Slashdot Mirror

You are correct - I could argue that most bank's CIPs already conformed to the Patriot Act but I won't disagree with you aftre doing a little more research; since the FDIC has issued guidance on the subject it looks like the Patriot Act has gotten its grubbly little fingers into a lot of new places, not just the highly publicized or obvious ones:

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2004/fil04 04a.html

The FDIC Financial Institution Letters make interesting reading in general:

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2005/index .html

You are correct - I could argue that most bank's CIPs already conformed to the Patriot Act but I won't disagree with you aftre doing a little more research; since the FDIC has issued guidance on the subject it looks like the Patriot Act has gotten its grubbly little fingers into a lot of new places, not just the highly publicized or obvious ones:

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2004/fil04 04a.html

The FDIC Financial Institution Letters make interesting reading in general:

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2005/index .html

I also have a perspective on the subject because I grew up here and I live and work here now. You are correct that tobacco and coal are primary industries here and are failing, that much is true. However, if you look closely at what he's doing, he is trying to help attract high tech industries to the area by showing that we have and are continuing to get better technology all the time. This has been something that he's been working on for quite some time. If you lived in the area, you might know that if you were paying attention. You would also know that many do return to the area after college seeking work here.

While not all localities in his district do have access to broadband, many do. What he wants is high speed connections in locations that do not have them so that there will be new industries already in place when the failing ones finally go. So you fault him for trying to help the region grow by attracting high technology to the area and "move the region into the 21st century"? He's already been successful in procuring money for high technology and attracting companies to Southwest Virginia.

Most of his constituants probably don't even have computers, much less even $20/month to spend on broadband

I also live in the county in which his office is located and while not everyone does have a computer let alone broadband, many do. Yes, even grandmothers and not necessarily just in Washington County.

Oddly enough, most of the people in southwest VA are very religious, ultra-conservative Christians, who would be shocked at the way Mr. Boucher votes on the so-called "moral issues". But it's amazing what a person desperate not to lose his/her job in an area where finding another one is nearly impossible without any kind of skills or education will overlook if he/she foolishly thinks that voting for Mr. Boucher will mean 2 more years of employment. And when you can't read, or else don't read very well, it's far too easy to fall for the crafty lies of such a gifted speaker.

Sir, I think you will find natives from here and people moving to the area are not these uneducated people that you seem to think they are. I'll address your employment issues in a moment, but your argument is very weak as you present the majority of people in this region in a very bad light. One that I might add has been cast on it for a long time and quite frankly is time for it to go. As for the "moral issues" The mud slinging toward Mr. Boucher got quite heavy in the last election, but the people know that he does work hard for the region and gets results. Even the ultra conservative people of the area know a hard worker when they see one.

Now for your unemployment statements. Looking at the counties that are part of his district, very few of them have unemployment above the national average, with several below that. While this can definitely use improvement, in some cases over the last year in this district, the unemployment percentage went down -- way down from what they were. In some counties, it went up. While unemployment is a big issue, to say that the man does nothing to try and help the region grow is quite uncalled for, and it is the same tired argument. This argument typically comes from those that do not pay attention to what is going on around them. If you would like to understand what he's been doing for the region, why not take a look.

The fact is, all over the state, unemployment has risen in many counties over the last year. It is not related to just this district. You should take a look at state wide unemployment for the last 4 quarters, take a look here. You can see that it is not just in the 22 counties that he represents.

As for originally voting for the DMCA, you can see

Enjoy the reading...

the two days refers to you losing your ATM card & pincode.. the 'access device"

(a)(1) Access device means a card, code, or other means of access to a consumer's account, or any combination thereof, that may be used by the consumer to initiate electronic fund transfers.

(2) An access device becomes an accepted access device when the consumer:
(i) Requests and receives, or signs, or uses (or authorizes another to use) the access device to transfer money between accounts or to obtain money, property, or services;

the two days refers to you losing your ATM card & pincode.. the 'access device"

the resolution section is at
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-31 00.html#6500205.11

[i]You can, but it will not do any good. Unlike a credit card, there is no way to reverse a draft from your bank account. [/i]

This is wrong see Electronic Funds Act
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-31 00.html#6500205.3

Unfortunately, Federal law mandates a limit on transfers and some banks have additional policies and charges for electronic transfers, so this is a bit impratical.

I had the pleasure of learning about this bullshit the hard way.

More information here and here. Call your bank for more info.

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2004/FIL11 404a.html

Banks are controlled by FDIC, not by IRS: This report may be of use. The linked document lists exemptions from a general rule, and you can see what this rule is (any transaction above $10K is to be reported, unless you are exempt) - and you can read yourself through how many loops you must jump to be exempt.

> IIRC, Paypal is not insured by the FDIC ... I believe the cap is $10,000.

No, it would be $100,000.

Hmmm... maybe in sheer quantity. But for the size of the crime, I think you'd have to look to the rich and powerful as the perps. Long before Enron, the precedent was set by The S&L Crisis - which was the single biggest theft of taxpayer dollars ever. Jim Wright, the Speaker of the House at the time, was forced to step down from his position as a result of that single crime. Daddy Bush's other kid, Neal was up to his eyeballs in that same deal as I recall. He got off scot-free.

Gee - sure hope they're all still living comfortably while poor inner-city kids are being shot by police almost daily.
</SARCASM>

Does the U.S. have an equivalent for the CDIC?

http://www.fdic.gov/

FDIC [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation], maybe? It is an organization founded by the Congress to supervise banks and insure savings. Since one of its duties is to supervise banks, any negligence complaints should go to it (I think).

So it seems the jury is still out on what the hell paypal is. But the Feds made it very clear that paypal very well might fall under state bank regulation.

It's not that hard to research and find out of a bank is FDIC insured or not. In fact you can do it online in about 30 seconds if you so desire. It returns some rather interesting information about the institution too. FCUA has a similar tool on their website for credit unions too.

I'll grant you I haven't done all this much research before choosing my bank. If they have a brick and morter location with an FDIC sign that's enough for me. I don't bank online because I like to keep my business local. Likewise I don't bank with the national-chains that have offices here (HSBC, Bank of America, etc) -- I bank with my locally owned bank. If I was going to bank online you can bet your ass that I would take the time to actually research it. All the moreso since "research" in this day and age consists of a few mouse-clicks and about 15 minutes of my time.

Anyone who sends a deposit off to a Paypal address deserves what they get. I don't think there are all that many stupid people out there -- though I'll grant you there are probably enough of them to make these scams worthwhile.

The real www.fdic.gov is running a rather standard press release to warn that it's a scam.

Consumers never have any reason at all to send information to the FDIC. They already can get all they need to know out of banks.

The real www.fdic.gov is running a rather standard press release to warn that it's a scam.

Consumers never have any reason at all to send information to the FDIC. They already can get all they need to know out of banks.

Everything you think you know about aimster is a complete lie. See my journal for details. In short, she had nothing to do with Aimster, nor is her name even Aimee - that was a fabrication to evade AOL's trademark lawyers (which failed miserably, which is why it's now called "Madster" - her name is Madeline). Aimster/Madster is operated by a thief and a felon (his "business partner"). As far as I can tell, the "music pundit" site is written by a third party - probably a professional writer - with all website "comments" being filtered by "Aimee's" dad.

I find it sad that Greplaw would stoop this low, but since John is a Harvard alum I guess it's easily possible that he arranged this "interview" to drum up press.

As for the interview itself, I would like to know how it was conducted. It looks to me like it was conducted over AIM, in which case I'm sure John either wrote the responses himself or was standing over the typist's shoulder coaching him/her. If it was conducted over telephone or in person I'd be very surprised.

Obviously you're not familiar with how pension funds work, or how they are guaranteed by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). This is a government corporation that protects "defined benefit" pensions in much the same way that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) protects bank accounts.

Basically, if you have a defined benefit (as opposed to defined contribution like IRA or 401K) pension plan (also known as an ERISA plan; ERISA stands for "Employee Retirement Income Security Act"), you will either get that pension benefit from your employer's pension fund, or the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation will take over if the fund goes insolvent (up to a maximum of about $42,000 a year).

For more information, see PBGC's List of Frequently Asked Questions

And such a guarantee will likely not be necessary. Please be assured that pension funds are kept separate from the executive's golf/prostitute/liquor petty cash fund. At most company's, pension funds are VERY carefully invested and monitored (people can go to JAIL if they are not), and are designed to survive the companies that they are associated with.

Newsflash: That which you refer to is the S&L Scandal. It was a pretty big deal back then. Several senators took the fall and a lot of people got burned.

The FDIC has a website dedicated to this fiasco. I don't think that the BBC broke this article, and it was certainly all over mainstream American news outlets for several months (years).

EEK...
Make that:
http://www.fdic.gov/consumers/consumer/news/cnsprg 98/crook.html

The basis given in the article for the decision seems more than a little questionable, though:

"PayPal does not physically handle or hold funds placed into the PayPal service," the FDIC said in its letter.

ING Direct no more physically handles or holds my funds placed in their service than PayPal does, yet they fall under the FDIC umbrella.

Aren't our elected officials supposed to at least TRY to protect their electorate from this kind of thing? $200 BILLION is a lot of money!

$1.4 trillion is even more money, and some politicians were involved in aiding and abetting that theft.

It would be nice if our elected officials would stop counting their kickbacks, bribes and lobbyist money and start doing their jobs.

What? Be actual representatives of the people in their districts? Stand up for justice? Do the right thing? Not when there's an electoral war chest to build!

And now you begin to understand just how close to death democracy in North America truly is. Money isn't just a unit of trade; it's a measure of power. The more you have, the more powerful you are, the more influence you have over lawmakers (what? citizens? screw 'em; they don't buy me campaign ads and dinners). As for "campaign finance reform," only a complete and total overhaul of how elections are run could even begin to attack the root of the problem with government in the US, Canada, and other Western "democracies"; the position of lawmaker has become one of authority without responsibility, instead of servant with great responsibility.

I wonder if the distance, real and political, between representatives and citizens has become so great as to make accountability meaningless, simply because the politician lives in a completely different world than the people who voted them into their positions. I wonder if politicians would make different decisions if they had to live with their effects on a daily basis, alongside the people who gave them that power and corresponding responsibility, instead of acting like first-graders and covering up their messes with spin and flat-out lies.

--end rant--

Where's your source, Jon?

According to this FDIC site, the number bank branches increased faster than the population in 1999. So there isn't any evidence that the Internet is killing off visiting banks in person (yet).

1. Financial Institution Web Site Privacy Survey
2. Know Your (Liability) Limits
3. Information Systems & E-banking

1. Financial Institution Web Site Privacy Survey
2. Know Your (Liability) Limits
3. Information Systems & E-banking

1. Financial Institution Web Site Privacy Survey
2. Know Your (Liability) Limits
3. Information Systems & E-banking

1. Financial Institution Web Site Privacy Survey
2. Know Your (Liability) Limits
3. Information Systems & E-banking

1. Financial Institution Web Site Privacy Survey
2. Know Your (Liability) Limits
3. Information Systems & E-banking