Jobless hit with bank fees on benefits

Jobless hit with bank fees on benefits

There are 31 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Feb 20, 2009, titled Jobless hit with bank fees on benefits. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

For hundreds of thousands of workers losing their jobs during the recession, there's a new twist to their financial pain: Even as they're collecting unemployment benefits, they're paying bank fees just to get ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Meez

Burnsville, MN

#21 Feb 20, 2009
Large Carbon Footprint wrote:
<quoted text>
The Republican alternative to Obama's stimulus would have eliminated tax on unemployment benefits.
Republicans (Reagan) are the ones that put income tax onto unemployment benefits, back in the eighties.

Since: Apr 08

Minneapolis, MN

#22 Feb 21, 2009
Too funny. Don't overdraw the amount you have in the account, then there are no fees. Use the right ATM, then there are no fees.

What a bunch of whiners.
DizzyOne

Stephens, GA

#23 Feb 21, 2009
Typical. The banks slip the politicians a few bucks and voila, they have a new source of income. Give those bankers a bonus!!
Bubbles

Saint Paul, MN

#24 Feb 23, 2009
Ms V wrote:
Yes, "Bubbles" I did read the article, perhaps you didn't. Look at how much money the banks make off this (cut/paste from actual article):
"In Missouri, for instance, 94,883 people claimed unemployment benefits through debit cards from Central Bank. Analysts say a recipient uses a card an average of six to 10 times a month. If each cardholder makes three withdrawals at an out-of-network ATM, at a fee of $1.75, the bank would collect nearly $500,000. If half of the cardholders also dial customer service three times in any given week (the first time is free; after that, it's 25 cents a call), the bank's revenue would jump to more than $521,000. That would yield $6.3 million a year."
I will tell my friend to take it all at once so the greedy MF's don't get any more of his meager unemployment while trying to find a job. Yeah, let's encourage just getting all the cash at once instead of people only taking what they need at the immediate moment. Can hardly wait until my friend gets jumped getting his funds.
I love it when people refer to legitimate business as greed. The banks are providing a service that saves the taxpayers money. This is a good thing. It is private enterprise increasing the productive capacity of the country.

Again, I feel for anyone out of work right now, tough times indeed. The real point is that bank fees are not that hard to avoid. The debit cards are issued for the convienence of the user. It does not absolve them of responsibility though. If somebody has to call customer service three times a week on this they have other issues. An easy solution would be to write down how much cash was loaded into the card then save all of the receipts from each transaction. All one would have to do is reconcile these transactions agains the original balance.
Large Carbon Footprint

Delano, MN

#25 Feb 23, 2009
Meez wrote:
<quoted text>
Republicans (Reagan) are the ones that put income tax onto unemployment benefits, back in the eighties.
If that's such a bad idea, why didn't the Democrats reverse this policy?
American

Baltimore, MD

#26 Feb 23, 2009
Ms V wrote:
My friend just went on unemployment. He doesn't have a bank account. He was issued a debit card. I am not aware that MN has fees imposed, at least at this time. If he got a paper check he would have to pay a fee to cash it wherever he went. Nothing like $#!++ing on someone when they are already down.
You can have the state deduct your taxes from your check - but they don't advertise it so then when you file taxes you get to deal with it then and you are usually screwed.
It should either be a free debit card, a mailed check that can be cashed at no charge, or the state should set up shop in each county and disperse the funds in cash (although I am not a fan of this idea). As a single-zero filer in MN, I don't want my tax dollars used to screw the less fortunate.
Think about how much easier it would be if your friend did have a bank account. Not having one suggests that your friend is a "cash and carry" sort of person. How does he/she pay a rent or a mortgage? Utility bills? Money orders cost money too.

Any employed adult without a bank account is rather suspect.
American

Baltimore, MD

#27 Feb 23, 2009
Bubbles wrote:
<quoted text>
I love it when people refer to legitimate business as greed. The banks are providing a service that saves the taxpayers money. This is a good thing. It is private enterprise increasing the productive capacity of the country.
Again, I feel for anyone out of work right now, tough times indeed. The real point is that bank fees are not that hard to avoid. The debit cards are issued for the convienence of the user. It does not absolve them of responsibility though. If somebody has to call customer service three times a week on this they have other issues. An easy solution would be to write down how much cash was loaded into the card then save all of the receipts from each transaction. All one would have to do is reconcile these transactions agains the original balance.
That would require personal responsibility and accounting. And you're right. A person that has to call customer service three times a week is a person with bigger issues.
Dicky

United States

#28 Feb 23, 2009
Large Carbon Footprint wrote:
<quoted text>
The Republican alternative to Obama's stimulus would have eliminated tax on unemployment benefits.
No, they eliminate taxes for the wealthy, not the unemployed.
Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#30 Feb 23, 2009
Anyone remember when ATM's first appeared as a way for the banks to save on "brick and mortar" institutions and employee costs? Then came the fees.
highland guy

Saint Paul, MN

#31 Feb 23, 2009
Joe wrote:
Anyone remember when ATM's first appeared as a way for the banks to save on "brick and mortar" institutions and employee costs? Then came the fees.
BINGO. it's remarkable that all other forms of electronic communications get cheaper over time, except for operating an ATM, apparently.
Dicky

United States

#32 Feb 23, 2009
highland guy wrote:
<quoted text>
BINGO. it's remarkable that all other forms of electronic communications get cheaper over time, except for operating an ATM, apparently.
What about cable TV? That has not only gotten more expensive, but originally had no commercials either.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Russ Carnahan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News A Democratic politician goes to jail, now advoc... (Sep '15) Sep '15 Cat74 12
News Democrats Say Federal Budget Cuts Will Hurt Col... (Jan '06) May '15 chris 2
News Pelosi tells grads diplomacy should mark U.S. f... (May '07) Dec '13 Shinichiro Takizawa 2
News Jobless hit with bank fees on benefits (Feb '09) Oct '12 Retired Sargent 16
News Missouri GOP 7-1 map: Cracking Kansas City (Jan '12) Jan '12 Doc 1
News Obama raising with Missouri stimulus beneficiary (Sep '11) Sep '11 Will Dockery 2
News Missouri Congressman Carnahan picked to attend ... (Sep '11) Sep '11 Doc 1