Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cost. If I bank with a large bank I can use their network of ATMs for free. With a smaller bank I can't withdraw anywhere other than my branch without incurring a ridiculous $3-$5 charge.
Many credit unions are part of a large co-op with lots of no-fee ATMs all over the place ( http://co-opatm.org/ ). You can also deposit checks/cash at many of these ATMs. They may not be on every street corner like major banks are in some cities, but chances are there's one near you. Some of those credit unions will also reimburse all your ATM fees if you use your debit card a certain amount (for mine, it's 12 transa…
The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
111–120 of 232 posts
Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#112The meat of this article, hidden underneath all the fluff, is simply that fees are higher and poor people end up paying more of them. Honestly though, they probably deserve that. I've never in my life been charged an overdraft fee because it doesn't take much to just track the payments you make and never go over. Of course, an inability to plan is probably why they're poor in the first place...
That's easy to do if you're not poor. It's a problem you've never encountered, so don't pretend your virtue protects you.
Obviously 'punishing' those with no money does nothing. It certainly doesn't prevent overdrafts. The only sane response to this (correctly identified) cycle of poverty: "inability to plan is probably why they're poor in the first place..." is education and help.
Your attitude is the pinnacle of intellectual void and laziness.
Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Businesses are run by citizens, who have a right to choose which other citizens they're interested in serving.
A problem is when those big businesses prevent other smaller businesses from catering to the niche markets, through lobbying or other anti-competitive means.
Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#114Here's why poor people don't like banks: because banks don't like them.
Let me paint you some pictures.
You're not clean-shaven. You smell a little bit, whether because you just finished a smelly job or because you're living on the streets or because you're depressed and haven't bothered to clean up in a day. You enter the bank, and no less than four pair of eyes look at you -- eyes that are surrounded by expensive haircuts, ties, and nice dresses or suits.
You're exhausted and you can't concentrate well. Maybe it's the chronic lack of sleep, maybe it's malnutrition, maybe it's stress, or maybe it's drugs or alcohol. You walk up to a counter with a check in hand. This paper is worthless to you, what you need is a different kind of paper that you can trade for things you need.
The teller asks you if you're a customer. She's polite, but polite in that barely perceptible condescending way that people are when they're uncomfortable with the person they're talking to.
You're not a customer. She'll have to charge you for cashing the check then (or maybe won't do it at all -- depending on company policy).
Can you be a customer? She directs you over to a desk. The desk has a nice finish on it. It's probably worth more than anything you own. It might even be worth more than everything you own.
You sit down at the desk and another person with a polite smile, perfect hair, and a nice tie or suit or dress asks you for some personal information and enters it into the computer.
You're poor, so you hate computers. They keep track of you everywhere you go. You can't seem to escape them. The police in different towns all somehow have access to the same information about you. Computers produce paperwork that occasionally makes it into your P.O. Box, or last address, or friend's address, and usually it's bad paperwork: more bad news, more stress, more trouble. Some faceless agency somewhere wants more of what you don't have.
This computer is no different. A few keystrokes later, the representative apologizes in that polite-but-condescending way: "I'm sorry, you're here in Chex Systems for account abuse at BigCorp Bank three years ago, we can't open an account for you."
This is the sixth bank you've been to.
Three years later, after a little bit of luck and a lot of hard work and a struggle that will forever leave a scar on your soul, you've finally reached the five-year expiration period for Chex Systems, you've finally got a regular job with a regular paycheck that is just barely enough to live on. You're set up with free checking at some bank, but you're very very careful not to overdraw your account, ever, because that one time you did it suddenly somehow turned into $250 of money that you owed the bank -- money that you didn't have, because if you did, the bank wouldn't be asking for it.
But this morning, your beater car finally crapped out for good and the low-rent apartment complex you live in forbids you from working on it in the parking lot. You can't get to work without the car. You have a little bit of savings, about $100, and you just need to borrow a little bit of money so that you can get another beater and get back to work as soon as possible. Your job doesn't offer paid sick days, so every day you're out of work, you get a little bit poorer.
You walk or get a ride down to your bank and you sit down behind that desk, and that computer that you still hate, and you ask the polite-but-still-a-little-condescending nicely-dressed person if you can get a car loan. You quickly add, "I don't need much, only a few hundred dollars, and I'll be able to get this car I saw down the street from my apartment." You make promises and tell the representative how important this is to you, because you're under the mistaken impression that the representative has the ability to make a decision. But it's not up to them, it's up to the computer.
The representative politely tells you that they don't do car loans for a few hundred dollars, they only do loans for a couple thousand. You don't need a couple thousand -- in fact, the very idea of borrowing that much is really scary to you, because you're pretty sure that if somebody gave you that much money you'd mess up with it, just like you always do, and then you'd owe a lot of money that you'd have no way of paying back.
But the representative tries to get you a couple thousand dollars for a car anyway. The computer says no: you don't have enough credit, your credit is too bad, you don't make enough, you don't have collateral. In short: you are too poor.
It doesn't matter that you're a customer. It doesn't matter how hard you're trying. It's just like all your friends say, it's what you hear all the time: banks only lend you money if you don't need it.
--
That was me. For years. I'm reasonably intelligent, I've never had a drug or alcohol problem. Still, though, I made a relatively simple decision many years ago, to take a vacation from the computer industry for a while and be a climbing instructor. Unfortunately, while being a climbing instructor was amazing and I'm still glad I did it, it didn't pay very much, and eventually I got into trouble with a bank.
The economy started to have trouble then (dot-com bust), my computer skills were more of a liability than an asset, and for the next several years I struggled desperately to keep my head just barely above water. I was homeless for a while.
I've got my own business now and my finances are better and I still hate banks. I love the people at my local bank, but I hate banks.
Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Many banks over the last century have run out of money and been unable to honour withdrawal demands/requests. It's reasonable and logical not to trust them to keep your money and give it to you when you ask. Within the last century, yes, but quite far back within it: the last time anyone with modest amounts of money in the U.S. lost deposits in a bank failure was 1933, the year the FDIC was created. You can still l…
If a bank failed, how long would it take to be reimbursed by the FDIC? Probably much longer than a poor person could weather. Also, if you chose to forgo paper statements to "save the environment" (and reduce the bank's costs), and you were lax in downloading your statements, it would probably take even longer to be reimbursed.
No bank statements or formal claim for reimbursement is needed; the process is entirely automatic and usually done in less than 24 hours.
Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#116Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Many banks over the last century have run out of money and been unable to honour withdrawal demands/requests. It's reasonable and logical not to trust them to keep your money and give it to you when you ask. Within the last century, yes, but quite far back within it: the last time anyone with modest amounts of money in the U.S. lost deposits in a bank failure was 1933, the year the FDIC was created. You can still l…
If a bank failed, how long would it take to be reimbursed by the FDIC? Probably much longer than a poor person could weather. Also, if you chose to forgo paper statements to "save the environment" (and reduce the bank's costs), and you were lax in downloading your statements, it would probably take even longer to be reimbursed.
In most cases, the FDIC takes over the bank and runs it (in a matter of hours), specifically to prevent this sort of impact.
Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#118Banks have been continually inventing and raising fees on unsuspecting middle-class customers for decades. I wouldn't be surprised if banks made more fee revenue per customer than check cashers.
I was happy to pay 1% fees on check cashing for that; with low income that was quite reasonable.
Direct deposit had no fee, and this was a great deal for me.
Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#119While the alternative financial service providers is taking the road of improved customer service, the banks are going the other way. In Sweden, most ATMs is set at a maximum withdraw of 100$, while a few is set at $300. The bank itself also adds additional restriction of maximum $2000 per week. If you want to withdraw more of your own money, you have to ask permission and give a reasonable explanation why one is tak…
"In Sweden, most ATMs is set at a maximum withdraw of 100$, while a few is set at $300." I think you did a conversion error from SEK to USD. Did you mean $1000 at a time? The documents you referenced say Swedbank has a max of 8 000 SEK/day, Nordea's is 5 000 SEK/day, SEB has 10 000 SEK/day, and so on. (Under-16s have a limit of 1 000 SEK/week.) That would correspond more to US$1,000 than $100. FWIW, I had a limit of…
However, I think you slightly missed my point. I do not say that Sweden is worse than the US. I merely wanted to point out that banks actually put in some real restrictions for taking out cash from ones own bank account. They are not holding my money for safe keeping, but rather providing a service where my money goes in, and I can get some out under circumstances they dictate, and only if they agree with it.
Re: The Real Reason The Poor Go Without Bank Accounts
#120HN is so cute. So many people here talking about why poor people do things the way they do without having ever really experienced it. Here's why poor people don't like banks: because banks don't like them. Let me paint you some pictures. You're not clean-shaven. You smell a little bit, whether because you just finished a smelly job or because you're living on the streets or because you're depressed and haven't bother…
At one point I mismanaged my finances and completely destroyed my credit score, as well as getting listed in chexsystems for overdrafting a bank account and not being able to pay them back for several months.
To cash my paychecks (I got paid mostly in tips), I used a check cashing place or the grocery store. I did this because being listed in ChexSystems prevented me from opening a bank account.
Once I became I developer I dug myself out of debt and then rebuilt my credit score. Eventually after waiting long enough I was able to get a checking account from a bank that used FICO scores instead of ChexSystems.
The article is a bunch of crap. It reads just like that nickel and dimed book by Barbara Ehrenerich[sp]. How an academic cannot figure out that the reasons these poor people are giving for not having a bank account is false? There is one reason: they are listed in ChexSystems and can't get an account.