ge capitol cuts off loans to gun shops

Status
Not open for further replies.
To follow up on that, if a bank made the decision not to fund gun companies or gun owners in minority areas of town while doing so in white areas of town, then you would have a case. But a blanket statement of not funding an entire industry is not redlining.
 
Not much of a surprise - they backed off such financing for new customers back in 2008. Also, FWIW, they are headquarted in CT (about 20 miles from Sandy Hook), and the father of Adam Lanza is a senior exec with GE.
 
Plus if they don't go along with Obuma they may loose their "we don't pay taxes" status.
 
Ok redlining or not. Whether its a business to make money or not, whether they are making smart financial moves or not, whether they sell products or give loans, I DON'T CARE. They are GE. They are denying credit to gun shops. They are playing politics to stay on the side of Obama and his legion. So GE gets ZERO $ from us right?
 
GE capitol is the finacial portion of general electric. They are one and the same. That is like saying chevy and cadillac are seperate companies. Still part of gmc.
 
"They received 200 million in FREE money they never have to pay back from the Feds."

Uh, that's what grants are. The $200 million in stimulus grants was spread over several years. It amounted to about 1/10th of 1% of the company's revenues, so it's not like they needed it. But they did their part to help the Pres stimulate the economy. :)


"Additionally, GE never received a bailout from the U.S. government, and did not participate in TARP. GE did willingly participate in other programs widely available to hundreds of financial institutions that were designed to stabilize the economy, including the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP) and the Commercial Paper Funding Facility (CPFF). In both these programs, taxpayers actually profited from GE’s participation through fees and interest."
 
It is payback for the financial ties. GE is just giving back a small favor. Here is some detailed interactions. The ties that bind....

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2011/04/08/the-unholy-marriage-of-ge-and-president-obama-at-the-altar-of-industrial-policy/

Look at any major Obama policy initiative — healthcare reform, climate-change regulation, embryonic stem-cell research, infrastructure stimulus, electrical transmission smart-grids — and you’ll find GE has set up shop, angling for a way to pocket government handouts, gain business through mandates, or profit from government regulation.
 
Ok redlining or not. Whether its a business to make money or not, whether they are making smart financial moves or not, whether they sell products or give loans, I DON'T CARE. They are GE. They are denying credit to gun shops. They are playing politics to stay on the side of Obama and his legion. So GE gets ZERO $ from us right?
I personally would not take it that far. They made a decisions to protect their best interests. That is how I expect them to act. I would guess the decision was more risk management than political. If you think about it like that they have a point. There are far safer alternatives for them to invest their capital than the gun industry.
 
I was surprised a few months back when I ordered a rifle (not even an evil black one!) from Bud's and the GE credit option was gone from the website. I really enjoyed using their money until the free period was over....

I will be closing all my GE Capital accounts.
 
The article I read says that Wells Fargo did this very same thing 10 years ago.
 
I had a customer recently who owns and operates a finance business.. We spoke a bit about the current economy and agreed that the folks running things are way out in left field (we were fishing so the conversation was fairly casual...). As a full time fishing guide I get to meet folks from every walk of life (and every level of society).

The one thing he remarked that really stuck with me is the current state of the lending business (he does lots of work with small businesses that need capital). He said that from his point of view the fortune 500 companies were doing quite well but that the entire small business world was in desperate shape financially and the policies being followed currently seemed designed to create that state of affairs... In that environment it's not surprising to me that GE Capital (or any other similar business) might take an action that was designed to make them look good to our current government types. Not much different than the businesses that suck up to the current administration for a chance to get ahead... Wish it weren't so.
 
GE Capital is under the GE Corporation umbrella. While it is true that GE Capital is different than GE 'products' (there are many divisions of GE) they all answer to, and take their guidance from, the Board of Directors of GE Corp. GE Corp is a stanch supporter of Obama

Is this policy change of GE Cap purely political? Probably not, GE owns lots of lawyers, so there is likely a big liability component as well. But to deny there is any political motivation in this is ignorance. GE Cap wants to fund lots of government projects. Projects like wind farms, military aircraft, and electric vehicle power. And to do so they need to kiss up to the regime in charge.
 
GE Capital is under the GE Corporation umbrella. While it is true that GE Capital is different than GE 'products' (there are many divisions of GE) they all answer to, and take their guidance from, the Board of Directors of GE Corp. GE Corp is a stanch supporter of Obama

Is this policy change of GE Cap purely political? Probably not, GE owns lots of lawyers, so there is likely a big liability component as well. But to deny there is any political motivation in this is ignorance. GE Cap wants to fund lots of government projects. Projects like wind farms, military aircraft, and electric vehicle power. And to do so they need to kiss up to the regime in charge.
So understanding your last paragraph, how can they be criticized for making this decision? Combined with a risk management assessment, they also have to protect their political interests for their shareholders and for their employees. I just don't see whats wrong with what they did. Oh well.
 
This is simple, don't use them. I'm fed up with ge capital for other reasons so decided to part ways a few weeks ago. Save your cash to buy your guns and gun related articles. If you must use credit then use it for other things you'd use cash for like gas and groceries where you can get double cash back bonuses on a lot of cards. Cash is king though.


Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android
 
I'm canceling my Chevron Texaco credit card as it is issued by GE Capital. In a capitalist society, they have the right to decide with whom to do business. So do I. I won't support them any more.
 
First I agree that gun owners are not a protected class. At least not yet.

Second, I did what several posters advised, I looked up "redlining" on Google.
(side note: If you want to base an argument on the precise wording of a definition look it up and provide it yourself. Saying "look it up on Google" is a poor argument.)

redline [ˈrɛdˌlaɪn]
vb (tr)
1. (Economics, Accounting & Finance / Banking & Finance) (esp of a bank or group of banks) to refuse a loan to (a person or country) because of the presumed risks involved
2. (Economics, Accounting & Finance / Banking & Finance) to restrict people's access to goods or services on the basis of the area in which they live
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/redlined

Redlining is the practice of denying, or charging more for, services such as banking, insurance,[2] access to health care,[3] or even supermarkets,[4] or denying jobs to residents in particular, often racially determined,[5] areas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

Definition of 'Redlining'
The unethical practice whereby financial institutions make it extremely difficult or impossible for residents of poor inner-city neighborhoods to borrow money, gain approval for a mortgage, take out insurance or gain access to other financial services because of a history of high default rates. In this case, the rejection does not take the individual's qualifications and creditworthiness into account.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/redlining.asp

Please note that none of these definitions include any reference to membership in a protected class, at least not directly. The bold quote is the most relevant, to deny loans based on membership in a group, rather than on the individual's qualifications.

So according to Google, redlining is denying a loan based on membership in a group rather than on individual merit. It's possible that the strict letter of the law is different. If so, please look it up and provide citations.
 
Last edited:
"If so, please look it up and provide citations."

"Saying "look it up on Google" is a poor argument"

I agree. :)


"redlining is denying a loan based on membership in a group rather than on individual merit"

I think you need to look at the original term - redlining. They took a map and drew a red line around certain neighborhoods or areas and refused to do business there. Sort of like a pizza place that won't deliver to everyone in town, but only to certain neighborhoods. The residents of a redlined neighborhood make up the group - all of the residents, black, white, whatever - if you live there they won't do business with you.

Unless GE is refusing to loan money to some gun businesses in a town and not others, I don't see that redlining applies.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top