[Hank Kerchief]

The "do not call" registry is the phone equivalent of a "No soliciting" sign on the front door. A man (or woman) should have the right to keep his home free of telemarketers invading their privacy.

NO! The "No Soliciting" sign is bought, paid for, and put up by the individual protected by it, the "do not call" registry has to be paid for by someone else. But you don't seem to think taking someone else's money to pay for your convenience is an intrusion.

Hank

[MizSterious]

By "somebody else"? Who the h*ll do you think pays the taxes? I pay my fair share. I'm not asking my neighbor to pay my taxes. Hence, I'm paying for my fair share of the do not call list.

[Dave S]

But you don't seem to think taking someone else's money to pay for your convenience is an intrusion.

You are the first kook, er person I have heard that has complained about the cost of the no call list. Do you also complain about the cost of the National Weather Service?

[SamAdams76]

NO! The "No Soliciting" sign is bought, paid for, and put up by the individual protected by it, the "do not call" registry has to be paid for by someone else. But you don't seem to think taking someone else's money to pay for your convenience is an intrusion.

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.