var json_comments = new Array("

$\"user-pic\"$

wcnghj

October 9, 2009 10:40 PM

Moderate | Flag for review

What about better regulation of this nations debt collection industry?

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

October 14, 2009 11:13 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@wcnghj: @Tankueray: Anytime you talk about caps, it sounds un-capitalistic and gives the govm't more control. But, I think it's open discussions about bonuses and having them revealed that shame these places into cutting back those things themselves.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

AngryK9

October 9, 2009 10:42 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

It has the potential for good, but it has an equal potential to be abused.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

October 10, 2009 9:37 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@AngryK9: If this gov't agency is just as susceptible to lobbyists as most other aspects of the gov't, then what chance does it have of doing a better job than NOT having a CFPA? I'd rather take companies screwing us over without help, than let the gov't \"protect\" the consumer by providing a lobbyist-paid way for companies to screw us more efficiently and to their greater benefit.

$\"user-pic\"$

Duke_Newcombe sez íViva la Revolucion de Chihuahua!

October 10, 2009 12:22 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@AngryK9: Don't worry. Our benevolent Big Business Overlords will see to it that such an agency will be sufficiently toothless as to be no real threat to anyone.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 9, 2009 10:50 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Forget the CPFA, I want to know where I can get one of these cats that poops money.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

oldtaku

October 9, 2009 10:52 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

In five years, if that, this agency will be so owned by the industry that it'll be the primary mechanism they use to get mandatory binding arbitration for everything and standardize their other customer abuses. The FDA, USDA, FCC, and others were getting lonely?

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

October 10, 2009 2:02 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@oldtaku: I don't think so. It seems that lately America is starting to become more pro-consumer. I certainly hope you are wrong but I'm not holding my breath.

$\"user-pic\"$

legwork

October 10, 2009 2:32 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@sasquatch28: The pendulum certainly has a long way to swing this time around.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

ElizabethD

October 9, 2009 11:12 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

(pic comment) A cat that poops out dollar bills? I gotta get me one of those.

4 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

ElizabethD

October 10, 2009 9:28 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Given the cat's coloring, I guess we can call her Cash Cow.

$\"user-pic\"$

catastrophegirl chooses not to fly

October 10, 2009 2:04 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@ElizabethD: mine pees gold.... ish

$\"user-pic\"$

Trai_Dep

October 10, 2009 12:02 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@ElizabethD: I have one at home and they're quite snazzy, especially at parties.
Unfortunately, they need to be fed diamonds, 4 ct. and above.

$\"user-pic\"$

tailstoo

October 10, 2009 12:06 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: I looked at my cat box, but alias, no bills to be found anywhere.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 9, 2009 11:16 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

re: fines

I work for an agency that hands out fines. Some things can carry a fine of $10,000 per day. This is nothing to the banking industry, rather a cost of doing business. They won't be scared until the fines are much higher and are assessed per incident, per day.

And, they'll just raise the cost on the customer to make sure they keep their profits up. No more free checking and we know credit cards are already more expensive, they'll find fees to add that they can get away with and hit every customer with them.

What they really need to do is cap the executive salaries and bonuses, so there is less incentive to use profits for the shitheads that sit around and think of these fees all day.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

nybiker

October 9, 2009 11:28 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

My fear is that regardless of what the agency becomes empowered to do, banks and their kind will come up with ways to preserve their existing profit levels. Just like how they've been changing their terms & conditions before the new credit card 'reform' bill goes into effect. Talk about a giveaway. And any change the agency does come up with will have a similar long lead time so the banks can put in new rules before the reforms kick in. Any new laws have to have an effective date of something like 10 days after signing. Too bad if their computer systems can't deal with it. That's what refunds / credits are for. And we could have let them mail out promos that were technically legal at the time, but once the law went into effect, they could not process any applications. Seems simple to me (but I'm sure people will disagree).

","

$\"user-pic\"$

Stephen Schenck

October 9, 2009 11:41 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Too many of these specifics seemed directly targeted at those who use credit and have outstanding loans. Where're the protections for consumers who aren't down with usury in the first place? We buy things, too!

","

$\"user-pic\"$

taney71

October 9, 2009 11:53 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Not another government agency!!!!!!!!!!!!

1 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

October 10, 2009 9:39 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

@taney71: I'm afraid so. Pretty soon we'll need MORE government agencies to keep the now-corrupt gov't agencies in line. Until, of course, THOSE new gov't agencies become run by special interest groups, too.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

tailstoo

October 10, 2009 12:05 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

The problem with wimpy fines is that they just get passed back on to the consumer.

How about fines on executive pay for violations? That would get attention very fast.

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

Mr.Duke

October 10, 2009 12:13 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

What will happen is the people that need credit the most will have a much harder time getting credit.

","","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 10, 2009 1:21 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

With credit drying up with all these regulations this economy will never get going anytime soon.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 10, 2009 3:44 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

It sounds good ,but where do the fines end up ,Are they given to the people that were mislead or defrauded ,No they go to the government, Misuse from our bought and pair for(by big business) congress is rampant.
We need this legislation to do some good for the people
not the bureaucracy.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 10, 2009 6:25 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

\"The CFPA would also have the authority to designate fees, charges, or behaviors as unfair, deceptive, or abusive practices, and ban them as the agency sees fit.\"

I like this, but how are they going to decide? And how long would a committee take to decide it? Government is not known for swift action.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 10, 2009 8:23 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

\"The CFPA would also have the authority to designate fees, charges, or behaviors as unfair, deceptive, or abusive practices, and ban them as the agency sees fit.\"

This seems like a very very very broad mandate. I'm very skeptical of gov't efforts to put price caps in place, and that's what this seems to amount to.

","","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

cali2009

October 11, 2009 6:16 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Your comparison chart is misleading - it fails to draw all the lines both before and after to DOJ, the 90 plus US Attorneys and all of the State Attorneys General. And it confounds efficient and effective.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 11, 2009 6:40 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

Having the Fed review the consumer credit card market
doesn't sound smart to me. Aren't they part of the problem?

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 12, 2009 1:09 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

I just love how when government bureaucracy screws us over, their solution is to create more of it with our tax dollars. Has anyone here actually read this bill in it's entirety here? I remember watching C-Span back in July (I think it was July, at least) and the House of Representatives were talking about eliminating some oversight panel that advocates for consumers that was ALREADY in existence. They were going to replace it with some other advocacy panel with NO ACTUAL ABILITY TO ENFORCE laws on corporations/businesses (or anyone for that matter).

I could be wrong on this one, but few people actually read these things. No-one would know what's in it.

2 replies

$\"user-pic\"$

October 14, 2009 11:23 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@simonsays666: That's right Simon! And guess what happens if they find that they actually save money by consolidating the agencies? They'll expand their budget and/or create a panel to oversee them.
Here's the best way to help consumers--quit spending our money!! I can't even talk about tax cuts when the Federal Gov continues to grow and spend more money.

$\"user-pic\"$

October 12, 2009 1:11 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

@simonsays666: Is there any fine print or other law that would indicate that the panel's rules are unenforceable? Is there a lawyer in the house?

","","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 12, 2009 3:19 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

In the short term this could be a good thing. But in the long term, when there's a different administration, this agency could be useless... if some idiot future president appoints the CEO of BoA to decide what good consumer practices are. What's really needed is legislation, not a policy-setting agency that can change its mind when political tides shift.

Also, coming soon from BoA: a CFPA fee, sufficient to pay all the penalties due for charging other ridiculous fees.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 12, 2009 7:54 PM

Moderate |Flag for review

How about obliterating the current credit reporting/FICO system while we're at it? A silly 3 digit number created by a corporation with a proprietary formula should never have been allowed to become so important to ones daily life.

","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 13, 2009 2:57 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

Who do they think they're fooling?...This is all smoke and mirrors...
Legislation to create a Consumer Financial Protection Agency is a pointless effort because the banks actually own the legislative process.

","","","

$\"user-pic\"$

October 14, 2009 11:35 AM

Moderate |Flag for review

One of my largest expenses that I'd like to see regulated is the Federal Govm't. How can they continue to spend more and more? Why do they give dish out money to so many useless things and causes? I want talk of of having a smaller federal budget. You cannot begin to talk about cutting taxes until spending is cut.

");