Fair Access to Financial Services (OCC-2020-0042-0001)

Not Really Here said:
This is literally a Federal agency issuing a new rule that is complying with the rulemaking process so it can't be easily attacked later.
Click to expand...
Have you ever dealt with the BATF?

I don't want to crap in your cornflakes, dude, but federal agencies can and have played games with the rules all the time.

Maybe if the penalties for shenanigans were a bit harsher I'd be more sedate about this.
 
  • Agree
  • Dumb
Reactions: Bethesda's Todd Howard, Not Really Here and Afinepickle
Capsaicin Addict said:
Have you ever dealt with the BATF?

I don't want to crap in your cornflakes, dude, but federal agencies can and have played games with the rules all the time.

Maybe if the penalties for shenanigans were a bit harsher I'd be more sedate about this.
Click to expand...
I got it, you're autistic and don't like the rule that Null likes.
It's still not a Bill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dork Of Ages
Left a comment for your sake. I've only ever had to go through hoops for you and 4chan, but I think that's enough to the point where I'd rather be able to use normal payment services instead of crypto. Not that I'm against crypto, I'd just appreciate being able to pay with stable currency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Letora, AmateurComedicTaxidermist and Dork Of Ages
Not Really Here said:
I got it, you're autistic and don't like the rule that Null likes.
It's still not a Bill.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry you're a faggot.

This doesn't have anything to do with like or dislike, or bills or rules. This has to do with how much I trust our so-called federal overlords -- which is to say, I don't. I admitted up front the problem's not easy, because Null is absolutely right that this bullshit has to cease. But I'm wary as fuck about some rando federal 'rule' getting used.
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: Not Really Here
Capsaicin Addict said:
I don't want to crap in your cornflakes, dude, but federal agencies can and have played games with the rules all the time.
Click to expand...
Having a public comment period like they're supposed to is not one of those, though.
Capsaicin Addict said:
But I'm wary as fuck about some rando federal 'rule' getting used.
Click to expand...
The worst that can be said about this is that it could quite simply be reversed by the next guy, leaving us in exactly the situation we were in before. It's pretty much no-lose.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: FunPosting101, Marvin, LurkTrawl and 3 others
AnOminous said:
The worst that can be said about this is that it could quite simply be reversed by the next guy, leaving us in exactly the situation we were in before. It's pretty much no-lose.
Click to expand...

Call me pessimistic, but my greatest concern is the 'next guy' using whatever mechanisms put in by this rule to do the exact opposite - actively punishing financial institutions for not wokebanning enough.

Having said that, I'll add my comment, as I agree the status quo is unacceptable. Happy berth-day, Josh!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dork Of Ages
Blacklight said:
Yeah, I'm not really a huge fan of the idea of centralizing the power of banking institutions in the hands of the government. All it takes is some luddite to try and fuck over things like cryptocurrency even more than they already are. Hell imagine if states pass laws restricting access to firearm sellers via the banks. There would be too many ways to abuse that power.

I would be fine with banks being treated like a power or water company instead of wholly nationalized.
Click to expand...
Yea, would really suck if we gave the government the power to legislate things.
 
  • Autistic
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Marvin, Not Really Here, Sped Xing and 1 other person
Slam-a-lam, Fam-a-lam
i dud its.png


It was easy to provide sources since this has been getting worse since 2012, Paypal especially keeps putting their foot in their mouth, like with the CEO confessing to using SPLC to choose who to ban. I found articles on the forced censorship, account locks/bans, etc. going further back than 2012.
If anyone had any question about the biggest lobbyists keeping this insanity going today (Big Pharma, Silicon Valley, and Payment Processors/Banks) you need to have your head examined.

Glad Null didn't take the black pill and actually seized and shared this opportunity, for whatever it's worth.

Blacklight said:
Yeah, I'm not really a huge fan of the idea of centralizing the power of banking institutions in the hands of the government.
Click to expand...
As opposed to the current system which leaves the government entirely beholden to private investors of a private bank which sits as the fraudulent heart of our national economy, thus leaving us in a constant Debt-based system that will inevitably collapse and leaving the highest branches of government in perpetual debt (and through debt, influence) of Literal Who banking fat cats?
I think we need a Fed 101 vid here
Ignore the cringe. It's designed to penetrate the protective shell encasing the normalfag's brain.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Autistic
  • Agree
Reactions: Letora, not william stenchever, 6thRanger and 4 others
I wrote my literal who senators and representatives a few months ago to encourage them to protect financial services instead of getting rid of section 230, if they want to actually defend freedom of speech. They came up with the PACT act after that, but didn't change their talking points much.

I wrote a comment for the exact same reason I wrote my congressmen: so Josh can stop being a doomer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Letora, 6thRanger, Rotollo and 2 others
Null said:
Banks should be entirely nationalized but saying that too loud gets you shot.
Click to expand...
Anyone who knows how central banking works can come to no other conclusion. It's one of the most well documented things in history, going back to the Roman Empire they were against it.
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: zedkissed60
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back