Posts by Raymond Palmer3

Jerry Ruiz36 said:Did you seriously just skip over the terms and conditions you agreed to when you signed up?

I did.

Leave Garfield alone! 🧐

Who’s touching him? I’m taking this straight to the mods.

Banderas and the gang, I’m asking one last time: Are you actually going to punish Alexander Thompson for that massive insult he leveled at me—and, apparently, another 100,000 people?

I’ll give you three days.

Small hint: my mental anguish is growing by the minute...

Robin Rodriguez5 said:I don't know if you were even paying attention, but the Anti-Euro Association actually started right here on this Forum, specifically in the Economics thread, back when the moderators were people like bilokoje and myself. I was actually out there providing guidance and links on how to draft the Association's first bylaws—I fully supported that kind of grassroots organizing and legal collective action, even if I didn't personally agree with the debtors. Back then, you didn't even know what the Anti-Euro Association was, and you probably hadn't even heard of this Forum.

Oh, give me a break...
So, what happened to you that you can just sit there stone-faced while all the members of the Association are getting wiped out?
Did you get a memo from headquarters or something?

Given the circumstances, your threats to push for any kind of action against the Forum would be a total oxymoron, but hey, that's your call.

We'll see about that. If they won't do it, someone else will.
You're digging your heels in and refusing to give Alexander Thompson what he's owed.
Don't pin this on me.

Before you got that 500-point penalty, a mountain of your posts went unpunished—posts that were way below the level of basic civilization and culture.
I stand by every single penalty I've handed out. Honestly, you really need to change your tone and stop being insulting, otherwise, you aren't going to be able to post here much longer. Man, you're getting flagged (not by me) even when you're reporting unfair penalties.

You're exaggerating—way too much. Some of my posts were only triggered because "the other side" wasn't getting flagged when they clearly should have been. There’s been a massive amount of dissatisfaction for a long time now—not just from me—regarding the double standards applied to everyone in this thread. You moderators, especially you, haven't shown even the slightest desire to fix it; if anything, you've made it worse.
It's the same story now: Alexander Thompson is going to slide by easily even though he insulted 100k people. Don't act like you don't know what's going on. How about trying some equal treatment for once? Like bilokoje (glad you brought her up) used to do. Just so we're clear, I've been following this thread from the start, even if I only recently joined the site. And I've been a member of the Association since day one, so you've just managed to spout two more huge lies.
Change my style? You think I write just to please you?
I hear you loud and clear, Comrade Stalin! 😁

Alexander Thompson said:Maybe it’s high time we cleared out these activists who treat this Forum like their party's personal propaganda machine—you know, the ones who think they have the right to lecture anyone just because someone drew a mustache on the President?

What "drawing mustaches"? I'm talking about supporting people who break the law. Hello? Is anyone even home???

People like that need to be kicked off here and off the streets.

Robin Rodriguez5 said:Chill out—nobody besides you actually said anyone was small-minded; that’s just something you made up.

They didn't say it directly, they said it indirectly. And yeah, it's my interpretation—but I laid out the logic in my opening post. The real issue here is that you don't care about arguments unless they line up perfectly with what you already believe. To you, "objectivity" is clearly just a theoretical concept, to put it mildly.

And no, calling for someone to lose their business capacity isn't quite the same thing as calling a banker a bottom-feeder.

We can agree on that much. Calling a banker a bottom-feeder isn't exactly a "heavy insult," let alone worth a 500-point penalty (???)—it's more of a condescending jab that's a far cry from labeling someone "small-minded."

Just a reminder: you've called for bankers to be thrown in jail countless times. I think you've said plenty of things along those lines yourself.

Yeah, so? That’s my opinion, considering the fallout caused by greedy bankers who were allowed to run wild (and still do) at the expense of countless American citizens. You clearly have no clue how much damage their products caused when they weren't supposed to be on the market in the first place. So many families went broke because of their greed. Besides, in Iceland, those bankers actually ended up behind bars. Iceland moved forward, but where are we?
Are we just not allowed to criticize bankers here? What is this, a banking forum? If it is, please let us know so we can pack up and leave.
Look, I stand by the idea that anyone breaking the law should face the consequences. You disagree? Please, tell me. If you actually think otherwise, then sorry, but you're a danger to society and the country.

You've never even been flagged for something like that.

How can you sit there and spout such blatant lies?

This "business capability" nonsense from Alexander Thompson is on the same level as you trying to throw bankers in jail.

That says everything I need to know about you. You're clearly just defending bankers—defending people who broke the law and are still trying to do it. And what do we call people who defend lawbreakers? How does a rule-of-law nation deal with them?

Neither one of you got a warning for posts like that—though honestly, I’d prefer if we just didn't have those kinds of posts at all, regardless of which side they're coming from.

That's not true—I got penalized while he didn't. The standards here are totally inconsistent.

As for a permanent ban for Alexander Thompson, he definitely hasn't earned it yet. He's picked up quite a few warnings so far—three, including one from me. He's been banned before, too, but in my opinion, it's not enough for a permanent ban just yet. We'll see how things play out down the road.

So, in your book, he’s never going to get a permanent ban? Not even when he's blatantly insulting a huge chunk of America?

And please, enlighten me—what exactly does that legendary "change your writing style" line mean?
What kind of writing style am I supposed to adopt to satisfy you? Should I be writing little poems about how wonderful and lovely everyone who breaks the law is? Maybe write like Alexander Thompson? And where, exactly, in the site rules can I find an instruction regarding "writing style"?

If this torture and the insults from certain users—and the fact that you moderators just tolerate it—doesn't stop, I'm reaching out to the Anti-Euro Association. I'll have their legal team step in to shut down this defamation and the public shaming of members. It seems someone needs a good reminder that while this Forum might be someone's private playground, the space it operates in certainly isn't.

Raymond Palmer3 said:Is anyone actually home? Mods, super-mods, mega-ultra-turbo mods... anybody there? I guess calling over a hundred thousand Americans idiots isn't a big deal to you people.
Just when I thought economic moderation couldn't get any worse, you guys go out of your way to prove me wrong...

Also, I’d love an explanation as to why the phrase "banking leech" is considered such a heinous insult that it warrants a week-long ban and a whopping 500 penalty points.

Anyone actually home? Hey, moderators, super-mods, mega-ultra-turbo mods... anyone there? Is it really okay with you guys to just label over ten thousand American citizens as idiots?
Just when I thought the economic leadership couldn't possibly get any worse, you guys go out of your way to prove me wrong....

Alexander Thompson said:Maybe we should try using those methods too? Like, you know, having an actual civilized discussion—if that’s even a thing anymore. 😵

I've already served my time for that... Unlike you, I seem to get flagged for every little thing...

Regarding this post by Garofeed:

Look, in his final sentence, this guy basically implies that over 100,000 grown adults—people stuck with those predatory Swiss franc loans—lack any kind of legal capacity. Since that term is reserved for people dealing with severe mental illness or cognitive impairment, he’s essentially insulting a hundred thousand people. In my book, that’s a permanent ban.

If I got slapped with a week-long ban just for sharing an opinion based on his tone and a few posts, then Garofeed deserves about 700,000 weeks—or, let's be real, a permanent ban. Plus, he’s constantly poking the bear and being disrespectful when it comes to the Tea Party movement or general economic debates. He rarely brings actual arguments to the table and never engages in a civilized way, so I really don't think he belongs on this forum anymore.

Thanks, Raymond Palmer3

Robin Rodriguez5 said:Both of you need to stop trolling. These interest rates aren't predatory; the data in that link is seven years out of date. You’re basically having a philosophical debate about something that doesn't even exist anymore.

Let's not troll—let's actually stick to the topic. This discussion is top-tier—if only we had more like it on this forum. 😍

Quincy:

Interest rates aren't even predatory—honestly.

That's your opinion—feel free to let everyone else have their own.

Quincy:

Let’s have a little philosophical debate about something that doesn't even exist—just for kicks.

Oh yeah, it definitely exists. You seem to be having some real trouble with the term "philosophical" — honestly.

Alexander Thompson said:As far as blowing people off goes, the best move is usually just to blow off spending other people's money....

You need to go into the red? Seriously? No shit, Sherlock. Why should your "need" be anyone else's problem but yours? Where are you gonna find the cash? Honestly, who cares?

You ask your friends, you borrow from jars with zero interest and no deadline, just like I do with my friends.... Or they borrow from me, I guess....

And yeah, spending someone else's money on terms that suit you perfectly is definitely socialism... Luckily we moved past that, but feel free to keep spending the money of whatever idiot is willing to hand it over to you....

BTW, I defend everyone's right, including the bank's right, to handle their money however they damn well please... Whether they lend it to someone or not, or at whatever interest rate they want...

If I didn't defend that, I might wake up tomorrow expecting some jerk to expect $33 from me that they have no intention of paying back, even though they "need" it... Sure, you'll find jerks like that, but for now, the legal thing to do is just tell them to get lost...

I agree with that—but you’re clearly missing my point entirely. A retard would have caught on by now, so I'm done explaining.

So you have to go into debt? Seriously? No shit, Sherlock? Why should your "struggling" be anyone else's problem besides yours? Where are you going to get the cash? Who actually gives a damn?

I'm not talking about myself—I'm talking generally. I'm nowhere near being in the red. And I'm not saying it should be someone else's problem. It's just that banks rip you off way too much on interest rates. Inflation is at 0%, savings accounts are sitting at maybe 3%, and don't even get me started on those instant-access ones. Then you still have to pay taxes on that... meanwhile, if you're overdrawn, they hit you with 10%+.
Get it?

And yeah, spending other people's money under terms that suit you is socialism... Luckily we've moved past that, but you're out here spending money provided by some fool who's willing to hand it over....

Oh sure, America is such a happy place. 🙄
And apparently, spending other people's money at usurious rates is what we call capitalism.

"Quote:"

Alexander Thompson said:I honestly don't get where you're coming from... If the interest rate (which is clearly laid out before you sign anything, by the way) doesn't work for you, then don't take the money... You know, using someone else's cash... It's pretty basic stuff—even a retard could wrap their head around that.🤷

Just spend your own money and you won't owe anyone a damn thing...

And for the record, I have no idea why I'd bother asking for $3.25 fee waivers when having three of them works just fine for me...

If you’d actually read what I wrote, you'd see I wasn't talking about "taking" money—I was saying that sometimes, due to things totally out of anyone's control (like a death or a serious illness), people just have no choice but to dip into the red. Does a bank—which, by the way, is supposed to be serving its own client—really have to charge them 10%+ interest? They don't *have* to. Is that a fair way to treat a customer? Not at all. And yeah, that interest rate is pre-defined—thanks for breaking the news to me, Captain Obvious. But who exactly decided it should be that way?
What choice does the guy actually have? Switch banks? Please—they’re all the same flavor of predatory. Honestly, thanks to our government for making sure the big banks get everything they want while the rest of us just deal with the fallout.
If you don't charge at least 10% interest, you might as well be running a socialist commune—give me a break with this "socialism" nonsense. What’s next on your list of ridiculous arguments—bringing up the Civil War?

"Quote:"

Same here—honestly, I have no idea why I'd even bother looking. $3.25 Benefits—honestly, when having three of them works better for me...

So, I see you’re out here playing defense attorney for the banks—acting like they aren't absolutely fleecing everyone. If you're going to defend them, maybe start by looking in the mirror first. 😵

Alexander Thompson said:Exactly... so anyone who messes up with other people's money and then has to pay it back under pre-set terms is just solely to blame...

But hey, you've got a pretty fantastic antidote to my "selfish" way of thinking... Just lend money to whoever you want at minimum, or even negative, interest rates... Give them 100 bucks, but if they were in a bind, maybe they only give you 80 back... The only catch is, don't do it with my money. I'm not handing mine over, and frankly, I couldn't care less about their situation. ☕....

Lending money without interest is basically like socialism... It works great right up until people start blowing through someone else's cash...

I'm not talking about interest-free loans, I'm talking about predatory interest rates... But clearly, that concept is flying way over your head.....
If they're only charging you two or three bucks for account maintenance, then by all means—go down to Chase and ask them to hike that fee up to ten dollars 😁

Alexander Thompson said:I mean, if diving headfirst into a negative balance when the terms are clearly stacked against you isn't considered reckless behavior, then I'm just lost. 🤷

By the current legal definition, usury is when an interest rate hits 8% above the maximum late fee cap—so we're looking at something like 18%... I mean, look, if you don't like it, you don't have to use them, right?

Personally, even 5% feels way too steep to me, which is why I usually try to steer clear of using anyone else's money altogether...

Sure, there's always that option where you blow through someone else's cash and then act totally blindsided when you actually have to pay it back based on the rules you agreed to upfront...

Wow, great logic there. So you're basically saying you have nothing against usury, because "if someone dives into debt, it's their own damn fault."
It’s like walking down a street with no sidewalks and getting hit by a car—you're blaming the kid for being out there when they knew there were no sidewalks. 😵
Besides, sometimes life just forces people into debt. A death in the family, for instance. And you'd actually want to congratulate the banks for making a bad situation even worse with an extra 10% interest "because they should have known better"...
Go ahead, keep rooting for the banks—maybe suggest they bump rates up to 20% since their profits are just so pitifully low...
It's attitudes like this—this worship of big "capital," greed, and predatory lending—that ensure this country stays trapped in a cycle of debt slavery.

Alexander Thompson said:Fair point... I mean, Chase probably charges next to nothing—like maybe two or three bucks a month—just to keep the account running...

Honestly, just tell them to kick rocks. Don't let them walk all over you...

If paying 10-14% interest on an overdraft isn't highway robbery, I don't know what is.🤔

Quorgyle said:http://www.chase.com/personal/checking-account-comparison

Bottom line—banks are all sharks.

driftingcrane83 said:Turns out I didn't end up at Wells Fargo after all. I went with Bank of America instead, and honestly, it was because of one incredibly stupid oversight—Wells Fargo doesn't offer a Visa Electron card for foreign currency 😵😵😵😵😵
. That means you can't even use it on PayPal. They only have this ridiculous prepaid card option.
Total amateurs.

Well, why didn't you just open a multi-currency transaction account? As far as I know, that covers both your USD and domestic accounts in one go.

silverhawk9 said:Honestly, does every single discussion have to end up blaming Swiss interests? At this rate, we might as well just hand them the keys to the city and build them a monument; it’s no wonder people are starting to develop such a strong aversion toward you all...

As for the banks, there really isn't much of an escape if you're shopping online. You could try using those prepaid vouchers, but then you're just getting hit with massive transaction fees. What's the actual alternative? No matter how you slice it, these predatory types are always looking out for themselves.

🤦 Where did this even come from?

driftingcrane83 said:Well, that's great news! I can pull cash from any branch, and I'm at the bank quite often for business. Bank of America wins.

True—having those post offices act like mini-branches is a huge plus. I bet the Treasury Department works similarly.
They were a total disaster about 5 or 6 years ago, but they've actually stepped up lately... across the board.

driftingcrane83 said:I'm thinking about moving my money over to Goldman Sachs. There isn't a single ATM in my neighborhood, and they have zero intention of installing one. It's pretty rude, honestly.
I've been looking into Bank of America, but I'm not sure if their mobile banking actually works well. Also, can you link their cards to PayPal?

They offer Visa cards, so yeah—they should work with PayPal just fine.