Author Topic: Why would anyone use Citibank? (Read 4377 times)

lone_gunman · « **on:** February 27, 2009, 11:28:51 PM »

Now that it is government owned, why would any free person want to use this organization?

Isn't using Citibank lending support to socialism?

Balog · « **Reply #1 on:** February 28, 2009, 01:19:46 AM »

Why would anyone use a bank full stop? Credit unions ftw!

That being said, most people either A. Like socialism B. Don't follow politics closely C. Don't vet the politics of where they do business. Do you pull a report of financial contributions for every grocery store, gas station etc you go to?

Azrael256 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 28, 2009, 01:22:39 AM »

Because my only other credit card is an American Express and not everybody takes Amex.

But I applied for a Visa with another bank yesterday. And for the record, I never opened the Citi card. They bought the bank that issued my visa card.

lone_gunman · « **Reply #3 on:** February 28, 2009, 01:48:19 AM »

Quote

Do you pull a report of financial contributions for every grocery store, gas station etc you go to?

They aren't partially owned by the federal government.

I know a lot of companies get incentives, subsidies, etc, from the federal government... but government ownership goes way beyond that.

Balog · « **Reply #4 on:** February 28, 2009, 02:15:37 AM »

/sigh

To you it does. To most people.....

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #5 on:** February 28, 2009, 02:19:51 AM »

Does 40% of the stock constitute ownership?

Anyhoo, I'm flummoxed that you, lone_gunman, would make an issue of this. I was rather sad to see you make the following remark, which to me is much more important than whether or not individuals do business with Citibank.

Quote

I am against the stimulus, but if there is a stimulus, my governor better get our state's fair share of money. Otherwise, my tax dollars flow into some other state. Why would a governor want his people to be taxed, and the money given to some other state???

EVERY governor should be refusing to cooperate with this porkulus garbage. Let the other states have the money, I say. I don't want one penny of it here.

dogmush · « **Reply #6 on:** February 28, 2009, 03:39:00 AM »

Quote

why would any free person want to use this organization?

I don't want to, but they bought my (not sub-prime) motgage and I don'thave the ready cash to refinance right now.

lone_gunman · « **Reply #7 on:** February 28, 2009, 09:31:29 AM »

Quote

EVERY governor should be refusing to cooperate with this porkulus garbage. Let the other states have the money, I say. I don't want one penny of it here.

I see no reason why my tax money should be collected and given to residents of another state. If I could opt out completely, and not have my taxes be used to fund the stimulus, that would be a different matter.

Animal Mother · « **Reply #8 on:** February 28, 2009, 09:38:18 AM »

I boycotted Citibank a long time ago due to their anti-gun stance.

http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/2008/01/09/citifirst-data-anti-gun-policies-stir-controversy-calls-for-boycott/

Scout26 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 28, 2009, 10:32:04 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Tactical pants on February 28, 2009, 02:19:51 AM

EVERY governor should be refusing to cooperate with this porkulus garbage. Let the other states have the money, I say. I don't want one penny of it here.

Word.

sanglant · « **Reply #10 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:01:09 AM »

one share of stock constitutes ownership, that's the whole point of buying stock in the first place

AZRedhawk44 · « **Reply #11 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:25:04 AM »

I used to have a Citibank savings/checking account along with my credit union account, back when they offered a 5% savings rate. Had the seed of my house down payment in it.

Last fall when the first whispers of government bank bail-outs, Citi-trouble and coercing the bank CEO's to take the money came to my ears, I ETF-moved all but $50 out of the account, back to my credit union.

With the recent news of the increased government ownership in Citi, I called them last week and closed the account, getting a check for the remainder mailed to me.

I won't bank with Uncle Sam, or any bank that has the power to just print more money rather than simply giving me the money that is mine. You want to see a bank over-leveraged? Just wait...

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #12 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:46:29 AM »

Quote from: lone_gunman on February 28, 2009, 09:31:29 AM

I see no reason why my tax money should be collected and given to residents of another state. If I could opt out completely, and not have my taxes be used to fund the stimulus, that would be a different matter.

Then why not borrow some cash from Citibank? It's your tax money. I see no reason why your tax money should be collected and given to others.

I have long believed that, since I oppose socialist practices, I should avoid taking government aid for schooling, housing, etc. (Other than the GI Bill.) It may be, partially, my tax money, but if my success can be credited to govt. handouts, I lose credibility in arguing against them. Am I wrong?

Quote from: sanglant on February 28, 2009, 11:01:09 AM

one share of stock constitutes ownership, that's the whole point of buying stock in the first place

One share of stock constitutes ownership of one share of stock. To own 40% of Citibank is not to own it outright.

sanglant · « **Reply #13 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:52:02 AM »

by that logic, if two people on a company no one owns it. after all no one owns all of it.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #14 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:54:44 AM »

I thought 51% was the significant figure in such matters. No? I'm no expert on things corporate.

And for the record, I think 40% is way too much govt. influence.

sanglant · « **Reply #15 on:** February 28, 2009, 12:10:55 PM »

51% is for control, not ownership. ownership is either or.

a link

Although ownership of 50% of shares does result in 50% ownership of a company...

Headless Thompson Gunner · « **Reply #16 on:** February 28, 2009, 12:23:56 PM »

Quote from: sanglant on February 28, 2009, 11:01:09 AM

one share of stock constitutes ownership, that's the whole point of buying stock in the first place

One share constitutes ownership, yes, but not control.

The real question is how much influence or control FedGov is going to wield over the operation of the bank. If the answer is none, then for this discussion it doesn't matter how much stock FedGov owns. Whether FedGov owns common stock, or preferred stock, or loans money to the bank, it all amounts to the same thing: an attempt to inject capital into the bank. It is not, in itself, an attempt to control the operation of the bank.

For the record, I'd have no more proplem using Citibank today than I would have a few weeks ago.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #17 on:** February 28, 2009, 12:24:42 PM »

OK, then, I was thinking of control.

lone_gunman · « **Reply #18 on:** February 28, 2009, 02:50:12 PM »

Quote

Whether FedGov owns common stock, or preferred stock, or loans money to the bank, it all amounts to the same thing: an attempt to inject capital into the bank. It is not, in itself, an attempt to control the operation of the bank.

When has the federal government ever injected money into something, and not wanted control??

Headless Thompson Gunner · « **Reply #19 on:** February 28, 2009, 03:18:53 PM »

Oh, I'm sure they want indirect control of Citi. Regulatory control and suchlike. That's nothing new, and they don't have to give you money to get it.

Ryan in Maine · « **Reply #20 on:** February 28, 2009, 07:47:40 PM »

40% gov controlled = 90% gov controlled.

H1500308 · « **Reply #21 on:** February 28, 2009, 09:57:36 PM »

Quote from: AZRedhawk44 on February 28, 2009, 11:25:04 AM

I used to have a Citibank savings/checking account along with my credit union account, back when they offered a 5% savings rate. Had the seed of my house down payment in it.

Last fall when the first whispers of government bank bail-outs, Citi-trouble and coercing the bank CEO's to take the money came to my ears, I ETF-moved all but $50 out of the account, back to my credit union.

With the recent news of the increased government ownership in Citi, I called them last week and closed the account, getting a check for the remainder mailed to me.

I won't bank with Uncle Sam, or any bank that has the power to just print more money rather than simply giving me the money that is mine. You want to see a bank over-leveraged? Just wait...

I'm in the process of moving all my accounts to a locally owned bank instead of Bank of America. Another govt takeover target. I refuse to bank with .gov

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #22 on:** February 28, 2009, 10:56:34 PM »

Did you take a look at any credit unions? They seem to be a good option.

Manedwolf · « **Reply #23 on:** February 28, 2009, 10:59:50 PM »

Remember that the contents of safety deposit boxes are NOT insured by FDIC. Get your stuff out if your bank may be nationalized.

"We have to do a survey of assets to make sure that there are no dangerous narcotics or firearms..." etc.

DJJ · « **Reply #24 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:13:20 PM »

Because Scotty and Vincent Price did?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXJyDfEYoDg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8ip_aEku38

News:

Author Topic: Why would anyone use Citibank? (Read 4377 times)