Price Caps On Swipe Fees Cost You Bank Bucks

By
May 21, 2013

Via Rob port, link below. The more Congress screws with our financial systems, the worse they get. Funny how that happens!

Three years ago Monday the Senate passed the Durbin Amendment to the Dodd-Frank Banking Bill which sought to make the retail experience for Americans cheaper by capping the fees for debit and credit card swipes. Essentially, the federal government told the banks they were charging too much, and cut the price in half for them from the $0.44 industry average to $0.24.

via Say Anything Price Caps On Swipe Fees Making Your Banking More Expensive 



AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
Comments:
  1. Ragspierre says:

    Collectivists are economic idiots.

    (See the period?)

    • Arthur Laffer says:

      LOL! Totally!

      • Ragspierre says:

        Right? I mean, it’s like they don’t understand you can tax people to the point where the law of substitution kicks in!!!

        Oh, I forgot.

        This was a post by a suck-puppet, who is such a cowardly liar, it can’t post as itself.

        • Tex Detroit says:

          Haha, so says the “trial lawyer” who bravely posts under a made up name.

          • Ragspierre says:

            Hahaha, always…and for many years…the same name.

            I would not stoop to your lying cowardice.

  2. Tex Detroit says:

    How come I haven’t seen many stories here about Benghazi lately? When is the investigation into why GOP staffers doctored those damning WH emails?

  3. Tex Detroit says:

    How much did the car theif’s Benghazi witch hunt cost taxpayers? And how many jobs were created?

    Remember, “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs”? When do house Teabillies get to the “jobs” stuff? Or was that a hustle sold to your mouth-breathing base yet again?

    • Ragspierre says:

      See, there you go again with your farcical lies.

      But here…

      http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2013/05/21/pjm-exclusive-ex-diplomats-report-new-benghazi-whistleblowers-with-info-devastating-to-clinton-and-obama/

      Don’t you want to know the truth about Benghazi? I mean, all that could be bs, but you want to know.

      Right…???

      • Tex Detroit says:

        What “truth”?

        That four Americans were killed because GOPers slashed the security budget, and then attempted to use these deaths as a cynical political tool against the president they hate?

        And, the hearings HAVEN’T cost taxpayer money? Rather they have CREATED jobs? How many?

        • Ragspierre says:

          Lies…

          1. “That four Americans were killed because GOPers slashed the security budget”

          Not according to State Dept. testimony.

          2. “…then attempted to use these deaths as a cynical political tool against the president they hate.”

          Not according to testimony from the hearings.

          3. “…the hearings HAVEN’T cost taxpayer money?”

          That one is an implicit lie. Sure, fact-finding costs money. And here, that cost has been multiplied by the conduct of Pres. Side Show and Old Walleyes Clinton. It still has to be done.

          4. “Rather they have CREATED jobs?”

          Another implicit lie. The work has to be done. Coverups and scandals cannot be tolerated in our democracy.

          I understand you love these lies, and hate our democratic republic. We all see that.

          • Tex Detroit says:

            Haha. “Testimony”. Which testimony will forever remain a mystery because you can’t/won’t site it. Maybe by next Wednesday you’ll provide a link to PJ Media that contains no reference to actual source material, shit your pants, and declare victory. As usual.

            Was Jason Chaffetz lying when he admitted that GOPers cut embassy security?

            What specific conduct of the president and/or Hillary has multiplied the cost of the car thief’s hearings?

            And we’re still waiting for proof of your cover-up. Why are GOPers kind of getting quiet about that in Congress now?

  4. Tex Detroit says:

    “You didn’t read Kessler, did you, you lying moron?”

    Yeah. The emails weren’t doctored, because GOPers would be foolish to do it.

    From CBS news reporting on the emails: “On Friday, Republicans leaked what they said was a quote from Rhodes:’ We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation.’”

    Was that an accurate quote from Rhodes? No.
    Were the Republicans correct in saying it was? No.
    Did the Republicans leak it? Yes.

    How hard is that for you to understand? Whether or not the Republicans actually changed the wording themselves is irrelevant. They were citing bullshit to back their bogus claims. That’s called lying.

    • Ragspierre says:

      This is good.

      Readers will note how you TRY to move away from Kessler to cBS.

      They will wonder why you avoid the truth.

      “It has long been part of the Washington game for officials to discredit a news story by playing up errors in a relatively small part of it. Pfeiffer gives the impression that GOP operatives deliberately tried to “smear the president” with false, doctored e-mails.

      But the reporters involved have indicated they were told by their sources that these were summaries, taken from notes of e-mails that could not be kept. The fact that slightly different versions of the e-mails were reported by different journalists suggests there were different note-takers as well.

      Indeed, Republicans would have been foolish to seriously doctor e-mails that the White House at any moment could have released (and eventually did). Clearly, of course, Republicans would put their own spin on what the e-mails meant, as they did in the House report. Given that the e-mails were almost certain to leak once they were sent to Capitol Hill, it’s a wonder the White House did not proactively release them earlier.

      The burden of proof lies with the accuser. Despite Pfeiffer’s claim of political skullduggery, we see little evidence that much was at play here besides imprecise wordsmithing or editing errors by journalists.

      Three Pinocchios”

  5. Ragspierre says:

    “Testimony”. Which testimony will forever remain a mystery because you can’t/won’t site it.
    ——————-

    The State Dept. said expressly that their was ample money in their security budget.

    You can look it up, or stolidly maintain your lies. Up to you. Others will.

    “Maybe by next Wednesday you’ll provide a link to PJ Media that contains no reference to actual source material, shit your pants, and declare victory. As usual.”
    ——————————

    Too stupid to address. And another lie.

    “Was Jason Chaffetz lying when he admitted that GOPers cut embassy security?”
    ———————-

    This is your lie. He never said that. The BUDGET may have been reduced, but that did not “cut security”.

    What specific conduct of the president and/or Hillary has multiplied the cost of the car thief’s hearings?
    ————————–

    Lies. Coverup. Stonewalling. Refusing to release information, etc.

    And we’re still waiting for proof of your cover-up. Why are GOPers kind of getting quiet about that in Congress now?
    ———————

    Read the emails, stupid. Nuland EXPRESSLY calls for a coverup. She even states WHY. And nobody objects.

    There is no doubt about the FACTS of the coverupSSSSSS. Or many of the scandalSSSSSSSSSSS.

    There is more to come, too.