Interesting...

[landrun]

Saw this on Drudge.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/citigroup-warns-customers-it-may-refuse-to-allow-withdrawals.html



The image of banks locking their doors to keep customers from making withdrawals during a bank run is what immediately came to mind when we heard that Citigroup was telling customers it has the right to prevent any withdrawals from checking accounts for seven days.

“Effective April 1, 2010, we reserve the right to require (7) days advance notice before permitting a withdrawal from all checking accounts. While we do not currently exercise this right and have not exercised it in the past, we are required by law to notify you of this change,” Citigroup said on statements received by customers all over the country.

What’s going on? It seems that this is something of an error. The seven day notice policy only applies to customers in Texas, Ira Stoll reports at The Future of Capitalism. It was accidentally included on customer statements nationwide.

“Whatever the explanation, it doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in Citi,” Stoll writes. “But it’s hard to believe a bank would be sending out a notice like that on its statements.”

Love this guys response


...
Chump Reply:
February 21st, 2010 at 6:40 pm

Forgive me Pat, if I disagree w/ you. I don’t think they can possibly create a stampede from their bank. i m p o s s i b l e

Why is it impossible to create a stampede- 1st, while the cattle-like citizenry of Amerika have it in them, they’ve been FAR too restrained within their minds. These people will walk willingly up to the executioner, and be able to say 2+2 equals 5.

Those of us who already have read the writing on the wall took any federal reserve notes out of Citi, Chase, Boa, et al, BECAUSE we still have some semblance of mind despite the poisoning and propaganda.

Anyone with money still in Citi… well, that unique and beautiful soul has abdicated any reason or voice and chosen to be sheared by the sheppard, and possibly made into mutton. There is no stampede- these are the people who have already forfeited freedom for security and peace.

May their chains rest lightly upon them, and may they never be remembered as our countrymen.


On a side note, I just read where my personal bank has received 2 handouts from the government through TARP. - I'm looking for a new bank. :(

[Jello Biafra]

so, if i have a home loan and a vehicle loan from thse guys, its time to......???

[OklahomaTuba]

Jeebus, if that's true and I had an account with money in it at Citi, I'd be hauling *** to withdraw it TA DAY.

Find a nice regional bank like BOK or something. Unlike our government run zombie bank masters, they aren't insolvent.

[yermom]

find a credit union

[landrun]

so, if i have a home loan and a vehicle loan from thse guys, its time to......???

Kick back and relax. Because when these guys go belly-up, you own your home free and clear. :D

[Jello Biafra]

Kick back and relax. Because when these guys go belly-up, you own your home free and clear. :D

lol thats what i was thinking bout...which is why i havent done anything about it... i know its wishful thinking but when someone else possibly took over, maybe we fall through the cracks?

i was just a little more than worried that the ones paying the bills were somehow going to get screwed ;)

[Leroy Lizard]

Kick back and relax. Because when these guys go belly-up, you own your home free and clear.

I realize you were joking, but your debts will simply be bought up by someone else. You will still owe the money, but with an added paperwork burden. In other words, it will only suck even more.

[SicEmBaylor]

I'm becoming a believer that national banks need to be broken up and destroyed. Small local and regional banks are the way to go.

Powerful national banks and national/international corporations are as big a threat to our liberty as government.

[Okla-homey]

I'm becoming a believer that national banks need to be broken up and destroyed. Small local and regional banks are the way to go.

Powerful national banks and national/international corporations are as big a threat to our liberty as government.

Now he's channeling Andy Jackson folks. Sic, why don't you just go full-on populist and forget conservatism.

[Okla-homey]

Saw this on Drudge.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/citigroup-warns-customers-it-may-refuse-to-allow-withdrawals.html



Love this guys response


On a side note, I just read where my personal bank has received 2 handouts from the government through TARP. - I'm looking for a new bank. :(

three words...BANK OF OKLAHOMA. Solid as a rock, and no TARP money rec'd because they didn't speculate in the worthless paper mortgage bubble fiasco.

Plus, they own the tallest building in Oklahoma and the coolest musical venue. Which is a plus.

[SicEmBaylor]

Now he's channeling Andy Jackson folks. Sic, why don't you just go full-on populist and forget conservatism.

Eh, by current standards of conservatism I suppose I'm not. I've made no bones about the fact that the movement has been co-opted by internationalists, interventionists, the evangelicals, big-government types, and neo-conservatives.

What I am is a proud Jeffersonian old-right/paleo-conservative with strong libertarian leanings. I always thought conservatism was about preserving the principles of the Constitution as originally written, a small and efficient national government that operates within the constraints of the constitution, healthy robust state governments, a humble and conservative foreign policy, and allowing the individual a maximum amount of individual liberty so long as they don't infringe upon the rights of others.

I didn't sign up for a style of conservatism that gives a free pass to massive national banks, international organizations, interventionist military deployments, a liberalized Wilsonian foreign policy, a multi-trillion dollar debt, putting the government in a person's home and bedroom, domestic spying, no fiscal responsibility, playing the politics of personal destruction game, fear mongering to win elections, etc. etc. etc.

So yeah, if that's what it means to be a conservative these days then count me out.

[landrun]

... What I am is a proud Jeffersonian old-right/paleo-conservative with strong libertarian leanings. I always thought conservatism was about preserving the principles of the Constitution as originally written, a small and efficient national government that operates within the constraints of the constitution, healthy robust state governments, a humble and conservative foreign policy, and allowing the individual a maximum amount of individual liberty so long as they don't infringe upon the rights of others.


That government ceased to exist before we were even born. :(

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Jeebus, if that's true and I had an account with money in it at Citi, I'd be hauling *** to withdraw it TA DAY.

Find a nice regional bank like BOK or something. Unlike our government run zombie bank masters, they aren't insolvent.

After my wife was disposing of her parents assets and accounts, I have nothing but good things to say of Arvest, even if WallyWorld owns them. Arvest customer service was extremely excellent. Too bad we can't say the same of Bank of America. They went out of their way to make things difficult.

[OklahomaTuba]

Yeah, BOA is a POS. F'k em.

I prefer local banks personally. Ones that give back to the community and such. BOK fits that mold for me. George Kaiser might be a limousine liberal, but at least he walks the walk on giving back.

[Okla-homey]

Eh, by current standards of conservatism I suppose I'm not. I've made no bones about the fact that the movement has been co-opted by internationalists, interventionists, the evangelicals, big-government types, and neo-conservatives.

What I am is a proud Jeffersonian old-right/paleo-conservative with strong libertarian leanings. I always thought conservatism was about preserving the principles of the Constitution as originally written, a small and efficient national government that operates within the constraints of the constitution, healthy robust state governments, a humble and conservative foreign policy, and allowing the individual a maximum amount of individual liberty so long as they don't infringe upon the rights of others.

I didn't sign up for a style of conservatism that gives a free pass to massive national banks, international organizations, interventionist military deployments, a liberalized Wilsonian foreign policy, a multi-trillion dollar debt, putting the government in a person's home and bedroom, domestic spying, no fiscal responsibility, playing the politics of personal destruction game, fear mongering to win elections, etc. etc. etc.

So yeah, if that's what it means to be a conservative these days then count me out.

Based on the above, I'd say you are neither conservative nor libertarian as the notions are currently understood. I'd say you are a "Calhounian." As in John C. A quaint but rather anachronistic and discredited set of personal politics I might add.
True fact: my esposita graduated HS from John C. Calhoun Academy in Orangeburg County, SC back in the late-Ploesticene Era.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Yeah, BOA is a POS. F'k em.

I prefer local banks personally. Ones that give back to the community and such. BOK fits that mold for me. George Kaiser might be a limousine liberal, but at least he walks the walk on giving back.**** boa. They bought my mortgage from countrywide(what a relief):rolleyes: I had a guy pay me with a boa check...went through the drive thru to cash it...was informed the drive thru was for account holders only....asked her if my mortgage they owned was considered an account...she said no...I said **** you.

[Veritas]

Eh, by current standards of conservatism I suppose I'm not. I've made no bones about the fact that the movement has been co-opted by internationalists, interventionists, the evangelicals, big-government types, and neo-conservatives.

What I am is a proud Jeffersonian old-right/paleo-conservative with strong libertarian leanings. I always thought conservatism was about preserving the principles of the Constitution as originally written, a small and efficient national government that operates within the constraints of the constitution, healthy robust state governments, a humble and conservative foreign policy, and allowing the individual a maximum amount of individual liberty so long as they don't infringe upon the rights of others.

I didn't sign up for a style of conservatism that gives a free pass to massive national banks, international organizations, interventionist military deployments, a liberalized Wilsonian foreign policy, a multi-trillion dollar debt, putting the government in a person's home and bedroom, domestic spying, no fiscal responsibility, playing the politics of personal destruction game, fear mongering to win elections, etc. etc. etc.

So yeah, if that's what it means to be a conservative these days then count me out.
I'd say the same of myself. Don't much give a **** if it's Calhounian, Calvinist, or Catholic.

[SicEmBaylor]

Based on the above, I'd say you are neither conservative nor libertarian as the notions are currently understood. I'd say you are a "Calhounian." As in John C. A quaint but rather anachronistic and discredited set of personal politics I might add.
True fact: my esposita graduated HS from John C. Calhoun Academy in Orangeburg County, SC back in the late-Ploesticene Era.

I can see how foreign these concepts would be to someone who is a part of the faux-conservative movement that I call "Conservative Inc."

Traditional conservatism draws its ideological lineage through Calhoun all the way back to the Anti-Federalists and Jeffersonian Republicans. The conservatism that I believe in has been more or less dead for some time, but for most of our nation's history this is what it meant to be a conservative. What changed is that conservatism was transformed into a true political movement offering a concrete set of policy ideas in opposition to liberalism and the progressive movement. That didn't happen until really the 1950s and William F. Buckley is really the one who gets credit. In the process though, most of what was considered "conservative" was discredited and pushed to the fringes in the name of appealing to a broader group of Americans. In fact, it has been so marginalized over the decades by mainstream-movement conservatives that most people, like yourself (and I don't mean that as an insult it's simply the truth), don't recognize the old-right/traditional conservatism when they see it.

Might I suggest you cancel your subscription to the Weekly Standard and National Review and instead subscribe to The American Conservative so that you may gain a better appreciation for true conservatism. ;)

I'll even provide you a link: http://www.amconmag.com/

At any rate, the issue here isn't that you're a conservative and I'm not or vice-versa....the issue is that we both believe in two very very different flavors of conservatism. You the "new" right and I the "old" right. I readily admit your side has won the ideological war, but there are a few bastions of the true faith left.

[SoonerProphet]

I can see how foreign these concepts would be to someone who is a part of the faux-conservative movement that I call "Conservative Inc."

Traditional conservatism draws its ideological lineage through Calhoun all the way back to the Anti-Federalists and Jeffersonian Republicans. The conservatism that I believe in has been more or less dead for some time, but for most of our nation's history this is what it meant to be a conservative. What changed is that conservatism was transformed into a true political movement offering a concrete set of policy ideas in opposition to liberalism and the progressive movement. That didn't happen until really the 1950s and William F. Buckley is really the one who gets credit. In the process though, most of what was considered "conservative" was discredited and pushed to the fringes in the name of appealing to a broader group of Americans. In fact, it has been so marginalized over the decades by mainstream-movement conservatives that most people, like yourself (and I don't mean that as an insult it's simply the truth), don't recognize the old-right/traditional conservatism when they see it.

Might I suggest you cancel your subscription to the Weekly Standard and National Review and instead subscribe to The American Conservative so that you may gain a better appreciation for true conservatism. ;)

I'll even provide you a link: http://www.amconmag.com/

At any rate, the issue here isn't that you're a conservative and I'm not or vice-versa....the issue is that we both believe in two very very different flavors of conservatism. You the "new" right and I the "old" right. I readily admit your side has won the ideological war, but there are a few bastions of the true faith left.

I'll second that and go a step further regardin WFB. He embraced the idea of big government as a transfomative type. He and the modern right used fear of communism to market an "ideology" that has absolutely nothing to do with Burkean conservativism. Modern neocons continue to embrace the message of fear and big government as savior.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Now he's channeling Andy Jackson folks. Sic, why don't you just go full-on populist and forget conservatism.

I don't consider the oligarchs that run this country and distort the rules of the game for their own profit [Goldman Sachs] as conservative or free market.