digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Why do banks need to be so concerned about the bottom line? Bailouts for the win! And lol at firearms manufacturers being too big. I'm not disagreeing with your speculation, but that's just ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Also, it's interesting (and by interesting I mean disturbing) how they can essentially target who they choose without due process. Yes, we know you've never done anything illegal, but you make a lot of money from an industry we don't approve of and you have the means to do something illegal so we're going to be proactive. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Why do banks need to be so concerned about the bottom line? Bailouts for the win! And lol at firearms manufacturers being too big. I'm not disagreeing with your speculation, but that's just ridiculous. the manufacturers don't deal in cash and all of their sales and money can be easily traced. That's the difference between a big manufacturing company and a small gun seller. The company that makes Glocks for example has 1200 employees. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Also, it's interesting (and by interesting I mean disturbing) how they can essentially target who they choose without due process. It's their business. They have the right to choose who they want to do business with, right or wrong. As long as it's not some form of illegal Discrimination I don't see what's disturbing. It's BofA. In my experience, you're better off not using them. Their a horrible bank with horrid customer service. My late grandmother died over a year ago and they've been dragging their feet releasing the $ in her IRA to my mom this entire time. When my moms bank was helping with the asset transfers and they heard the IRA was at BoA they pretty much said good luck. You won't see that $ for years. So far they were right. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Another poker player this just happened to. Harrison Gimbel @Harrison_Gimbel 29m29 minutes ago Jupiter, FL Bank of America just froze my account. Waiting to hear why but assuming it's same thing that happened to @RealKidPoker He was an active FCPer gibler321 and had cashed for a few million in tourneys Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 It's their business. They have the right to choose who they want to do business with, right or wrong. As long as it's not some form of illegal Discrimination I don't see what's disturbing. It's BofA. In my experience, you're better off not using them. Their a horrible bank with horrid customer service. My late grandmother died over a year ago and they've been dragging their feet releasing the $ in her IRA to my mom this entire time. When my moms bank was helping with the asset transfers and they heard the IRA was at BoA they pretty much said good luck. You won't see that $ for years. So far they were right. It's not the banks who decided to do this. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 It's not the banks who decided to do this. Then who decided it? You claim the banks are theives and now saying the bank isn't the one who decided it. If they didn't do it then they can't be theives. To be theives they had to have made the decision. Accomplices? Then it's still a decision they made. Forced by another entity? Then it's like coercion and not their "crime" but someone else's. Please explain. Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Then who decided it? You claim the banks are theives and now saying the bank isn't the one who decided it. If they didn't do it then they can't be theives. To be theives they had to have made the decision. Accomplices? Then it's still a decision they made. Forced by another entity? Then it's like coercion and not their "crime" but someone else's. Please explain. Thanks. Search operation Chokepoint. Bob posted a link. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Search operation Chokepoint. Bob posted a link. Oh ok you're talking about the DoJ now and not the bank. BoA is still shit though Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Oh ok you're talking about the DoJ now and not the bank. BoA is still shit though I'm talking about the DoJ and banks. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Well what I've been reading is that the DoJ is the one making the decisions without due process. How does that fall on the banks? Again, I have no issues with banks being called theives but we just seen to be throwing blame all over the place. Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Reading about booster seats is confusing. High back? No back? Harness? Is all so contradictory. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Well what I've been reading is that the DoJ is the one making the decisions without due process. How does that fall on the banks? Again, I have no issues with banks being called theives but we just seen to be throwing blame all over the place. What happens if the banks don't comply. Idk. Throwing blame all over the place? Hyperbole? Link to post Share on other sites
iBeaver 409 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Sure why not. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Blame Obama and the Democrats , it's totally their initiative. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 what do you think is behind it? I thought it was always follow the money, so follow the money. They think its in their best long term interest (which is about making money), to no longer allow DN to have an account there. Why they think that, I don't know, haven't given that issue much thought to be honest. But with banks, its about money, I would guess. Even if indirectly so. I thought this sounded like me too! But that's because you were arguing logically and not trying to apply ethics to corporations specifically designed to avoid them, while also jamming selfish personal traits on ginormous businesses. Blame Obama and the Democrats , it's totally their initiative. Despite the rhetoric, I actually kind of agree with this. Governments in many advanced countries realized that trying to catch up with the biggest and most sophisticated criminals was impossible, so they reset and tried to catch risky-seeming transactions or people right at the bottom, hoping to cut off enough cash flow from the bigger groups to hurt the operation. Impossible to say if that has worked or not, though it is certainly apparent how this has harmed legimitate and legal businesses and people who might be "on the fringe" by being involved in (totally legal) things like gun sales, poker, blah blah. I've heard of Canadian non-profit entities having difficulties because they couldn't "prove" the source of large anonymous donations. There's an argument to be made that pinching people like DN is worth it if it cuts off cash flow to giant drug cartels, mob-run casino money laundering and terrorist funding...but it's impossible for any of us to say if any of that is actually happening. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Isis fighting with American weapons and the US military protecting opium fields in Afghanistan....lol but pinch those poker players and porn store owners because they're a real risk....what a ****ing joke! The war against drugs is just as much of a joke as the war against terrorism. And the banks have already been caught laundering money in the past. I'm actually amazed how the real criminals get away with it while attacking those who haven't done anything wrong. And then we have people like Dan who think it's justified. Lol Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Isis fighting with American weapons and the US military protecting opium fields in Afghanistan....lol but pinch those poker players and porn store owners because they're a real risk....what a ****ing joke! The war against drugs is just as much of a joke as the war against terrorism. And the banks have already been caught laundering money in the past. I'm actually amazed how the real criminals get away with it while attacking those who haven't done anything wrong. And then we have people like Dan who think it's justified. Lol What exactly did I say that any of the above was justified? I mean, other than the baseless, meaningless accusations about the "real criminals" and "banks laundering money" (any money that is held by a recognized bank is already laundered, by definition, though you are accurate to say that banks and their executives in most/all major countries have been caught assisting money launderers by either gross or purposeful negligence, ineptitude, or certainly in some cases, explicit fraud.) In fact, rather than yelling at clouds, I actually addressed the supposed intention of the problems and indicated there was no evidence it was working which is kind of a more useful way to address a problem. p.s. do you have a link for the US protecting opium fields in Afghanistan? Because I have no doubt about the veracity of that one, I'm just curious how blatant. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Here watch this and then decide who's lying... Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Here watch this and then decide who's lying... Where were the facts in that? Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Where were the facts in that? It was filmed in Hollywood. I think they used the same stage they used to film the moon landing. Or maybe they filmed the soldiers and added the opium fields with a blue or green screen. Hard to say. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 You guys have Google, right? Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Can we talk about the prosecutor in the Tamir Race case for some reason forgetting what his job title was and explicitly attempting NOT to have the officer(s) tried? My lawyer friends are almost as pissed as everyone else just about that. Link to post Share on other sites
mrdannyg 274 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 You guys have Google, right? I do! Sweet, didn't realize that's all I needed. Ok I googled "US military protecting opium fields in Afghanistan". Ok, 476000 results. Guess I'll get back to you when I'm done reading. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 I do! Sweet, didn't realize that's all I needed. Ok I googled "US military protecting opium fields in Afghanistan". Ok, 476000 results. Guess I'll get back to you when I'm done reading. I guess you don't read books either, cuz, like, there's so many. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now