Is Wells Fargo "a criminal enterprise"?

[Kevin McHugh]

I do have to stand corrected on statement I made. Since 2011 the FDIC has changed the assessment rates to reflect the relative risk of the institution. Now the minimums are about $3-4 per $100. And the problem remains the same, they are both underfunded.

 

[Kevin McHugh]

This is rapidly turning into "Banks are evil. This act is evil. Therefore banks committed this act."

V50, you are an intelligent person. When you examine the facts pertaining to the banking system, you can only draw one conclusion. The banks can engage in risky behavior with no consequence. If the FDIC is incapable of making good its liabilities, history has proven that the government (i.e. the people) will make good the difference. The banks have been continuously bailed out by the taxpayers since the inception of the FDIC.

The first time a government supported a bank in a time of failure was in 1696. There was run on the Bank of England which led to insolvency. The Parliament responded by making a law which suspended the "payment of specie". This means that depositors could not redeem their payments in gold (the standard of currency of the day). The precedent was set, and to this day there is an unholy alliance between govermnents and central banks that defies logic. Just because something is legal, does not make it right.

In the words of the Mayer Amschel Rothschild ( the original bankster), "Give me control over the issuance of a nation's currency, and I care not who makes its laws."

 

[Vanadium 50]

Kevin, I am afraid your argument is too slippery for me and you keep moving the goalposts. The fact that a bank commits some bad acts does not prove it commits other bad acts, just like the fact that a person is a thief does not allow you to hang him for murder. Fractional reserve banking, "too big to fail" and risky S&L loans in the 1980's have nothing to do with this particular Wells Fargo scandal.

 

[Kevin McHugh]

Kevin, I am afraid your argument is too slippery for me and you keep moving the goalposts. The fact that a bank commits some bad acts does not prove it commits other bad acts, just like the fact that a person is a thief does not allow you to hang him for murder. Fractional reserve banking, "too big to fail" and risky S&L loans in the 1980's have nothing to do with this particular Wells Fargo scandal.

Yes, of course you are right, FR banking has nothing to do with this scandal. Cheers.

 

[grahas]

I used to have a bank account with Wells Fargo 8 months ago. I was incredulous when they took $12 dollars out of my account for no reason. The story: I had transferred some money from savings to checking to buy an item (I can't remember exactly what it was, probably a game to play with some friends) I knew the exact cost of. When I bought the item (online purchase) for the exact amount Wells Fargo gave me an overcharging fee. When I tried to get my my money back because I clearly had not over charged but paid the exact amount the Wells Fargo rep would only give me six dollars back. I was thoroughly upset and resorted to keeping my money away from Wells Fargo. The worst part is that I was powerless to do anything about it. They took the money I had entrusted them with. I can't imagine I am the only one this has happened to.

 

[mheslep]

The WF CEO was sacked couple days ago.

 

[Vanadium 50]

But replaced by his right-hand man. Meet the new boss.

 

[Astronuc]

The bank stands to lose $99 billion in deposits, $4 billion in revenue and a customer base that could dwindle by up to 30 percent, a study released Monday by cg42 showed. Ultimately, about 14 percent of customers are actually projected to switch banks, an at-risk level that a cg42 principal still said is "dramatically higher" than what would be expected from any of Wells Fargo's competitors.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/wells-fargo-fallout-study-says-145943938.html