Posts by Charles Ramos7

Some good news at last! 👍
If things were looking this bright in other sectors of the economy, we’d be living in a golden age. ☕

You don't buy oil with gold—that’s just not practical. But if you want gold, you can certainly use the cash you get from selling oil to go out and grab some.
The Arabs don't necessarily need to buy Toyotas, but they have plenty of needs that they cover using the cash generated from their oil sales.
If I'm following you correctly, you're suggesting people just sell resources and pile up cash, which isn't really how it works. After all, was Dubai built by just stacking paper, or was it built by using that oil money to actually invest? It's the same with Gaddafi; he wasn't just hoarding colored paper, he was using it to buy stakes in banks that print the money.

Maria Thomas48 said:The difference is that whoever issues the colored paper basically controls the economies using it. I think we all pretty much know that by now. It’s just that back home, brilliant professors teach economics students all about the perks of using a foreign currency, but they conveniently forget to mention that it’s a given that the money supply has to increase, and that it isn't unnatural that you have to export something to account for that increase. This logic implies that the entire planet would need to be exporting things to aliens just to grow the money supply. The alternative to exporting is endless debt and bankruptcy, because while some people are exporting, others simply can't.

I honestly can't wrap my head around this weird idea that increasing the money supply requires exporting. Even the brightest Nobel laureates in economics wouldn't get it, because it's obvious that exporting has all the hallmarks of money printing, just with a wasteful drain on resources. Imagine if they just printed those bills themselves and handed them out to their own people to build stuff within the country. The effect would be much larger. The only difference is that foreign money triggers spending abroad and causes capital to flow out.

Do you ever stop to wonder where Americans get so many dollars to buy up all that Arab oil? And why does it matter so much that oil is bought with dollars?

Sorry, you wrote a lot but didn't actually say anything. What's the difference?

100 barrels of oil = Toyota
100 barrels of oil = some colorful paper = Toyota

In both scenarios, I just see 100 barrels of oil at the start and a Toyota at the end. 🤷

Maria Thomas48 said:Kulić and the saint aren't interested in telling the actual truth or offering real solutions. From what I can see, the saint has finally stopped peddling false hope in his statements. I actually reached out to both economists, but they won't bother refuting my points with any real arguments. So, I guess it's just a case of "the dogs bark while the caravan moves on." We're all waiting for something, though I'm not sure what. Maybe WW3.

According to reports on hidden news sites, the whole reason behind the rebellion and war in Libya was Gaddafi trying to gain independence by demanding oil be paid for in his own currency. It brings up that exact question: Why did the Arabs agree to sell oil for nothing more than colored paper? That's the core of it—when people aren't informed about the things they absolutely need to know, it leads to manipulation, coups, counter-revolution, turning a nation into a banana republic, and having all its resources seized.

Because of that, being well-informed is really the only thing that will allow us to succeed. There are counter-revolutionaries everywhere you look, while the general public has no clue where this is all heading. In Libya, people were even welcoming the French as liberators—kind of like a joke about a worm in the mud and a bird. It’s similar here; our people think the EU is the answer to everything, when the reality is quite the opposite. The EU just brings more problems rather than solutions.

Regarding Facebook, I'm not exactly thrilled about the idea of all our activity happening on a server owned by an American company. On top of that, there are so many wrong spins being pushed—stuff about government waste, bad investments, tax rates being too high or too low, privatization, and so on—that it dilutes the issues so much that it's impossible for a few individuals to educate the majority. Every single TV news program is just a source for a mountain of lies and half-truths that are hard to believe. Who is ever going to be held accountable for all that disinformation and lying?

This pre-election campaign is a real chance to solidify a front against debt slavery and being beholden to money as a debt. I really hope we can make it happen.

If the Arabs sell their oil for colored paper and then use that paper to buy groceries or a car, I don't see the big deal. 😕 If someone trades a certain amount of oil and gets a certain number of Toyotas in return, does it really matter if they used paper money, colorful pebbles, or just traded goods for goods?

Why not just head down to the grocery store and pick up some bread and milk directly with that card? 🤷

Maria Thomas48 said:Regarding that article, "The Department of the Treasury is in the red, and procrastination isn't an option anymore," there are warnings and suggestions coming straight from the HUB. Up until recently, Governor Roha was the one handling this stuff, but it seems he isn't being quite as compliant lately, so the HUB had to step in and handle the lecture directly.

And what does any of this have to do with banking? It has everything to do with it. Seriously. Handing out money solely as debt—specifically through bank loans—is exactly what triggered the crisis here in America back in 1994. Now, bankers are going to claim that some other method will pull us out of this mess (savings, certain Administration measures, whatever). It’s just a magician's trick. They divert your attention to one thing while the real action is happening somewhere else entirely.

I honestly don't know how much longer the public is going to fall for these little magic tricks from the HUB, but it's getting old. They would be better off just keeping their heads down and praying people haven't caught on. Because once they do, there won't be anything left of those bankers.

So, you're saying what The Administration is doing is actually right? 🤔

Sandra Williams70 said:Can I book a flight in my own name using someone else's Mastercard? The last name and address match perfectly.

And what happens if the card gets stolen? If there's no PIN required, does that mean anyone can just use it without any issues?

It really depends on the airline. Some companies state on their website that the cardholder needs to show up at check-in, though I've personally never been asked for it. Others give you the choice to verify yourself with either a passport or the physical card, and some don't care at all...

Yeah, you can.

Matthew Evans7 said:Banks create value, so it’s actually a win that they were sold off and the profits are heading out of the States. I mean, interest rates here are four times higher than what those same banks charge back in their home countries... it's totally business as usual. 🙂

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should kill someone. Same goes for banks here—they pull criminal stunts just because they think they can get away with it..

Does the company you work for sell products with razor-thin margins where everyone gets tiny paychecks and the owner sees zero profit? Or do you guys charge whatever you can get away with?

I've got a PHP booking form on my site that sends all the details straight to my email. Is there any way to link those incoming entries to Excel so they automatically list out and sort themselves chronologically?

I’ve been pretty happy with my setup at Chase. They give you a free checking account, most cards are included except for the Diners Club one, and you get the prime rate on purchases if you don't pay them off right away. I'm not entirely sure how they handle overdrafts, though...🤷

Are you sure you actually need a checking account? You aren't even running a deficit right now.

btw. at Chase, opening and maintaining a checking account is free for individuals.

silverfox91 said:Who actually told him? Someone over the phone? How does he know it wasn't just a friend or a brother reaching out? How can he be sure it wasn't a gift? Who gave him that info and how?
Maybe she didn't pull the cash from her pocket, but let's face it, most people only have digital numbers in their bank accounts anyway. It's all just digits on a screen.
How can you be so sure she didn't tell him, "Here, take this"? Is there a recording of the conversation somewhere?

Right, because banks exist solely to distribute gifts, and it's just wild that this guy doesn't realize it was a present. What a joke. 🤦

silverfox91 said:Drop the milk act? What am I supposed to do, start turning down gifts? To me, that's a gift. If she gives me $1000 instead of $100, then she (the teller) messed up and she’s the one who needs to fix it. If she gave me too much, that's her problem. It's the same as if she handed me ten cartons of milk when I only wanted one. She told me, "Take the milk," so I took it. Let the bank or the store deal with her. In almost every other industry, people who screw up have to own it. But in these sacred banks, nobody is responsible except always their customers. Nobody asks if the teller is doing okay; they just harass an innocent person.

If I had done this through online banking, I’d be singing a battle hymn because I’d be the one who screwed up. My problem. But if someone hands you a gift on the street, you take it. Doesn't matter if it's a candy bar or a car. Why should someone come sniffing around two days later asking for that candy back? They gave it to me.

You tell me to drop the milk thing, but you aren't even addressing the point. Ten cartons of milk is $17 and a significant amount of money to some. Why is that any different from these $1000 which don't mean much to me?

What about those groups that go out on the streets handing out Christmas money? Are they supposed to give it all back two days later once someone realizes they actually needed the cash?

I love how lawyers think they're the only holy, honest people left while everyone else is an idiot. We all know there aren't many people more dishonest or crooked than lawyers. Just turn on the TV at any hour.

Frank Walker7, remember that crew in Indianapolis with RBC? Remember how the teller and the outsiders did exactly that, and look what happened... the teller had to pay it all back along with those two outsiders. And she ended up in a jam because she wasn't just accidentally underpaying—she was stealing from people's accounts. She wasn't just transferring 10 million because someone told her to; she was looting accounts. It's just like that situation in Seattle or that guy... or that other guy...

That isn't a gift; it's just a blunder, or as you put it in your next sentence, a mistake.
This is a unique situation because of that repossession, but it could have been handled with a simple agreement to keep things civil without escalating the tension.
I remember once I didn't receive my PIN (maybe the mailman missed it, or someone swiped it...🤷), and they tried to charge me for a replacement. I told them there was no way I was paying for a reissue when I never got the first one. Since I only needed the PIN for one specific card, and we both knew that, we reached a gentleman's agreement: they’d send the one I actually needed for free, and I wouldn't worry about the other one.
There's always a way to fix things, but being stubborn doesn't help anyone.

Nicole Long28 said:Wait, hold on. So because of her own little clerical error, this teller was snooping through your account, looking at your private data, hunting for your phone number just so she could harass you, and lecturing you about updating your mobile info? That is priceless. 🙏 She should probably be careful, though, because accessing client data without authorization is a massive violation.

Why didn't she just contact you through official channels—like a certified letter from a lawyer or something legitimate? Instead, she's hiding behind her job title and making calls, even though the bank itself doesn't care who actually ends up covering the loss.

If we really want to stretch the definition, it's more like unjust enrichment rather than evasion. 🙂

Well, that's what the article claims...🤷 Either way, the money needs to be paid back.

Chris Doyle4 said:Look, I’m not saying I don't have some skin in the game here, but people are seriously overcomplicating this whole mess. Things just happened the way they happened—I know I owed money, and believe me, it was my intention to pay it back, just not through this kind of forced, totally unexpected nonsense.
I’m not some criminal or anything, but I’ve landed myself in this massive moral dilemma purely because of how incredibly arrogant this bank teller was being toward me. Like, what do they think? That I’m just going to roll over and run to hand over cash just because she’s being rude—even though she’s the one who dug herself into this hole in the first place?

Here’s the quick rundown—as usual, my personal banker called me this morning, acting completely condescending and bossing me around like she's some high-powered CEO, demanding I show up at the branch ASAP. (She even had the nerve to snap at me about why I wasn't using my old phone number, despite the fact that I literally just updated my mobile info with the bank recently. Makes sense, right?
So, I head down to the bank intending to sign the paperwork, and then the absolute audacity kicks in. She launches into this verbal attack on me—exactly what I was bracing for. The second I brought up a few conditions—like, hey, who’s reimbursing my gas for this trip since this isn't even my fault, or suggesting they just pull the funds from the account once they're there (which they can't do without my signature 😁)—she basically told me she couldn't care less. She claimed it was my personal responsibility to settle things with the victimized party. Seriously, wtf? Am I the bad guy now???
If she hadn't been such a total jerk, I would have signed everything on the spot, just like I originally planned.
The idea of paying them in installments is a complete joke. She’s insisting on an automatic sweep of the entire negative balance, which would just push me into an unauthorized overdraft, freeze my account, and trigger God knows what kind of predatory interest rates. And get this—on top of all that, I’m getting hit with an extra fee just for them to move the money around.
The woman wouldn't even tell me what the penalties are if I don't sign or agree to her terms, which is just beyond unprofessional. Honestly, instead of treating me with a little decency—since they're the ones who screwed this up—they're trying to use reverse psychology and intimidation tactics to bully me. It’s obvious they know they're totally in the wrong.

So, I pulled a class act, told her I’d get back to her once I’d had time to think, and made it clear that if I do come back to sign, it’ll be on my own terms. She just shut up, visibly fuming.
But the thing is, I genuinely have no clue what the fallout will be if I don't sign, because she flat-out refused to answer that question.

I’m speechless!

How do you not know what's coming? Don't you read the news?😲 You're looking at potential criminal prosecution for tax evasion. ☕

http://www.nytimes.com/news/tax-evasion-investigation/

Chris Doyle4 said:Citibank—I've had nothing but bad experiences with them, especially their staff. They are incredibly arrogant, totally incompetent, and their personal bankers are useless.
So, can I just play dumb and start ignoring their calls? Do they even have any legal leg to stand on to sue me?

Am I legally obligated to pay this back, and does the bank actually have the right to shut down my account?

I saw a story on a news site recently about a similar situation where someone got an accidental deposit and refused to return it. They ended up filing charges against him—I think it was classified as fraud or theft (or at least that's how the article framed it). Bottom line: you really should pay it back.

Sure 🙏

I was actually just thinking about whether this is even worth it. You can usually just pick up tech on a few interest-free installments anyway, so... 🤔

They don't look at what you buy individually; they focus on your total balance or debt. But yeah, if you only spend $50 in a single month (assuming you aren't starting with any existing debt), that full amount will be due for that period. To make it easier to visualize, if you spent a total of $333 in the first month, your payment would be $50 (leaving a balance of $283). If you spend another $333 the following month, your payment would be $62 (which is 850 + $333 in remaining debt). By the third month, if you spend $1000, your payment would hit $156 (3000 + $555 in debt), and so on...

You don't need to explain anything to anyone.

The Raiffeisen Mastercard is a true credit card through and through. You’re only required to cover the minimum monthly payment—which is 10% of your total balance (at least $50)—and anything extra you decide to pay is entirely up to you.

wiredviper19 said:Since I can't get my hands on a Diners or an American Express right now, I'm looking into Mastercard and Visa options instead.

Is it even possible to pay in installments with those cards? That’s basically my top priority at the moment...
From what I've read online, they're mostly just deferred payment cards, and if someone actually offers installment plans, they basically turn into revolving credit cards, if I'm understanding this right.
If anyone here has actually dealt with this, please let me know...

I also noticed in some online shops that the specific bank matters a ton. Like, some places offer installments if you're using a Visa from Zions Bank, but if it's a Zaba card, you have to pay the whole thing upfront—probably because of their specific contracts or whatever.

Are you talking about revolving credit lines, or specifically about paying in installments at stores that have an agreement with the card processor?🤷

By the way, getting approved isn't just about your income; having a high salary doesn't mean you'll get one by default.