Reply to Shutting down the CFPB

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Shutting down the CFPB"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]How many lawsuits have they dropped over the last few weeks? Those defrauded consumers will never, ever get their money back now. Can someone explain why this administration wants to protect skeezy lenders? [/quote]
Republican Senate just passed a bill increasing bank overdraft fees, which had been capped by a CFPB rule at $5. The average overdraft fee when not capped is $35.
[twitter]https://x.com/merylkornfield/status/1905393037829980645?s=46&t=kf1qYlCXQnKgUhJWEIu2vg[/twitter][/quote]

Have you heard of a thing called inflation? Can you get a five dollar footlong anymore?

At least the people paying $35 overdraft fees didn't get debanked for reputation risks. [/quote]

Those things have nothing to do with one another. WTF are you talking about? Enjoy getting scammed by banks, credit card companies, mortgage lenders, and the brand new X payments system. It’s all legal now. Oh and so is debanking!

I’m sure being distracted by the “debanking” bogeyman, which is only tangentially connected to CFPB— at best!, was worth it. [/quote]

So you're saying the CFPB was powerless to stop debanking? It just exists to regulate the fees they charge? And this can't be done by one of the other billion financial regulatory agencies? [/quote]

We’d all love to read one, even semi-relevant thing from you that doesn’t use the word “debanking.” Please. Enlighten us with everything you know about financial regulation. Please tell us all your well-informed opinions about the complete shutdown of a consumer protection agency. I’d love to hear why dropping a dozen lawsuits against scam artists and predatory lenders is good policy, too. Please tell us. [/quote]

The charge is that the benefits of the CFPB don't justify what it costs to operate, making it a net negative for the country.

To disprove this charge, you and your ilk presented capping overdraft fees at $5, which is now $35. That was the best you could come up with.

My point is, that if this agency actually did something useful, it might be worth saving. Examples of something useful would include protecting people from debanking. But, banning usury or breaking up big banks would also be something useful. But those things would actually protect consumers, rather than just create regulatory burden.

[/quote]
You seem entirely unfamiliar with what the CFPB does. 
https://www.consumerfinance.gov/enforcement/actions/portfolio-recovery-associates-llc/

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-sues-think-finance-collecting-debts-consumers-did-not-legally-owe/

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-and-new-york-attorney-general-sue-credit-acceptance-for-hiding-auto-loan-costs-setting-borrowers-up-to-fail/[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics