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 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 401 next last
To: DefCon
A radio station was discussing stupid laws still on the books. A good example of government gone amuck....You have to have your elephant on a leash when walking him down the street.
To: LowCountryJoe
"...(I would have responded to #252 but I've been blocked by the elite)..."
- - -
You are almost ready for a tin-foil hat, I think...
262
posted on
11/11/2003 7:22:54 PM PST
by
DefCon
To: palmer
>>"they won't last long">>>
I knew we were lost when the telemarketers figured out they could have a computer call us & have us call them back if we were interested in their product.
Why would they ever stop doing that without gov. intervention?
263
posted on
11/11/2003 7:24:26 PM PST
by
Ditter
To: DefCon
signed, some unscrupulous personThere's no freaking way that is his real number. That's why his previous post of that number was pulled. Now, he could publish name, address, phone number, and other authenticating information, verified by FreeRepublic management, and then maybe we could be sure it was him. Maybe.
But anyone so blase about unsolicited harassment via telephone is sure as hell not to be trusted about something as simple as this.
264
posted on
11/11/2003 7:25:00 PM PST
by
Petronski
(Living life in a minor key.)
To: LowCountryJoe
they wouldn't be the "poorest" if telemarketing firms had ever paid them more than starvation wages.
To: LowCountryJoe
You are most welcome to unlearn from me. I used to think I was very smart in my 20's (40 now), but I quickly found out posting here how dumber and dumber I really am.
Or you can toady up to the professor, that sounds like it might be easier for you.
266
posted on
11/11/2003 7:26:28 PM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: Indy Pendance
If it's an important call, they could leave a message, and you could return it when you are able. I rarely take calls from telemarketers. You can tell when they call. The first clue is the silence. Dead giveaway it's a junk call. Most people will talk to you right away. Second is, the 'please hold for an important call' recording. Right, how many have actually holded for that? The third option is to have your kids answer. They fight over the phone anyway. They tell them I'm dead or moved. I've finally learned that I am not a slave to my phone. If it rings, it's my phone, and I'll answer it if I'm able. I'm not going to drop everything I'm doing to try to answer it in 30 seconds. I have an answering machine, and that works fine. Maybe I'm just lucky, I don't get that many junk calls. But, I'm still not going to sign up for a government list. Who knows what hillary and her kind would do with it. Remember the FBI files? Maybe I'm stretching it, but I figure, the less government in my life the better.That's an excellent list of the many ways I can adjust to the harassment of others. But I don't have to. It's my GD phone, and in the event one of them does fool me long enough to speak to me, they wither. Again, though, telemarketing harassment is a public nuisance, and the 'public nuisance' has been part of Anglo-saxon jurisprudence for hundreds of years.
P.S. It's 'held' not 'holded.'
267
posted on
11/11/2003 7:30:31 PM PST
by
Petronski
(Living life in a minor key.)
To: palmer
"I just think allowing the wire negates [privacy]" Of course you do.
You also think that having a front door to anyone's house means that you can stand there and ring the doorbell all day, that you can walk side by side with anyone on the street where ever they go trying to sell your crap, that you have a "right" to continually try hacking anyone's computer all day because they're on-line, and you can stand peering into anyone's windows since they have the windows in their house and car.
There are plenty of laws to stop these invasions of privacy, too. These are the protections provided by the government because other idiots with your thought processes can't fit into what would otherwise be a freer society.
268
posted on
11/11/2003 7:31:54 PM PST
by
HighWheeler
(A chainsaw don't know the difference between a laig and a lawg.)
To: Ditter
Why would they ever stop doing that without gov. intervention? Because you demand to have computer calls blocked by your local phone company. They then demand that any other company they connect to identify such calls. It's a pretty simple market solution, I'm surprised so many people ignore it.
269
posted on
11/11/2003 7:33:05 PM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: HighWheeler
Hey HighWheeler,
By his 'logic' having a home with door locks creates my zone of safety and privacy, meaning that whenever I step outside of my home, I'm waiving expectations of safety and privacy, and thus inviting creeps to accost me or assault me or (attempt to) take my wallet, etc.
Like I said, not much 'logic' there.
270
posted on
11/11/2003 7:34:52 PM PST
by
Petronski
(Living life in a minor key.)
To: Petronski
hahaha, holded=held, I knew that. (slaps forehead - what was I thinking????)
I guess I don't let telemarketers bother me. I just hang up on them if I get one on the phone. Like I've said, I don't rush to answer the phone. I will answer it on my schedule.
To: LowCountryJoe
"Can you imagine being a telemarketer or anyone of those professionals that might use a phone to solicit business in order to earn a living?" Hate to staunch the flow of your bleeding heart, but it is not my lookout to provide these pests with jobs. I pay for a private phone for my own convience to contact people I choose to talk to. I do not pay for some smuck to take advantage of my bought and paid for private convience to attempt to sell me something I have no interest in. I do not want my privacy invaded by some pest trying to sell me insurance, a phone service, a credit card, or light bulbs.
I'm not stupid, if I want to change insurance companies I know how to look for the best deal, if I want light bulbs I'll go to the store and buy them. Now get off my back and don't call me.=o)
To: Indy Pendance
Like I've said, I don't rush to answer the phone. I will answer it on my schedule.I'm glad that works for you. For fifty-million Americans, that solution is not acceptable. I'm one of them.
You know what, though? I live in a home with four incoming telephone lines, and we have not placed ANY of them on the Federal Do Not Call list. As I've described, I police it myself, and I'm down to about five calls a month, total over four lines.
But I applaud the FDNC list because it is a reasonable response to a public nuisance. If I need it, I'll sign us up.
273
posted on
11/11/2003 7:40:49 PM PST
by
Petronski
(Living life in a minor key.)
To: HighWheeler
You also think that having a front door to anyone's house means that you can stand there and ring the doorbell all day, that you can walk side by side with anyone on the street where ever they go trying to sell your crap That is harassment, I think local government can reasonably judge and enforce those cases. I will gladly cede to their authority
There are plenty of laws to stop these invasions of privacy, too. These are the protections provided by the government because other idiots with your thought processes can't fit into what would otherwise be a freer society.
You are implying we need laws to enforce politeness (or outlaw rudeness) which are the prerequisite for a free society. I don't think that will work and still have a free society. That's not even mentioning the problems of having a Federal bureaucracy enforcing the politeness laws.
274
posted on
11/11/2003 7:40:59 PM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: Petronski
Great analogy, but now you have given these telemarketers more ammo!
To: Petronski
Your analogy is wrong, the wire is equivalent to you leaving your door open with a come-on-in sign. You signed up for the service that allows the calls, that's your mistake.
276
posted on
11/11/2003 7:43:57 PM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: Slings and Arrows; palmer; LowCountryJoe; DefCon; Indy Pendance; NELSON111
Would you
all sign off!
I'm tryin' to CALL you!!!!
277
posted on
11/11/2003 7:44:36 PM PST
by
Elsie
(Don't believe every prophecy you hear: especially *** ones........)
To: HighWheeler
No, it's the wrong analogy. See my previous post.
278
posted on
11/11/2003 7:45:52 PM PST
by
palmer
(They've reinserted my posting tube)
To: palmer
"That is harassment, I think local government can reasonably judge and enforce those cases." However, you don't think the rest of us non-government, freedom-loving types can reasonably judge when we don't want to be harassed by you telemarketers.
To: palmer
Your analogy is wrong, the wire is equivalent to you leaving your door open with a come-on-in sign. Yours is the minority opinion. You should spend some time imaging how you might be wrong.
Here's a hint: crank calls (unsolicited and useless nuisance calls) have been illegal for decades. 'Telemarketing' is no different.
How do you and your cohorts know I don't want your crappy products or fraudulent services? Simple. I didn't ask for them.
280
posted on
11/11/2003 7:47:50 PM PST
by
Petronski
(Living life in a minor key.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 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