Archive for the ‘corporate criminals’ Category

Those motherfuckers at Wells Fargo are either incompetent, or thieves. Either way, they don’t deserve your business.

In this particular bit of thievery, they stole thousands of people’s cars and charged hundreds of thousands more customers for auto insurance they didn’t need. They claim it was incompetence on their part. But I got this to say: that’s a damn convenient line to spew. My bet is that they’re a buncha fucking crooks.

But hey, it doesn’t matter in the end. Incompetent assholes? Crooks? Whatevs. If you bank there, don’t. If your business banks there, don’t. There’s other banks, and while Bank of America is just as venal and Chase is just as incompetent, you don’t have to use the Too Big To Fail banks. Just sayin’.

– Badtux the Credit-union-usin’ Penguin

Read Full Post »

And they kicked a blind woman and her guide dog off a plane because they didn’t want to re-seat her to someplace where her dog could sit on the floor in front of her. Despite the fact that the Americans with Disabilities Act says they have to accomodate her and re-seat her if a seat can be found.

But they’re American Airlines, which has a long history of violating the law regarding service dogs. They regularly harass and bully people and claim impunity. They have even continued this conduct after signing a consent decree saying they wouldn’t do it anymore.

This is, of course, a blatant violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, but they don’t care about the law, because they don’t have to — a federal government that is 100% owned by big corporations is refusing to enforce the law against said big corporations.

So in short, American Airlines is a criminal enterprise that refuses to obey the law, and the government refuses to enforce the law against it. That’s the sort of situation that leads to massive lawsuits or, if lawsuits have been barred by law, eventually leads to violent revolution. And violent revolution never ends up well for the country that does it. I can’t remember one that turned out well, whether it was the Russian Revolution that put the Communists in charge, or the Egyptian Revolution that put the Islamists then the Army in charge, all that happens is that the most violent win and then impose their will upon the rest of the people at gunpoint.

— Badtux the “These people are criminals” Penguin

Read Full Post »

Ro Khanna has received more money from Wall Street than any other House candidate in the United States.

Yes, the candidate claiming to be an “honest government” candidate has taken more money from the corrupt Wall Street establishment that bought laws that allowed them to crash the economy in 2008, then escape all consequences while getting billions in taxpayer bailouts for their corruption, than any other candidate in the entire United States of America. Even more than the New York City candidates who you would think would be the focus of Wall Street money.

This is why I can’t vote for Ro Khanna. He is a Republican Lite in the pay of the sleazy Wall Street types who crashed our economy in 2008 and then got paid to bail themselves out. I think Mike Honda has overstayed in the House, he is no longer capable and needs to designate a successor with similar ideals, but Ro Khanna is a dishonest sleazebag who has repeatedly made promises that he knows he can’t keep (because U.S. Representatives don’t have the power to fulfill promises such as “institute coding classes in all schools”) and Ro has repeatedly smeared a man who has served honorably in the House for almost as long as this sleaze has been alive. There are ways to run against an elderly man who served honorably in his day but is no longer capable. Dishonorable smear jobs and ugliness are not among them, and are what offends me most about Ro’s campaigns.

In short: Ro is *not* a suitable replacement for Mike Honda. Ro Khanna is part of the problem with our economy and our government (that is, pay for play politics), not part of the solution.

– Badtux the Santa Clara Penguin
Note: Yes, the San Jose Murky News endorsed Ro. They’ve never met a “pro business” (i.e., corrupt pay-for-play) candidate that they didn’t like. And your point?

Read Full Post »

Wells Fargo is in trouble for illegally repossessing hundreds of cars from active duty military service members. Because Too Big To Fail is also Too Big To Prosecute.

Solution: Break up the banks. Again.

Again, you say? Yep. Prior to 1864, all banks were state-chartered banks that were only allowed to operate in a single state. In 1864, the National Banking Act of 1864 established national banks chartered by the Federal Government. Until 1927, they were required to operate within a single building. In 1927, the McFadden Act not only extended the Federal Reserve into perpetuity, but also gave national banks the right to open branches within the state within which they were chartered, to the extent allowed by their state’s laws. They were still, however, not allowed to operate outside the state in which they were chartered.

The net result is that until 1994, a bank could only fuck up the state it was operating in — it couldn’t fuck up other states. Needless to say, as banks in New York and San Francisco got larger and more powerful, this pissed them off. The first thing they tried to do was create bank holding companies that would own banks in multiple states. The Bank Holding Act of 1956 put these holding companies under the regulation of the Federal Reserve and forced them to divest non-bank enterprises such as other financial corporations, but the net effect was that you had interstate banking of a sorts. Bank A in state A was technically not the same bank as Bank B in state B, but they were both owned by the same holding company so could cooperate to do interstate banking for the large corporations that were spreading across America. The next thing that happened was when San Francisco based Bank of America (which has nothing to do with the current Bank of America, which is a descendant of Charlotte North Carolina based Nations Bank) created the first credit card (as versus charge card) in 1966: Bank Americard.

The problem with Bank Americard was that it could only be used in California, because that was the only place that Bank of America was chartered to operate. That is why the modern credit card clearing house system was created — banks in other states were given the right to issue Bank Americard credit cards too, and then a processing network was set up to handle the inter-bank transfers to get the money from customer account at bank A in state X to the merchant account at bank B in state Y. A couple of years later, banks feeling left out or that didn’t like Bank of America’s terms for licensing the Bank Americard name and access created the Mastercard network which operated the same way, except with no single bank dominating it like Bank of America dominated BankAmericard, something which eventually resulted in Bank of America losing control of its network, which became rebranded as Visa.

Finally, during Ronnie Raygun’s regime, we saw massive deregulation of the savings & loan industry that caused the collapse of both that industry and of many commercial banks. This caused the collapse of roughly 2,000 banks, resulting in a massive buy-out of the collapsed banks in many states by these bank holding companies and thus de facto interstate banking. In 1994, Democrats wrote and passed the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 which removed all restrictions on interstate banking, and President Bill Clinton both praised it and signed it.

The result? The number of banks drastically declined from 12303 in 1990 to 7752 in 2003. And to 5210 as of the second quarter of 2016. Furthermore, Federal Reserve regulations intended to make sure that banks are properly capitalized have had the practical effect of making it impossible to form new banks (note — because this is a Federal Reserve paper it doesn’t blame the Fed, but yes, it was the Fed). The end game is five banks owning half the banking industry. And as with all oligopoly industries, these banks copy each other’s efforts to improve their profits more than they compete for customers, and feel free to rip off customers because they feel customers have no real alternative. Well, except for credit unions, which is why the big banks are attacking credit unions and trying to get them banned.

The only realistic option: break up the banks by outlawing interstate branching again. Banks would be required to spin off as separate non-owned entities all branches, deposits, and assets in states other than the state in which they are chartered, and bank holding companies would face the same restriction — they would only be allowed to operate in one state. Furthermore, bank holding companies and banks would not be allowed to own non-bank businesses. Any insurance, securities, stock brokerage, etc. that they do would have to be spun off as independent companies.

So, some of the objections I’ve heard:

  1. “What about ATM’s?” Yeah, what about them? My credit union is not allowed to operate beyond my county. Yet I can still walk up to nearly 30,000 ATM’s nationwide and 5,000 credit union branches nationwide and do fee-free banking. Why? Because they’ve formed a cooperative network to reciprocally handle each other’s transactions. Banks can form cooperative networks just as easily as credit unions can — and in fact, have done so for ATM’s.
  2. What if you’re in another state and need to do business? Well, just as with the CO-OP network, if a bank is not allowed to do business in state B, that doesn’t prohibit the bank from forming a reciprocal agreement with a bank in state B to handle each other’s transactions. Nothing stops them from forming a cooperative network like the CO-OP network.
  3. But… I’m a multinational corporation, how do I issue checks?! Uhm, just like now — your HR department prints them out drawn on your bank of choice wherever it is located and hands them out, or does a direct deposit via the inter-bank transfer network.
  4. But… I’m a retail chain with stores in every state, how do I do my banking?! Well gosh, sucks to be you, Walmart! I guess you’d have to open deposit accounts with local community banks, and wire the money from the previous night’s deposits every morning to the Mothership. My heart bleeds, bleeds I say, for you having to deal with a locally owned business like the ones you previously drove out of business.

In fact, the biggest argument I can see is that this will tend to concentrate money in banks in major financial cities, meaning it won’t be available for lending to businesses in smaller states. If Bank of America in Charlotte has $5B on deposit from IBM, the Bank of America branch in Abbeville, Louisiana can lend some of it out so that Boudreaux can buy a new pirogue. On the other hand, there’s nothing to stop the Bank of Abbeville from borrowing money for Boudreaux’s pirogue by selling the loan to Bank of America. This happens all the time with mortgage loans — smaller lenders / loan sourcers regularly sell their loans to larger institutions that have a surplus of cash and a shortage of customers willing to borrow it. The banking industry would just need to go back to their roots again, back to the days when it was normal for big Wall Street banks to buy loans from smaller community banks.

— Badtux the Banking Penguin

Read Full Post »

Donald Trump stole at least $285,000 from his own charity in order to pay off personal legal obligations.

In case you’re wondering — yeah, that’s illegal.

But I guess IOKIYR.

– Badtux the Eye-rollin’ Penguin

Read Full Post »

16,800 calls to police in the Tampa Bay area from one location in one year. That location: WalMart. The people paying for those calls: Not Walmart.

Essentially you and I are being taxed to provide private security to Walmart on the public dime. Rather than hire private security guards like the mall down the street (which is much larger yet has many fewer calls), Walmart instead calls the police for everything — including minor shoplifting incidents like someone drinking a 12 oz drink without paying for it that, at the mall down the street, would get you taken to the back room at the mall and forced to sign a compensation contract upon penalty of arrest if you don’t. (Been there, seen it, the kid was scared to death and his momma was irate that he cost her $100 in penalties to get the charges dropped just because he wanted to drink a soda he didn’t have the money to buy).

But Walmart doesn’t do that. Rather than have their own private security force use civil remedies where possible, like every other major shopping chain, Walmart calls the police instead. Every. Single. Time. If they were an apartment in the Bronx, they’d be boarded up as an attractive nuisance. But because they’re Walmart, they act as if they’re entitled to have the local cops be their unpaid private security. And it’s not because Florida law makes it illegal for them to detain shoplifters. In fact, Florida law gives shopkeepers almost total immunity from civil and criminal prosecution for detaining shoplifters. They don’t even need probable cause under Florida law to detain a suspected shoplifter. All they need is reasonable suspicion, and they can detain shoplifters for hours before calling the cops — hours that, for most shoplifters, could be used to pursue civil remedies such as signing a contract banning the shoplifter from the store forever, and calling relatives to bring in money to compensate the store both for the merchandise and for the security costs of handling the shoplifting incident, costs that can easily mount into the hundreds of dollars and which it is perfectly legal for the store to demand in exchange for not calling the cops.

But that would require Walmart to act like a responsible corporate citizen rather than like leeches at the public trough. Deadbeats. Welfare whores to beat all welfare whores. That’s Walmart.

– Badtux the Pissed Penguin

Read Full Post »

FactCheck.org tries to dishonestly spin Bernie’s accurate numbers about Federal tax receipts and where they’re coming from.


The chart needs little explanation, but I’m going to provide it anyhow. Bernie noted that corporate income taxes declined from 30.5% of Federal revenue in 1953, to 10.6% of Federal revenue today, and FactCheck.org then sputtered, “but… but… PAYROLL TAXES!”

Yes, and? The numbers clearly show taxes being shifted from corporate income taxes and excise taxes (which similarly declined from 14.2% of Federal revenue to 3% today) to payroll taxes, of which 50% are paid by individuals and 50% are paid by companies. Even if you add the 50% of payroll taxes paid by companies back into the “company” pile, that’s *still* 28% paid by companies today vs 44.7% in 1953. And who is paying the rest of what companies paid in 1953? Look in the mirror… your taxes are 63.8% of federal revenue today, versus 47.7% of federal revenues in 1953. In 1953, taxes were almost a 50-50 split between paid by individuals and paid by corporations. Today… not so much.

In short, you and I, individual Americans, are paying roughly 16% more of Federal tax collections as a percentage of revenues today than we paid in 1953. Bernie is right, we’re getting fucked. And shame on FactCheck.org on trying to spin that unspinnable reality to make it seem less so.

– Badtux the Numbers Penguin

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »