Oh, this is just precious. Let's set the stage from back in 2006:
Bank profits: How Canada's big banks really make their money
CBC News Online | September 1, 2006
The words "record," "bank," and "profits" spend a lot of time together these days. The three have been seen cavorting together so often that their ménage-a-trois is becoming common knowledge.
The public tut-tuts. Billions in profits. Almost $12 billion in 2005 from the Big Six alone.
Hold that thought. Now, let's drop by Blogging Tory Matt McGuire's "A Step to the Right", where we read (emphasis added):
So Jack Layton wants to ban ATM fees to save bank users $5 - $10 per month? Of course, the hypocrisy is just too delicious. In one breath, Mr. Layton will tell you that $100 per month for child care is mere peanuts. In the next, he runs to the CBC to decry ATM convenience fees.
What are you trying to give me with $10 per month, Jack? I can’t even go to a movie theater for that kind of change, let alone buy an overpriced soda there. I suppose I could rent a movie, but it would take me at least 4 months of no ATM fees to save up the money for the cheapest DVD player on the market.
No, no, hang on, we're not done yet, as we revisit Matt's blog from an earlier post here:
This morning I woke up to the wonderful news that OC Transpo is looking to hike it’s fares by 7.5% in July, almost 4 times the rate of inflation...
This will be the 6th fare hike I’ve witnessed since I moved to Ottawa 4 years ago.
So, let's sum up, shall we? Matt looks at ATM fees from a banking industry that is making record profits, and he's outraged -- outraged, I say -- that anyone would suggest making even the smallest dent in those obscene profits.
On the other hand, Matt looks at an essential public transportation system that is almost certainly operating at a loss, and he's outraged -- outraged, I tell you -- by a fare increase that will help it keep operating.
Does anyone else see the howling inconsistency here?
7 comments:
You really do need to look up the definition of "outrage". He simply points out the fact that fares were increased a number of times and that a severance package was given to a fatcat. His other post points to Jack Layton being hypocritical..fucking shocking, that.
Are you really so hard up for shit to post about that you have to use this? Look up "hypocritical" and "schizophrenic" while you at it. You obviously don't know what they actually mean.
Anon--are you so daft as to actually not understand what was written? What's your reading comprehension at? Zero??
Layton went after convenience fees for the express purposes of letting You and Me Q Public keep some of our hard earned money--Monies that are currently making 'record profits' for banks.
Some blogger mocking Jack Layton (and I'm no apologist for Layton--in my book he's a used car salesman and I'd never vote for him) for going after bank user fees on the one hand but admonising the gov't for the 'pittance of 100 dollars/month for child care' monies...
And then the same blogger whines about the user fee increases on public transportation...
Yeah, I think CC's got it nailed.
The issue with the bank service fee is bigger than what you and I may have remaining in our bank accounts at the end of the month--it's that banks have *record* profits at the expense of, well, you and me.
The Child care 'subsidy'--ask a parent about how far 100 dollars per month goes.
Layton, for a change, is right on on both counts.
So instead of showing up with some yippage that amounts to zero, why don't you actually post something that shows that you understood what you read?
I think pointing out that some corporate (bus) crook is stealing your bus money is *100% exactly* the same thing as saying some corporate (bank) crook is gouging your bank account.
Um, AA, in Canada at least public transit is generally run by public corporations operating on a non-profit basis. They rely heavily on fares because they are massively underfunded by senior levels of government in comparison to American public transit. There's simply nothing to 'steal'.
Oh, come on, Adam. Didn't OC Transpo put up record profits last year? Like a few billion dollars' worth?
What? No? They didn't?
Huh.
adam c,
This is what his blog said.
"Former OC Transpo head Alain Carle was awarded a severance of $130,000 after being fired late last year."
Alain Carle - crook
$130,000 - money
OC Transpo - corporation
QED
AA - you're right. I might counter that $130 000 is a drop in the bucket of OCT's operating and maintenance costs of $250 000 000 annually (so it's not like it caused the fare increase). But then, I'm starting to forget what my original purpose was, or why I'm arguing with you...
Post a Comment