In the past few months city legislatures in Santa Monica and San Francisco, CA felt that the people of their cities should not have to pay service charges at ATMs where they did not have an account. The people voted to ban these fees. It is unclear what they think should b

In recent court documents “BofA said its 188 San Francisco ATMs collect about $245,000 per month from the surcharges. Wells Fargo said its 174 ATMs in the city take in about $210,000 monthly” (Zuckerman B1). That may seem like a lot. One might demand “how do they have the right to collect that much money from us?” They have the right because they are a business; apparently a successful business. They list a price for a service and the customer accepts. McDonald’s proclaims on their signs “billions and billions served.” That multiplied by a few dollars or whatever the average meal costs is, well, billions and billions of dollars. Is that preposterous? Should McDonald’s be forced to offer hamburgers for free because by some bizarre twist of selfish logic the populous feels that they deserve it? No, of course not, and neither should the banks have to offer their service for free.

What might be scary to some consumers is that the surcharges are still increasing “to an average of $1.38 for all banks from $1.33 a year ago” (Sheets 56). While that may seem like trouble in the future, economist Robert Litan offers a sobering forecast. “They (the banks) are pretty much maxed out.�

Some topics in this essay:
San Francisco, , Robert Litan, Zuckerman B1, Francisco CA, Santa Monica, Francisco ATMs, Kasser Rackl, Bank America, san francisco, Harris Bank, sheets 56, santa monica, monica san francisco, convenience using, lower fees, monica san, banks atm, offer service, santa monica san, ban fees,