we keep talking about how only one party actually cares about the working class (hint: it sure the fuck ain't the republican party). here's a perfect under-the-radar example that proves the point.
the magas love talking about how the working class is hurting. every single middle class american is on the verge of bankruptcy (except you, of course. and most people you know.) anyway, with everybody hurting so bad, i guess we can all agree that exorbitant credit card late fees are unnecessarily punitive and should be abolished. right? not controversial, is it? unless you are the CEO or a major stockholder of a large credit card issuer, you probably agree that credit card late fees should not be excessive.
well, the consumer financial protection bureau agrees. first, a little background on the CFPB, for those unfamiliar. the CFPB was created in 2010 by the dodd-frank act, part of the response to the financial crisis of 2008 (remember THAT fiasco?). republican politicians have been fighting HARD against it ever since, trying to either get rid of it or at least weaken it significantly. it's hard to believe any americans familiar with what the CFPB does ("The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is an independent agency of the United States government responsible for consumer protection in the financial sector. CFPB's jurisdiction includes banks, credit unions, securities firms, payday lenders, mortgage-servicing operations, foreclosure relief services, debt collectors, and other financial companies operating in the United States.") would actually be against this, but like so many things these days, it's become politicized. yup, one party is fighting against an agency whose purpose is to protect consumers (that's us!!).
ok, so the CFPB proposed a new rule that only applies to credit card issuers with over 1M open accounts and it would cap late fees at $8 unless the credit card issuer could prove that they need to charge a higher fee to cover their cost. seems pretty fair, doesn't it? it doesn't abolish late fees. it acknowledges that the large banks (and other large credit card issuers) should receive a fee when people are late with their payments. it just says that the fees should be in line with the actual cost to the banks, and not excessively punitive.
still with me? nothing controversial there, right?
guess who doesn't like this rule? that's right, the banks! they collected an estimated $14B in late fees in 2022. of course they would like to be able to continue gouging people for late payments, and they have sued to block the new rule. and guess where they filed the suit? in texas, where they know the judges will put the interests of large corporations over... people in the working class. so twice now, a trump-appointed judge has actually determined that this case should be transferred to a judge in washington. and the 5th circuit court of appeals (two trump judges and a bush judge) ruled that the case needs to stay in texas where they can get a favorable ruling.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/lawsu...18 (Reuters) - The,a judge in Washington, D.C.
just one real-world example of how the republican party puts the interests of the wealthy ahead of the working class. all the magas who whine about how much the working class is hurting... maybe it's time you open your eyes and realize which party is actually fighting to make your life better.
as always, feel free to point out the dozens (hundreds?) of lies here.
i've said it before, and i'll say it again.... 99% of people voting for that "R" are voting against their own best interests. it's fine that we have parties that disagree on how to move this country forward, as long as both are ultimately fighting FOR us and not against us. right now, republican politicians are fighting AGAINST us.
i eagerly await the thoughtful conversation that is sure to ensue...
the magas love talking about how the working class is hurting. every single middle class american is on the verge of bankruptcy (except you, of course. and most people you know.) anyway, with everybody hurting so bad, i guess we can all agree that exorbitant credit card late fees are unnecessarily punitive and should be abolished. right? not controversial, is it? unless you are the CEO or a major stockholder of a large credit card issuer, you probably agree that credit card late fees should not be excessive.
well, the consumer financial protection bureau agrees. first, a little background on the CFPB, for those unfamiliar. the CFPB was created in 2010 by the dodd-frank act, part of the response to the financial crisis of 2008 (remember THAT fiasco?). republican politicians have been fighting HARD against it ever since, trying to either get rid of it or at least weaken it significantly. it's hard to believe any americans familiar with what the CFPB does ("The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is an independent agency of the United States government responsible for consumer protection in the financial sector. CFPB's jurisdiction includes banks, credit unions, securities firms, payday lenders, mortgage-servicing operations, foreclosure relief services, debt collectors, and other financial companies operating in the United States.") would actually be against this, but like so many things these days, it's become politicized. yup, one party is fighting against an agency whose purpose is to protect consumers (that's us!!).
ok, so the CFPB proposed a new rule that only applies to credit card issuers with over 1M open accounts and it would cap late fees at $8 unless the credit card issuer could prove that they need to charge a higher fee to cover their cost. seems pretty fair, doesn't it? it doesn't abolish late fees. it acknowledges that the large banks (and other large credit card issuers) should receive a fee when people are late with their payments. it just says that the fees should be in line with the actual cost to the banks, and not excessively punitive.
still with me? nothing controversial there, right?
guess who doesn't like this rule? that's right, the banks! they collected an estimated $14B in late fees in 2022. of course they would like to be able to continue gouging people for late payments, and they have sued to block the new rule. and guess where they filed the suit? in texas, where they know the judges will put the interests of large corporations over... people in the working class. so twice now, a trump-appointed judge has actually determined that this case should be transferred to a judge in washington. and the 5th circuit court of appeals (two trump judges and a bush judge) ruled that the case needs to stay in texas where they can get a favorable ruling.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/lawsu...18 (Reuters) - The,a judge in Washington, D.C.
just one real-world example of how the republican party puts the interests of the wealthy ahead of the working class. all the magas who whine about how much the working class is hurting... maybe it's time you open your eyes and realize which party is actually fighting to make your life better.
as always, feel free to point out the dozens (hundreds?) of lies here.
i've said it before, and i'll say it again.... 99% of people voting for that "R" are voting against their own best interests. it's fine that we have parties that disagree on how to move this country forward, as long as both are ultimately fighting FOR us and not against us. right now, republican politicians are fighting AGAINST us.
i eagerly await the thoughtful conversation that is sure to ensue...
