thumbs down from:
M A R S 
| reply to KoolMoe
Re: once great! Why do people get so upset about paying for the convenience of getting cash at the bar when they didn't get around to stopping at the Bank? You'll happily pay $1.79 a gallon for gas with half in taxes, but God forbid the buck and a half! |
|
|
|
 pcscdmaChocobo Chocobo Random BattlePremium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA | said by nedlohs:
Why do people get so upset about paying for the convenience of getting cash at the bar when they didn't get around to stopping at the Bank? You'll happily pay $1.79 a gallon for gas with half in taxes, but God forbid the buck and a half!
I can consume about two gallons of chocolate milk in the time that my 4-banger consumes a gallon of gasoline.
And the nearest chocolate milk is $2.75 a gallon last time I checked.
--
The smarter computers get, the more faith I put into Newton's 3rd law. |
|
 KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | reply to nedlohs
Because it's MY MONEY. I give the bank MY MONEY for safe keeping and a little (LITTLE) interest. In return, they get to use my money for their investments, which I guarantee makes a LOT more money for them than they are returning to me in interest.
To charge me a fee to take MY MONEY out of the bank is offensive. Banks are a necessary evil, unfortunately.
KM
--
"Bush got a little upset with a reporter for calling him 'sir' instead of Mr President. Man, how upset is he going to be after the election when they start calling him 'George' again."--Jay Leno, 4/6/04
Re-Defeat Bush! No One Died When Clinton Lied |
|
| Did you ever think that the bank has to pay a fee for ATM use? Who do you think really owns the ATM... the bank, or a corporation called TYME, PULSE, or something else of that nature? |
|
pcscdmaChocobo Chocobo Random BattlePremium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA | said by myrr_allinc:
Did you ever think that the bank has to pay a fee for ATM use? Who do you think really owns the ATM... the bank, or a corporation called TYME, PULSE, or something else of that nature?
Let's say 2 banks both offer no-fee ATMs if you use the cards that one of them issue. Now, prospective and existing customers flock to use the fee-free ATMs of each other. Instead of collecting fees from the other bank, the banks are effectively 'cancelling' out each other's fees. Now there is certainly the possibility that one bank will be used more, but there are more than two that offer it and the program is entirely voluntary for the financial institutions that use the Shazam ATM network.
Financial institution customers that use the Shazam network but are not part of the Privileged Status do not get the right to use fee-free service. They must pay $1.50 or whatever the ATM wants to charge (legal limit?). This may upset customers so it may help 'persuade' their respective financial institution to Join In™.
--
The smarter computers get, the more faith I put into Newton's 3rd law. |
|
| reply to nedlohs
If you were banking in the early seventies, when the first ATMs were put into service, you will recall that the ATM was introduced as a money SAVING measure.
ATMs were supposed to be cheaper than tellers, and much cheaper than branch banks.
So why do ATMs cost money to use, when the branch bank and the teller are free? |
|
pcscdmaChocobo Chocobo Random BattlePremium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA
1 edit | said by De Badd Ass:
If you were banking in the early seventies, when the first ATMs were put into service, you will recall that the ATM was introduced as a money SAVING measure.
It increases the bottom line of Citibank, Wells Fargo and Bank of India. They sure didn't want you to benefit from it silly.:p
--
The smarter computers get, the more faith I put into Newton's 3rd law. |
|
