Posted on 09/27/2003 7:05:03 AM PDT by joesbucks
I've read over the course of the past few months the numerous threads regarding the use of telemarketing and the intrusion it has on our homes.
I had a long discussion with my wife who hates the intrusion. I ask her why did they call her? She had no idea. Well, despite the black eye telemarketers get, it's probably the most effective way to get business. Even Mrs. Me admitted that if they called about something that she had an interest in, she probably would buy. BINGO.
But let's look at if from another perspective. You will see numerous threads about how regulation is driving business from our shores to others. How we've taken manufacturing and moved it to low cost countries. Not because of productivity, but because of emission regulations or community groups that complain about the noise, smell or traffic caused by the facility. Even right to know and safety concerns. Changes necessary would be costly and not enforeced across the border or across the pond so companies locate there.
We seen threads about government regulation taking over our lives. Yet when it comes to a minor inconvience, we run to the government for help from the big bad telemarketers.
What's the difference between regulating out a obnoxiouis telephone call but not noxiouis fumes from the plant next door?
What happens when all the telemarketing jobs get exported to Ireland or India and our laws don't extend to them? And the calls continue cause we can't stop them.
What are we to do with all the folks who try to eek out a living working in a humid cramped call center. Many are the folks we drove from the welfare rolls with welfare reform (a good thing). Many are college students trying to earn their way through college. Others are seniors trying to supplement a fixed income. Or the physically disabled who find work in a sitting position reading a script, possibly from the company you work for or possibly even own. Some are just the slugs of life and a call center is the only way they've managed to find some sort of paycheck. What do you suggest they do for a living that's not immoral, illegal or indecent?
I find it amazing that we would rally all day about government intrusion and regulation on companies, yet we have rallied to stop a few phone calls a week or day.
The other thing to remember is that there are several ways that you will still get calls. They WILL NOT GO AWAY. Doing business with a company? They can call. Done business with them in the past 18 months? They can call. Signed up for one of those free give aways recently? You can now legitimately get a call. Charities. Exempt. Local lib dem candidate? Exempt. Pollsters. Exempt. Probably a thousand other loop holes? Exempt too!
Yes. I believe they are called CAMA or LAMA, which records are used for automatic billing purposes.
Would a subpoena be needed ...
No. The Telephone companies are called, "private companies," but are highly regulated and must make certain kinds of data available to the government to stay in business.
Or does the government already have access to all such records?
It can have.
Hank
I'm in private business. Phone solicitation was a problem for me, I solved it. I just don't expect the government to solve every problem for me. So my side is the side of people who can take of their own affairs without appealing to the nanny-state every time something isn't to their liking.
What's that make your side?
There would be nothing wrong with this or any other scheme that prevented unwanted calls of any kind, so long as the government didn't do it. It's not finding a way to prevent unwanted phone solicitation I oppose, it's all the collectivist government solutions to everything I oppose.
Hank
Two wrongs still do not make a right.
Hank
Of course!
I assume you mean by "kook," anyone who is not what you are.
Hank
A year later I ran into the guy who they had contracted to re-do their site (they were too stupid to crawl our site to get the files before we took it down). Yup, you guessed it - they had refused to pay him too.
If the neighbor repeatedly continues to do so after being told not to, the procedures are outlined in the front of your phone directory.
Look, telemarketing defenders, these trolls are just not working..
How does telemarketing tell a business what to do?
You know perfectly well where I stand so stop playing dumb and feeding me that BS line about the "gov't" having to pay for it. You know better.
So for the benefit of others, I will state for about the 100th time, my practical solution to this dilemma that does not involve any government money: Invert the "do not call" registry idea. That is, restrict telemarketers only to those homes who "opt in" to the system. Let them pay a fee for it. Then we will have the perfect situation. Only those who want and are willing to pay for telemarketing calls will receive them.
You voluntarily answer the phone, and you choose to answer the door or not.
I presume youre referring to one of those phones that comes on even after its turned off or unplugged. I hate those.
Then the next question is whether Congress authorized any specific government agencies to have such access and if so what constitutional safeguards are in place.
In theory, the gov't (say the FCC) could just go on a fishing expedition if they decide to target a particular calling company as an example, and run the CAMA list against the D-N-C list to have the names pop up, each with a penalty of $11,000, provable in court ($1 million for each 901). No telemarketing company can possibly afford fines of millions of dollars, or even the potential threat.
The result of the fear factor would be that Sears will quit calling about home improvements altogether, and the scam artists will keep calling but now from the Cayman Islands or many other nearby English-speaking places beyond the reach of American law. I have enough experience researching scam artists to know that passing such a law results in vast unintended consequences.
But the primary purpose of the law, which is for Congress to be able to say they DID SOMETHING -- and get re-elected, has been accomplished.
Look I'm not defending the industry as such. I'm simply saying we seem to want to kill an industry that employes thousands of people in legitimate commerace for the sake of inconvience.
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.