Anti-Gun Policies Cost Citibank & BOA $600,000,000 in Louisiana Road Projects

Sure it is if I operate a business that is manufacturing guns and I'm an absolutely safe loan to take and they refused it over ideological reasons that's absolutely banking taking a backseat to ideological reasons you said so yourself they are against gun ownership in the US.

They are practicing activism and it comes before banking.

 

So what. There is nothing controversial about that.

99% of their concerns is still about banking. And you're just dismissing it to push your agenda. lol

 

but it is activism.

their primary concern is activism.

you're dismissing their activism to push your agenda

 

It's nothing like Greenpeace of BLM. Those are groups/institutes who got activism as a primary concern

 

Yes they are.

So does bank of America.

 

And it COST THEM. Bravo.

 

So chick Fil A is not a restaurant, Koch Industries is not a manufacturing and refining operation, most religious denominations are not religions. In fact according to your definition, one would be hard pressed to find any business that is what it claims to be.

Welles fargo, which I am guessing is still in the running despite having defrauded thousands of americans last year, just contributed 1.8 million dollars to various politicians this year (mostly republicans) and over 3 million in lobbying. Is that not fiduciary activism? How can they still be called a bank?

 

Of course, I guess the delicious irony is that you have overlooked that those voting on the funding, the state BOND COMISSION, are clearly not a state bond comission they are fiduciary activists right?

 

Which is why the Louisiana State Board did what they did,

"Enough of the BULLSHIT" is the message.

 

Supporting the Constitution is the OPPOSITE of "activism", as is penalizing the insertion of "ACTIVISM" into the banking business.

 

Since when does the second amendment guarantee gun manufacturers the right to a loan from the bank?

 

The only group that can attack the 2nd Amendment is the government.

 

well ask yourself this question do they discriminate against people over ideological reasons if no then no they're not.

of course religions are activists.

My definition is if you refuse to serve somebody over an ideological reason you cease to be at the business you were and become an activist.

As far as I know Chick-fil-A does not say no people of this stripe allowed. I don't know who the Koch brothers discriminate against I'm really not sure what they do.

You completely messed the criteria in which I called Bank of America and activist organization they refuse to bank with certain people over ideological reasons that makes banking secondary to ideological reasons.

 

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. The state Bond Commission does not refuse to do business with a certain sect of people over ideological reasons.

You couldn't have gotten this more wrong if you tried.

 

Damn right.

 

I don't think you understand. Nobody is saying gun manufacturers have the right to a loan that's just dumb. People are saying Banks shouldn't have the right to discriminate against people. Bakeries don't.

 

How about you reread the post I quoted from grok and tell me exactly where he said that?

Banks should have the right to not do business with institutions that will harm their reputation. Gun grabbers might not bank with BOA if they did business with the NRA.

 

No one said that they "had a right" to a bank loan.

Since when is pushing an ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT policy part of banking?

They are free to establish that loan policy if they choose; they are NOT FREE to SUFFERING ZERO CONSEQUENCES for it.

The left agenda pushing IDIOTS just met with the CONSEQUENCES.

 

So we should punish starbucks for asking customers kindly not to bring weapons to their coffee shops, punish businesses that demand customers not have guns

LOL. That is exactly what they did. The State Bond Commission was put into place to oversee the incurring of state debt. They just chose to refuse business with a group of people uniquely on ideological grounds rather than on grounds of feasability or the ability to repay any indebtedness incured, as is their mission. Too funny.

 

no I would have no issue with Bank of America sing not to bring weapons into their establishments but that's not what they're saying.

So again this is not a comparison it wouldn't be like Starbucks not serving anyone who drove a large vehicle.

did you not have to do business with an activist group that used to be a bank.

 

Well as opposed to Polydectes, you are at least being honest: you admit that the government is punishing citibank and BoA because it does not like it's behaviour. You know... picking winners and losers...government interference in the free market....big government. All that stuff that conservatives are against. Welcome to the democratic party!!!!
As I said at the very beginning of this thread, you like the outcome (punish the people who might have anything to say about gun control) so you didn't care how it got to it, despite it being against every principle you beleive in.

BTW the citibank policy is as follows "The new policy, announced Thursday, prohibits the sale of firearms to customers who have not passed a background check or who are younger than 21. It also bars the sale of bump stocks and high-capacity magazines. It would apply to clients who offer credit cards backed by Citigroup or borrow money, use banking services or raise capital through the company." which mirrors Walmarts policies. Quick! grab your pitchfork!!!!

 

Or like car rental companies not renting to people under the age of 25. or health insurance companies not insuring people with preexisting conditions, or all of those businesses offering senior discounts only to seniors?
Care to move the goal post...again?

 

I haven't moved the goalposts months nothing you are listing is that all denying service to customers over ideological reasons.

As far as I know Chick-fil-A doesn't refuse service to customers at all. You mentioned something about the Koch brothers and I don't know who they deny service to.

Car rental companies deny service to people between the age of 16 and 24 for financial reasons not ideological ones. Same with insurance companies denying people with pre-existing conditions.

 

I think it's time for a counter-activist movement: