNC is as well. Off the top of my head I do appreciate the inflation reduction act for the decarbonization benefits and economic benefits. I appreciate the student loan forgiveness (even though I had to pay my own off).
There are a lot of first hand reports. It's obviously not something the parties like spreading around. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-are-members-of-congress-becoming-telemarketers/
Yeah, politicians complain about fundraising. Big deal. There's nothing there to support your view that the party somehow forces them to fundraise if they don't want to. Obviously, there are a lot of reasons they will do so even though they don't enjoy it. And there are a lot of reasons the party would encourage them to do so. I did notice one interesting thing in the link - it says the R boiler room has "About a dozen tiny offices, equipped with a phone and computer". There are/were roughly 200 Republican congresspeople. If all 200 spent 3/4ths of their time fundraising, wouldn't you need more than 12 phone rooms? Money in politics is a big problem, we agree on that. But I can't get on board with your view of the party as being this evil all-powerful entity that operates from an underground island lair. It's not any more (or less) evil or powerful than the people who comprise it. Same as your local school board, or any other grouping of humans. barfo
It literally says they are told to spend 30hrs per week on the phones fundraising... From a pre-approved list.
