[bpodgursky]

Um, no, you completely made up the numbers, making no attempt to source from the article which laid them out clearly. It's not the same "ballpark".

- It's $1 for the card, not "$5-$10"

- It's free cash withdrawal, not $3

- It's free deposits from direct deposit or government benefits, not $3

You are not approaching this remotely honestly.

[fefesafaea]

https://www.walmartmoneycard.com/account/legal-info-page?pro...

As I said, there are a variety of cards on offer, from a variety of sources, but they all seem to fall within the same range cost-wise, even if the fees are structured differently.

It's as if we are arguing about cars, and you want to debate whether the pinto in question had power-windows or not, while ignoring the fact that it will explode in a routine accident.

[bpodgursky]

Dude, you really need to think carefully about whether you are approaching this topic honestly, or if you are hunting for reasons to reinforce your belief that this card is a scam.

The precise things you claimed about this card are _not true_. Those are facts. If you want to debate, use _facts_.

Nobody is denying that WalMart _could_, if they wanted to, offer a savings card which is a scam. But also consider their motives going into this, compared to the average bank:

- Wal-Mart's goal is to get people to spend money at Wal Mart. This card makes it easy to spend money at Wal-Mart.

- Banks exist entirely from interest on saved money, and on fees.

Since these customers have very little saved money (the whole point of this article), the money made is entirely from fees, unless you have another reason to get people to use the card. Wal-Mart does -- it is totally reasonable for them to run this program at-cost to attract customers. You cannot say the same for any bank.

If you want to disagree with the merits of people spending money at Wal-Mart, that's a different topic. But the evidence points to this card being a good deal for an underserved part of the population.

[fefesafaea]

Not sure why you are accusing me of intellectual dishonesty, unless the goal is to derail the conversation.

You are right to say that a few of the specifics I gave were not correct. I was clearly not arguing that. However, the specifics you gave were not 100% correct either. For instance, if you go to an atm machine in a wal-mart and attempt to withdraw cash, you will be charged 3 dollars. The fee breakdown I linked bears this out. A fee breakdown, I might add, that is several pages removed from the main page describing the class of card in question.

[bpodgursky]

The FAQs (https://www.walmartmoneycard.com/account/faqs) say

> You can withdraw cash from your card at any Walmart register or MoneyCenter. This service is free for the Walmart MoneyCard product with Cash-Back Rewards.

Where are you looking?

[fefesafaea]

Alright, start on the page you just linked https://www.walmartmoneycard.com/account/faqs

now click on the fees tab https://www.walmartmoneycard.com/account/faqs#fees

then click on the 'fee plan' link https://www.walmartmoneycard.com/account/legal-info#feeplan

then click on the 'view the Wal-mart money card fee plan' link https://www.walmartmoneycard.com/account/legal-info#feeplan

and you will arrive at the fee plan I linked earlier.

[bpodgursky]

That number isn't for ATMs in Wal-Marts, it's the general "at an ATM" fee. If you look below,

> Walmart Card Cashing / Withdraw cash without a fee at Walmart MoneyCenters and Customer Service desks. / No Fee

there's no fee for withdrawing cash in any Wal-Mart.

That seems to be the same as any other normal bank -- except for some credit unions that reimburse you, you don't get free withdrawals at random ATMs (I have BoA, and it's the same for me).

[kefka]

I suppose you're in the wrong income bracket to have considered services from them.

Yes, they do charge fees at the register, regardless your link. When I went and deposited the $200 check from Wal-mart at a register, and $197 goes in... yeah. You can link URL's all you want. But 3$ disappeared in that transaction for "reasons".

I know because I've used the plans that people here are talking about. Unlike the rest of you, I've had them. I've used and been used by them.

[lazyasciiart]

Withdrawing cash != cashing a check. Stop accusing people of not being familiar with these products just because they aren't conflating different services the way you are.

[kefka]

You do realize you're talking to people who've never had to use these services, never made under $40K (except when living at home), and are many steps removed from ever having to go through this?

Yeah. I have. I did the Green Dot. Pile of shit, with hidden service fees, usage fees, loading fees, fee fees. Oh yeah, YC.

Ive been on food stamps. I've been on unemployment. Even been homeless for a time. Right now, I have a significantly better job... But I still live in a trailer.... err, "Tiny House".

But anyways, good luck explaining what you mean. These people don't get it, and their societal structure means that they won't get it, even if you linked the very documents to them. It's out of their worldview.

[Aloha]

I think another point to be made is the OP is correct - most non-bank alternatives are horrible, but so much of modern society is inaccessible if you do not have a bank account or bank account analog.

Also, to quote from the article.

"Check-cashing outfits, payday lenders, and similar businesses are often thought of as merely preying on poor people, who, the conventional wisdom goes, tend to make bad financial decisions. Lisa Servon, a University of Pennsylvania professor of city and regional planning, offers a different angle in her recent book, The Unbanking of America: How the New Middle Class Survives. During Servon’s research working as a teller at a check casher and payday lender, consumers told her that the fee structures of nonbank alternatives were more transparent and predictable than those at conventional banks—crucial to anyone living on a budget."

I understand where you're coming from, I was in the payday loan trap at one point.. robbing peter to pay paul as it were, I made much less than 40k a year, its only in the last 5 years I've started to get north of 50k, and gotten comfortable.. now I save save save..

[kefka]

> I think another point to be made is the OP is correct - most non-bank alternatives are horrible, but so much of modern society is inaccessible if you do not have a bank account or bank account analog.

Indeed. And I'm still paying for it after many years. I got fucked over with payment reordering for bank-profit maximization, even with "overdraft" disabled. Didn't matter. Because whatever the bank says, is the ordained truth. And when your name gets on ChexSystems and other lists, you're done for.

My wife was did in similarly. The local credit union said she owed $120 for previous account issues that pertained to her then ex-husband. Didn't matter. The bank said it was hers, and too bad. There is no recourse. The bank/CU is god, no if's ands or buts. And suffice it to say, if you're in this position, there's no money for a libel suit (which is what it is, without a court determination).

> "Check-cashing outfits, payday lenders, and similar businesses are often thought of as merely preying on poor people, who, the conventional wisdom goes, tend to make bad financial decisions. Lisa Servon, a University of Pennsylvania professor of city and regional planning, offers a different angle in her recent book, The Unbanking of America: How the New Middle Class Survives. During Servon’s research working as a teller at a check casher and payday lender, consumers told her that the fee structures of nonbank alternatives were more transparent and predictable than those at conventional banks—crucial to anyone living on a budget."

I would agree with the transparency discussion. But it's also much more predatory. They get their pound of flesh. And this flesh is taken every time you use it. Banks do cover up and obfuscate their fee structure, but if you have the usual minimum balance, you'll never see this. Banks also rely on lack of CSR's for rich people. Because money's nothing, not a big deal. Bills are minuscule compared to income.

> I understand where you're coming from, I was in the payday loan trap at one point.. robbing peter to pay paul as it were, I made much less than 40k a year, its only in the last 5 years I've started to get north of 50k, and gotten comfortable.. now I save save save..

Yeah, it's not common to see people here who know what this all means. Fortunately, I was able to avoid the payday trap.. But not student loan trap, credit card trap, medical trap.. Right now, I have a garnishment for an injury sustained in 2008. Had insurance, but the physical therapy "wasn't approved". For a while, I was job hopping a bit and stayed ahead of the garnishments. And unemployment is ungarnishable in Indiana.

Credit cards.. Well. I had them when I had a job. Paying them down is hard without one. But it's easy money to get food and basics when you're waiting for unemployment. Fortunately, a few of them have been written off.. but that just burns another bank. At least Google Voice allows me to shitcan creditors, especially when I dont have the capability to pay.

School debt is a whole 'nther area. I got into my accident which caused my medical debt, but also caused all those classes to fail. But the school gets their cut, regardless if you do well or not. The school can do horrendously, apathetically, and cutthroat.. and they're guaranteed their money no matter what.

I did schooling at a "proper 4 year university" with frankly nothing to show for it. And I believe this burden should also be shared in part with the organization that also failed me in my educational goals. But, even this "Public University" is run much more as a Business than a public trust or institution. But likely, I'll be paying this off with garnishments in my Social Security.

In reality, this whole area is a sore point. Many people here, given the focus of HN, will never have to suffer like this. They'll also never know the pain of hurting, and not being able to fix (no medical care). They'll not know what it means to go hungry because you're waiting for the unemployment to start along with food stamps. They won't know the shame of walking into the food pantry, or using the foodstamp card. Nor will they see the looks you get, when you borrow your mother's vehicle to get the groceries... How dare you not be dressed in tatters and driving a rust-eaten beater truck.

It comes down to understanding "Us" vs "Them". I was an "Us", and remember that well. I'm on my way to being a "Them". Faking it, living the culture, understanding the nuance. But I understand, and seeing many posters here in this thread brings back all that anger of being taken advantage of, and having no power to do anything about it.

[fefesafaea]

Hey thanks for the support. While I don't think making sweeping generalizations about HN readers is necessarily constructive, I would definitely agree some of us are working from very different assumptions here.

I guess the main thing I was attempting to communicate is that the facts on the ground are very different from the facts as presented in this article and elsewhere online. While it's definitely difficult to convey this in brief internet comments, I do feel there's a worthwhile discussion going on, so thanks to all involved as well as those reading. :)