Skip to comments.
"Do Not Call" Means Poorest May Lose Jobs
Cato Institute ^
| various
| Various
Posted on 11/11/2003 10:23:26 AM PST by LowCountryJoe
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 401 next last
To: palmer
I pay for your entitlement Nope, you pay for your own. Hence no entitlement. If you prefer not to avail yourself of it, that's your choice.
but you and millions of other people lobbied to make me.
that's called democracy.
To: Jack of all Trades
A local regulation to discourage strangers from commercial speech and physical trespassing is a lot more acceptable to me than federal regulations to regulate calls that may include political speech.
102
posted on
11/11/2003 11:55:47 AM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: palmer
Right, 50 million Americans are going to disconnect or pay to be left alone either of which would put the minimum wagers out of work anyway. Isn't that some sort of extortion? Would we have a "case" then?
103
posted on
11/11/2003 11:57:26 AM PST
by
Let's Roll
(And those that cried Appease! Appease! are hanged by those they tried to please!")
To: sirchtruth
"Our selfish attitudes lead us to use this Do Not Call registry because God forbid we might be 'bothered'"
Oh, I get it. It's just fine for the harassER to be utterly selfish by barging into MY personal time at MY home, making me get up, answer the phone, so I can walk away wanting to tell this irritating twit to go to hell. But it's not okay for ME, the harassEE, to have some peace and quiet in MY home after MY long day at work doing a real job. As usual (and isn't this classic liberal philosophy?) it's okay for people to inflict themselves on people minding their own business, but people who want the freedom to CHOOSE not to be harrassed by these whining adult juvenile delinquents (democrats, liberals, socialists, communists, PETA disciples, Saddam sycophants, 'social justice' dweebs (Did You Hug Your Telemarketer Today?), etc.) are somehow 'selfish', yegods, absolute criminals...
WhatEVAR.
To: Modernman
American industry never seems to learn this basic lesson: either regulate yourself, or government will end up doing it for you. The second alternative always ends up being worse for the industry Extremely well put.
To: The Clemson Tiger
This kind of "democracy" is like voting for more bread and circuses. All consumers and payers of unemployment tax are going to pay for this.
106
posted on
11/11/2003 11:58:21 AM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: Let's Roll
That's acceptable. If the state government allowed more local competition, you would likely have service choices that included no solicitations for no extra charge.
107
posted on
11/11/2003 11:59:59 AM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: palmer
This kind of "democracy" is like voting for more bread and circuses. Oh, please.
I'm movin' on now...good luck workin' on those debating skills.
To: LowCountryJoe
*Pity.*
109
posted on
11/11/2003 12:00:44 PM PST
by
blackie
To: LowCountryJoe
Boo hoo!
110
posted on
11/11/2003 12:01:03 PM PST
by
aculeus
To: xm177e2
Look, I'm not a telemarketer. But you bring up a very good point about the nature of that business and how they're predatory. I just worry that this will lead to even more protections provided by our government. I'll repeat myself on this one: There are free market solutions for everything and even if they hadn't been created yet, they would have been or will be. I can't name all the technology out there that does the job or even if it works but in the mean time, there are things one could do in order not to be disturbed. Ignorance should not be an excuse to create legislation that takes away our FREEDOMS.
To: myrabach
I don't like telemarketers any more than anyone else. However, saying that these people are not productive members of society is crass and baseless. If they don't produce anything, then they are by definition "non-productive".
Vast numbers of telemarketing employees are young people working while attending college, single moms doing the best they can, second-job people supporting themselves while they work up the success ladder, supplemental income to retirees, etc.
Vast numbers of illegal aliens are holding jobs all over the country illegally. Perhaps these ex-telemarketers can take up positions and send the illegals packing. Or, they can apply at all of the McDonalds and KFC's around here that always have a help wanted sign out.
The loss of this kind of employment will greatly impact the lives of those above. And its those low end workers who will be impacted the most. The telemarkting companies... well yep, you guessed it... they are taking the business to Canada and overseas. One market closes, another opens up!
My gosh - what did this country do before the huge proliferation of telemarketers? I mean, what did young people do to make a buck or two?
112
posted on
11/11/2003 12:02:19 PM PST
by
meyer
To: LowCountryJoe
3) Can you imagine being a telemarketer NO they're scum
2) That politician's shortsighted behavior could lead to further legislation protecting us 'dependent' citizens from the e-mail, snail mail, and billboard advertising that we somehow, by ourselves, can not suppress the influence of.
Nothing to do with not being able to supress the influence of.
e-mail: I chose when to log on and delete unread any spam that sneaks past the filters: minor inconvenience
snail mail: I choose when to go to my post box. The trash bin is between the box and the house: Minor inconvenience to dump unread.
Billboard: don't read.
Telemarketers: They insist I answer the phone when they ring, whatever I was doing at the time. This is a major inconvenience as it is *never* at a time convenient to me. For telemarketer calls there is *no* convenient time.
And did I mention that telemarketers were scum.
113
posted on
11/11/2003 12:04:17 PM PST
by
Oztrich Boy
(You realize, of course, this means war?" B Bunny)
To: SamAdams76
Look, you people must be getting swamped with these calls! I get maybe two or three a week. I actually have fun telling TM's to go pound sand especially after I've said NO to them and they keep on trying.
I really was looking at it as reducing the opportunity for these people to make a decent living by limiting free speech, however after reading some of these post and juding the way some of you look at it, I am slowing changing my thinking.
OMG, I might be wrong!!!
BTW, I love the blowhorn idea!
To: The Clemson Tiger
Don't let the facts hit you on the way out!
115
posted on
11/11/2003 12:05:04 PM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: petercooper
Wow, good point!
To: The Clemson Tiger
Having looked at palmer's home page, I now understand that this topic isn't the only one he is irrational on.
117
posted on
11/11/2003 12:05:32 PM PST
by
Let's Roll
(And those that cried Appease! Appease! are hanged by those they tried to please!")
To: LowCountryJoe
Then factor in all the people employed making products or providing services sold by those telemarketers.
Add in the truckers who once delivered those products, the stockroom boys who loaded those trucks and filled those shelves with products now not being sold by those telemarketers.
Take away from the economy the sale all those millions of taxable gallons of truck fuel, all those millions of taxable hours of phone calls, and the economic ripple effect thoughout our market economy might well exceeed the "value" realized by a few people too lazy to get off their fat asses and answer their telephone.
118
posted on
11/11/2003 12:06:03 PM PST
by
Gargantua
(Embrace clarity.)
To: palmer
A local regulation to discourage strangers from commercial speech and physical trespassing is a lot more acceptable to me than federal regulations to regulate calls that may include political speech. Political fundraising is exempt from the do-not-call list, as are charities.
119
posted on
11/11/2003 12:06:40 PM PST
by
Modernman
(It puts the lotion in the basket or it gets the hose again)
To: af_vet_rr
I pay for my phonelines, I value my time at home. If telemarketers want to pay me for my phone and my time (and it would cost a lost, let me tell you) then they are free to call and chat.That would be the best solution - just let us mortals charge for our time and equipment.
I'm $75 per hour, 1 hour minimum. Any takers?
120
posted on
11/11/2003 12:07:09 PM PST
by
meyer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 401 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson