Consumer Revolt Spurred Via the Internet 309
sas-dot writes "UK's newspaper Independent outlines the brewing consumer revolt being fomented on the web. 'Consumer militancy' is becoming ever more common, as individuals join forces on the internet to fight back against the state and big business. Businesses from banks to soccer clubs have been the target of these groups, in each case facing the fury of consumers who feel they have been wronged. For example, 'A mass revolt has left the high street banks facing thousands of claims from customers seeking to claw back some of the £4.75bn levied annually on charges for overdrafts and bounced cheques. More than one million forms demanding refunds have been downloaded from a number of consumer websites. The banks are settling out of court, often paying £1,000 a time.' Are these kinds of organized 'advocate mobs' going to be the future of internet activism?"
Here in the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The classic Big Brother question now has an answer (Score:2)
Everybody!
Re:Here in the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
AC Here in the United States is ...? (Score:3, Funny)
I do not know who AC is, but if I did I would click-friend the person AC. AC's ability to observe and derive personal conclusions that indeed do reflect reality in the USA, EU, China, Russia, Canada, Mexico
Must just be in England... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm actually surprised at the apathy shown towards the Bank of America fiasco of exploiting loopholes in the law to allow them to open accounts and credit cards for illegal aliens!!
I figured there would have been a much larger rush of people to move their accounts away from them.
I guess aiding and abetting law breakers just isn't enough to get the typical US citizen's ire up....
Re:Must just be in England... (Score:5, Interesting)
At least someone is getting money from illegal aliens in that scenario. I withdrew my money from BoA after Clark Howard brought to light the man who was jailed after he asked a teller to verify a shady check, she verified it was genuine, and then he was jailed for cashing that check since it was a fake check. But no, I don't particularly care that a bank is profiting from our government's inability to properly enforce immigration laws.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
However, you can't really stop using the services and businesses of illegal aliens. In California, the entire economy is dependent on illegal labor. If all of the illegal labor left tomorrow, the economy would collapse.
This is the real hypocrisy of the problem. Everyone is dependent on illegal labor so they shouldn't get upset but they do get up and make stupid statement
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Must just be in England... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm concerned about BOTH! And ignoring one to focus on the other is no acceptable solution.
Re:Must just be in England... (Score:5, Interesting)
No...we should be enforcing existing laws, and possibly make some stronger ones that make it virtually impossible to earn a living in the US without proper, legal documentation for immigrant workers. If you withold banking privs, make it impossible to wire money, prosecute employers that hire illegal aliens and make it impossible for illegas to get a job, cut off all social services....basically make it impossible to live in the US as an illegal, dry up all incentive to come here illegally...THEN, you'll have solved the problem. They will leave if they can't work or get a govt. handout.
I'll agree at the same time, there needs to be a streamlined method of legally getting citizenship (hopefully the end goal of all immigration)...and make it easier to get a temporary visa which would allow the above to be set up for a legal immigrant worker.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Must just be in England... (Score:4, Interesting)
People say that the reason the illegals do these jobs is because no-one else will. I call BS. This is easily like the fast food jobs in the city, a high-school or JC job for extra cash while still living at home.
Mind you I don't fault the immigrants, illegal or otherwise for wanting to come here to better their life, but I firmly believe that starting off by entering the country illegally is the wrong way to do it. A large percentage of specific crimes in high immigrant areas (drug and robbery issues in LA for example) are committed by illegal (and often gang members) immigrants. While I realize that these people may be the minority of their total population, the easiest way to deal with it is deportation of all illegals.
[ditribe]
Christ make work visa's easier to get for Mexicans, I DON'T CARE, just stem the tide of people who are outside the system. If they have a work visa then they can get an international drivers license (no need for a state ID) and they can get a TIN (no need for a SSN) and with those two pieces of data along with their passport they can buy US car insurance if they drive. It's all within the existing legal framework. Enforce what we have and tell Pres Fox to go fuck himself when he complains about how we treat illegals in our country. Heaven forbid you enter Mexico illegally. You're below the child molesters in Mexicali prison.
[/diatribe]
Ta,
-nB
Re:Must just be in England... (Score:5, Insightful)
I call it "the myth of the $6.00 head of lettuce." This is when someone complaining about illegal aliens gets nailed with the "yeah, but do you want to pay $6.00 for a head of lettuce? Because that's what it would cost if an American were picking it!"
First of all, by most accounts, these illegals are well paid - well above minimum wage, and not the slave labor rates that so many like to claim they are making. The benefit to the employer is not having to pay payroll taxes, which is a huge hit to any company, and also not having to deal with full time employees that get paid whether there's any work or not.
But let's say, for sake of argument, that the typical illegal only makes $3.00 an hour picking 30 heads of lettuce. Of course, any monkey can work a lot faster than that, but let's err on the safe side.
That means that, out of the $1.29 I pay for a head of lettuce at my supermarket, only $0.10 goes to pay the worker who picked it.
Now let's say that same guy gets paid $12/hour instead. It'd only be $0.40 to pay the worker who picked it. My cost would increase by $0.30.
So, to all the idiots who say "yeah, but do you want to pay $6.00 for a head of lettuce?" I say "No, but I'll pay $1.59 to help keep out illegals and improve the economy in other ways."
What part about "illegal" do people not understand? I have sympathy for people wanting to come here. My wife is from South America, it took years for her to become a legal resident (we'd already had one child). I spent thousands of dollars and countless hours taking her for medical exams, to get fingerprinted (several times, since they kept changing the rules about what they'd accept), getting documents translated and notorized...
I'm not saying it should be that brutal, but I'm saying that I did put my money where my mouth is - there's a right way and wrong way to immigrate to another country. Illegally is the WRONG way.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're right that attempting to change a situation through the democratic process is important, and that to some extent law is a social contract we all deal with to get along a bit better... but that does not mean that all laws should be obeyed, and it MOST CERTAINLY does not mean that any part
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I easily understand your disagreements with my position on the issues, Just wanted to say thanks for the lucid response rather than the flamewar it coulda become.
A large percentage of specific crimes in high immigrant areas (drug and robbery issues in LA for example) are committed by illegal (and often gang members) immigrants.
A large percentage of specific crimes in high white areas are committed by whites. A high percentage of gang related violence involves gang members. A high percentage of the sky is blue. A high percentage of illegal aliens are here illegally.
Shocking, I know.
Point taken, but the argument I was trying to make is that rather than have to delve into whether some illegals are good while others are bad, remove the entire class and be done with that particular subset of criminal element. I remember reading that a high percentage of Mexican gang bangers in the US are illegals. I see gett
Also (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, we should put governors in all cars so they can't go over 65MPH.
Oh, and all computers should report to government agencies to help prevent crime.
Here's on for you:
In new Mexico there are farms the pay over 10 bucks an hour, and have benefits, and they can't find anyone to do the work. Picking is a very hard, and supprisingly skilled labor. Most peopel would rather take there 5 dollar an hour fast food job rather the
Re: (Score:2)
If it did start to happen, there would be news stories of all the poor illegals that can no longer get jobs or government hand outs, and are starving on the streets. Since Americans are a compassionate people, we would collectively scream that the government needs to fix this, either by allowing them to work illegally, giving them hand outs, or making them legal. Of course the current illegals that are made legal will just be replaced by new illegals, and the cycle starts all over again.
I
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Well, when it comes to big businesses, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't:
-Bank of America gives CC's to illegals.:
"OMG j00 are teh violatign teh immigration rulzorz!"
-Bank of America refuses to give CC's illegals.:
"OMG y wont j00 extend tehm credit just bcuz tehy are from teh DIFFREN COUNTRY!!!!!!111"
Oh, and just a nitpick: from what I read here [snopes.com], they're not *specifically* giving cards to illegals, just to people w
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So I think it's great pol
Re: (Score:2)
I would perfer it for that matter. Right now I don't ahve any Credit Cards specifically because I don't want them to have my SSN.(It's a principle thing, not a paranoia thing.)
AS far as I am concerned, it's BofA's risk. The only people who seem to really hate BofA not getting SSNS is the credit agencies. Suprise, suprise.
Re: (Score:2)
Then I found out that this basically means you're a ghost for non-credit card transactions, like electricity and renting an apartment.
Yep, I have enough verifiable liquid assets saved up to pay about 6 years of rent, and still I have to get a cosigner.
What do you do to establish credit for those kinds of things, plus mortgages if you've gotten one? (Yes, I'm aware th
Re: (Score:2)
Quite frankly, if you have 6 years of rent in the bank, you might want o looka t buying a house or condo.
If you go to a mortgage broker, they will be able to set you up with a finance person. They can tell you all kinds of ways the bank can lend you money.
To answer your question, buying a home is the best way to establish credit.
I have never had a co-signer.
You can get a credit card, buy something and then pay it off imm
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, so I guess using the SSN isn't so bad, is it?
Quite frankly, if you have 6 years of rent in the bank,
It's not in a bank, it's in mutual funds. (It sounds like a nitpick but "bank" implies "low-yield, will not lose value". Only an idiot would keep that much in the bank.)
you might want o looka t buying a house or condo.
Why?
If you go to a mortgage broker, they will be able to set you up with a finance person. They can tell you all kinds of ways the bank can lend you m
Re:Must just be in England... (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe people don't consider this to be a big issue. Usually, to spark a boycott, you need something really unexpected or shocking, which would rally the people into action. A good example of this is Shell, when it tried to sink an oil platform in the North Atlantic, which resulted into massive boycotts all over Europe. Or, more recently, Citgo, which saw a slump in sales after Hugo Chavez had his famous "Bust is Satan" speech at the UN (Citgo is owned by the Venezuelan government).
The Bank of America case is different. What they did was neither shocking nor unexpected. At times when people speak of amnesty for illegals and when there are efforts to grant them driver licenses and scholarships to their children, giving them credit cards doesn't sound far-fetched enough to spark a large protest. (In addition, people are more interested in Smith's decomposing body and Britney's shaved head at the moment.)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Or, prior to the fall of Apartheid, BofA's massive investment in pro-Apartheid South Africa. Which is what got me to remove all my funds from their bank.
Re: (Score:2)
Or even laudable.
Re:Must just be in England... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, well, that would also involve not eating hot dogs from meat packing plants that are blatantly breaking employment laws, and not fueling the problem by hiring curb-side landscape workers completely outside the law. People can't have it both ways, and... they want to.
But the whole credit-card-issuing thing brings a new, and especially noxious form of credibility into the illegal alien scenario. You can get a Visa/Debit card in Mexico, for example. So why not just bring your real account with you from home? Oh, right... because you're a criminal. The only plus side of this is that when an illegal is busted for one crime or another, and cut loose pending a trial date, there's a better chance of finding them by tracking their gas station purchases, etc. But... that's not worth the philosophical price paid for rewarding the initial law breaking in the first place. I would think that the legal immigrants would be up in arms over this dillution of what they work so hard to accomplish.
Re: (Score:2)
they have, by definition, already committed a crime. all that has to be done is issue a card and then track them down. if i were illegally in a country i wouldnt do anything that helped locate me.
yeah, let's talk about it! (Score:5, Insightful)
If an illegal alien can go and open a bank account, it's fine by me. Bank of America is not in the law enforcement business, it's in the banking business. This alien is supporting an American business by opening that bank account.
No, let's talk about predatory lending, sneaky credit card terms, deceitful charges, etc.
Let's talk about MBNA (now part of Bank of America) and BofA being some of the heaviest hitters to push through new bankruptcy law [moranlaw.net] that makes everyone a peon [tpmcafe.com] to credit card companies, regardless of circumstances! Let's talk about the fact that an amendment to limit credit card interest rates to 30% (yes, that's thirty f'ing percent) was rejected last yaer. Yes, credit card companies did not want their interest rate limited to a cut-throat ceiling of 30%!
Let's talk about my platinum Bank of America card moving from 2 late payments (by even a day!) in 6 months to 2 late payments in 12 months to 1 late payment in 12 months before they bump your rate from a good APR to an insane 20%+ default APR. Let's talk about two-cycle billing [smartmoney.com] (my roommate, who normally pays off his entire balance got bitten by this because he miscalculated and payed off a $1 less than the balance)
Let's talk about CapitalOne (and some other predatory lenders) not reporting your credit limit to the credit reporting agencies, which is ILLEGAL to do, but there is not enough activism or pressure to change that.
So yeah, let's talk about that, and then you can tell me why I should care that Bank of America issues a bank account to an illegal alien, when there are all these other topics out there that affect every damn American.
Re: (Score:2)
While I'll agree that these are problems....these CAN be avoided by people that have self control, live within their means...and don't run up credit balances they cannot afford to pay off in a reasonable manner.
If you do this...you can generate a good credit rating, and you can then get credit cards with very reasonable rates.
I got in to CC trouble once...took a miracle to get out of, and I'll NEVER do it again..
you and I are not in the majority (Score:2)
Predatory banking is bad, but, it only works on ignorant people.
This is a false impression. The problem with predatory lending is that people who should not be lent money are given that money. This is irresponsible because the bank well kno
Re: (Score:2)
Yes people, please do have the self control not to be diagnosed with a debilitating illness, ever get laid off or have a slump in income, or have your house burned down when your neighbor shoots off fireworks that land on your roof... *sigh*
It's great that you got out of your self-created emergency by some 'miracle', and that it leaves you time to worry about things like 'ohhh noooess
But it could benefit other customers (Score:2)
However if they way they treat their good customers isn't enough to make you vow never to do business with them again, then I can't imagine how this would deter you.
right on! (Score:2)
Re:Must just be in England...1 Problem (Score:3, Informative)
The problem is that there are fewer and fewer acceptable choices every year as alternatives. BofA isn't the only bank you wouldn't want to do business with.
Newsflash!! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Most peopel also know that immigrant workers are good for the US . .
So truth is now a function of popular opinion?
Illegal immigrants are great for the factories and construction companies that can get them to work for sub-minimum wages. They're just a burden on the rest of us that have to pay taxes to build the public infrastructure and fund the public services that everyone uses(and illegals don't pay for). It's also a documented fact that illegals ship substantial portions of their earnings back to
Re: (Score:2)
I figured there would have been a much larger rush of people to move their accounts away from them.
I guess aiding and abetting law breakers just isn't enough to get the typical US citizen's ire up....
Um, I don't really care if a US bank opens and account for a citizen of any country and it gets used. I don't care if my small town
Re: (Score:2)
Law Breakers (Score:3, Insightful)
Americans don't have any respect for the law, because the law doesn't have any respect for us.
There's just no way someone can look at the American revolution and its causes -- the very principles that the country was founded upon -- and then look at today's America and not see hipocrisy. The Drug War?! DMCA!? All the creepy shit that's been happening since September 2001? Even little day-to-day stuff
Re: (Score:2)
Don't play games by obfuscating the issue by mixing the terms "immigrant" and "illegal immigrant." Our country, by and large, LOVES legal immigrants.
Boycott!! (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. I'll bring the lawn chairs, beer, and Scrabble.
Soccer.. arggggggh! (Score:2, Informative)
English: Football
Spanish: fútbol
Protuguse: futebol
Romanian: fotbal
Galician: fútbot
Catalan: futbol
French: le football
Russian: futbol
Turkish: futbol
Serbian: fudbal
German: Fußball
Dutch: voetbal
Norweian: fotball
Swedish: fotboll
Danish: fodbold
American: Soccer
The United States, it seems, is the only country in
NFL? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Soccer.. arggggggh! (Score:4, Informative)
"The rules of football were codified in England by the Football Association in 1863, and the name association football was coined to distinguish the game from the other forms of football played at the time, specifically rugby football. The term soccer first appeared in the 1880s as a slang abbreviation of Association football, often credited to Charles Wreford-Brown.[18]
Today the sport is known by a number of names throughout the English-speaking world, the most common being football and soccer. The term used depends largely on the need to differentiate the sport from other types of football played in a community. Football is the term used by FIFA, the sport's world governing body, and the International Olympic Committee. For more details of naming throughout the world, please refer to the main articles above."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_(soccer) [wikipedia.org]
Re:Soccer.. arggggggh! (Score:4, Funny)
Score one for the bad guys! Yee-haw!
Re:Soccer.. arggggggh! (Score:5, Funny)
Australia: Soccer
Canada: Soccer
USA: Soccer
New Zealand: Soccer
Britan: who cares, you all suck at it anyway!
Re:Soccer.. arggggggh! (Score:4, Informative)
Nope, In Ireland football is a game played with 15 players a side and run by the GAA [www.gaa.ie]
Soccer is something played by delicate flowers who fall in a breeze and generally bring disgrace upon themselves and their nation and shouldn't be confused with sport being more in the realm of performance art.
Though footie as played in Oz seems suited to a bunch of ex-crims, they really shouldn't be allowed abroad to perpetrate [abc.net.au] International rules on others ;)
Re: (Score:2)
What? the land of the free?
Whoever told you that is your enemy
Now something must be done
About vengeance, a badge and a gun
cause Ill rip the mike, rip the stage, rip the system
I was born to rage against em
no you can't (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Consider my mountain bike... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, yes they will (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, yes they will. See the current bruhaha over Bank of America [libertypost.org] and their giving credit cards to illegal aliens as well as allowing unapproved documents to be used to open accounts.
Even, gasp!, Michelle Malkin is getting into scrum [michellemalkin.com] and accusing the Bush administration of ignoring and condoning the actions of Bank of America.
One need only do searches for things like "lawsuit Match.com" to see that (maybe) consumers will be getting the upper hand. Until businesses bribe, er, lobby, Congress to protect them that is.
the bush administration is in pocket of big biz (Score:5, Insightful)
* ignoring BofA bruhaha
* encouraging "guest worker status" to permit legal under-minimum-wage labor
* signing the bankruptcy bill
* pushing ethanol fuel (big ethanol lobby)
* against discount drugs from Canada
* crazy cronyism in Iraq (KBR, Halliburton)
I mean, there is very little that's not big business motivated.
Re: (Score:2)
This one is not a bad idea. Though it is not really worth it to use lots of land for a marginal energy gain with mais, it will build the infrastructure for when we can make it from cellulose.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What branch does the FBI fall under? The Attorney General is appointed by whom? The Executive branch is the branch in charge of enforcement. Judicial tries them after the executive investigates.
Basically, Canada's government artificially limits the prices on drugs, and some people want that price control to apply in the U.S.
Nope. People want to be able to exercise free-market buying. That is, if I can buy from anywhere, I buy wherever it is cheapest.
Re: (Score:2)
So what if BofA has decided to take that risk?
And god forbid people trying to make a better life be able to save a few bucks so there children can get a better schooling and become productive tax paying members of the US.
no no, lets just spend billions upon billions of dollars throughing out people who will do jobs no locals will. I would also argue that if BofA wants to hold money for people with l
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of banks, no. When opening an account, banks must, by law be provided with certain documentation which proves who you are. For a quick and dirty list, see this from Rice University [rice.edu] (pdf). Note that a matricular consular card IS NOT a valid form of identification yet Bank of America, and others, are being allowed to use it anyway.
So what if BofA has decided to take that risk?
Re: (Score:2)
Additionally - what does immigration status have to do with bank accounts ? there are a lot of people that spend a lot of time legally in the USA without ever obtaining permanent resident status (business visitors and such) should they be denied access to banks too ?
Re: (Score:2)
For the record, while I would like to see people provide that evidence, I'm glad the bank is not abusing the social security system by not requiring the social security number. Now, an interest bearing savings account (or other investments) might be an exception, but it should not be required for a checking account.
Re: (Score:2)
See this link [federalreserve.gov] (pdf) from the Federal Reserve in regards to opening accounts for people affected by Katrina. The answer to the second question lays out what a bank must do to verify a person's identity. It lists some forms of identification which may be used. As a rule, the document presented must be an official form of identification. That is why I qualified my previous statements by sayi
Re: (Score:2)
I sure hope this will finally drive a wedge between big-business Republicans and "social conservative" Republicans (former Southern Democrats who fled that party in protest of its civil rights platform). Every other year, those poor suckers elect another Republican to office to end immigration and abortion forever, get prayer
Stating a general theory of political reality. (Score:5, Interesting)
Those who oppress us cannot do so unless we help them. Those who go against our-selves rampant, shall suffer the only possible consequence.
As humanity learns to speak with one another, breaking down barriers of distance, language, and culture, the existing governmental powers are going to have a very interesting dillema on their hands. One people, one world, one government.
-GiH
The preceding has been your dose of political idealism for the day. Overdosiong on political idealism may lead to conspiracy theories, or dellusions of power. Use only as recomneded.
Re: (Score:2)
That is the preferred disclaimer throughout most of the world. Lon Horiuchi has to have something to keep him busy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Those who oppress us cannot do so unless we help them.
Specifically, no one can oppress you unless you first oppress yourself. Do not ever use moral judgement or punishment as a tool to become the person you want to be. It WILL backfire, and it will leave a backdoor in your mind that mental hackers can use to root your head.
Mob activism against corporate criminals (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it thus fair to call a press which publishes information about this issue, along with all the people who makes use of that information, an "advocate mob" out to bully corporations out of their profits? In fact, who is the more organized here? The private companies with enough funds to hire PR agents, attorneys, and lobbyists, or those citizens who assert their rights as legislated by parliament and enforced by the courts?
It is not the future (Score:2)
"Advocate Mobs"? (Score:5, Funny)
Wait until such a "mob" hits Slashdot and demands journalism.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I'll wait for the dupe.
Re: (Score:2)
Chase Bank Please. (Score:2)
Anyone up for doing this?
Newsflash (Score:2)
Along those lines, a few years back I got a letter in the mail saying that I was elegable to join in a class action lawsuit against whichever b
Re: (Score:2)
And, the thing that made
The Short Answer (Score:2)
The short answer: Yes!
The longer answer: Yes, as long as it's more effective than other courts or methods. Banks that did nothing wrong should have little to fear from a better informed consumer.
As long as it is just the Internet... (Score:2)
Some patheticly weak "boycott" where people decide they aren't going to buy their slave-labor products from one store and instead buy them at an inflated
Re: (Score:2)
It would. In fact, it would get a lot of people killed, probably including many innocents, and it would get a lot more people in jail for murder.
Speaking as someone who lives near a business that had a direct action campaign run against it for some considerable time, though, I can guarantee that such campaigns are not reliably effective in changing the behaviour of a business.
Banks have it coming to them (Score:3, Interesting)
I had to pay a deposit to my landlord for a new place I was going to rent. Unfortunately, due to a foul up which was entirely my fault, this put me something like £1 overdrawn (a trivial amount in anyone's book). So the bank sent me a letter that they were going to charge me (IIRC) £25 for unarranged borrowing and a further £3 per day for each day overdrawn! Then they took the £25 out just before my first pay day, making me overdrawn AGAIN, causing them to charge me £25 again for unarranged borrowing as a direct consequence of them charging me for the previous problem! You'd think before they charged you they would check that the charge wouldn't cause you to go overdrawn again and be charged again.
Of course they refused to refund it. Natwest - bastards. They used to like also withdrawing the funds on a cheque written the day it hit the payee's bank, but not add the funds on a cheque you were paying in for 3 to 5 days.
If my current bank tries that trick, I will move my account elsewhere - including my mortgage. I'll make sure it ends up costing them more than it does me.
Re: (Score:2)
The point of the whole thing is: their published policy was unfair.
Bouncing Your Bank (Score:3, Funny)
To be brief: (Score:2)
I simply hope so. And not just for consumer issues, but for environmental, ethical and human rights issues as well. The public needs to vote with more than their dollars and care about more than convenience.
I'm hopeful that this is a sign of the pendulum swinging the other way at last!
consumer revolt (Score:2, Informative)
I'm not sure, probably, but one of the best I have seen so far is saynoto0870 [saynoto0870.com] which lists the equivalent geographical telephone numbers for the 0870 (national rate non-geographical) numbers that companies give out for support and such. ( Okay so it should have been called saynoto0870.co.uk but that's a little OT )
Considering how long some of them keep you on hold, dialling non-geographical numbers (which are often excl
Wonder if the U.S. will see such benefits (Score:3, Insightful)
(Disclaimer: I don't know if the U.K.'s any better than the U.S. in this regard):
In the U.S., if consumer revolt ever becomes enough of a problem, the companies will just buy some laws making it illegal for consumers to collude against them, and/or crush complainers under the weight of the civil court system.
There is a choice other than evil banks... (Score:2)
... credit unions! (in the U.S. at least)
Credit unions are nonprofit, so there's no incentive for them to nickel-and-dime you to death with fees. (Account owners are the only shareholders anyway). I have free, interest-bearing checking through mine [coastalfcu.org], as well as a credit card with actual reasonable terms and conditions (and fixed rate), a mortgage and a car loan, both at decent rates.
It's not hard to affiliate a group (e.g. an employer, church, etc.) with a credit union, and the only disadvantage over ban
Market transparency ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently, in the cases mentioned in the article, businesses were doing things that prompted their customers to leave when they found out that what they were faced with was "policy" instead of just "bad luck".
Market transparency is great ... it forces businesses to be honest and to actually compete on value instead of relying on (modest) barriers (including ignorance) to keep their customers. If a business uses practices that hurt it when the public finds out about it (as was the case here), can those practices be either good or reasonable? What's not to like?
And look at the flip side of the coin ... if people are happy with the way a business works they will write about that too.
Nothing new. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Soccer Clubs (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer: I am an American.
Ah, but see, by saying "soccer" it removes all the ambiguity. Most non-Americans know what "soccer" is, they just think it is an incorrect term to describe that sport with 2 goals and a buncha guys kicking a ball around. Had the poster said "football" then the American population would assume the summary was referring to American football while the non-american population wouldn't be confused for they would expect to see "American football" to describe football and "football" to describe soccer; a clever non-American would however assume that since this is an Amermican website that the summarry was actually referring to American footbal by saying "football". So had the summary said "football" to describe soccer, only non-presumptuous non-American's would infer the correct meaning...By saying soccer, everyone infers the correct meaning, and a few people get pissed off and/or roll their eyes.
P.S. I'm not arguing over which is the more correct term, thats a useless debate...Seeing as I am an American and a Slashdotter, I suppose I'm supposed to be double-arrogant and double-argumentative. . so yeah, soccer is THE correct term
Re: (Score:2)
Back to the article, I really don't think these campaigns make much of a difference. I hope that changes, and they start to make more of a difference, and stopping Tesco is a great start, but the fact is consumers have to choose from the lesser evil. When talking about energy companies, or banks, or supermarkets, there isn't any difference between them all. I wish
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Soccer Clubs (Score:5, Funny)
The modern American football pad set evolved from intense competition, where everyone was looking for a better edge. However, it is my opinion that the inception of hard plactic components that spurred our current suit of armor look. Would you rather get speared in the gut by a guy wearing a thick, soft leather helmet, or a guy wearing a bulletproof shell on his head? Thus it became necessary to wear hard plastic shoulders as well as elbow, knee and girdle pads.
As far as the purists accross the pond mocking American football, I say, if you hadn't spent the majority of the 20th century without 2 nickels to rub together, your rugby would have evolved similarly. If rugby was a billion dollar industry like American football, you would be importing only the most ferocious animals alive to play the game. Competition would spur the need for stronger, lighter protection, and eventually, the only difference between American football and rugby would be that nifty little gay pride celebration you chaps call a scrum.
Re:Soccer Clubs (Score:5, Funny)