Coddling Corporations was RE: east & west state names

Subject: Coddling Corporations was RE: east & west state names


Bob,
Exactly right.
We have become so used to being lied to by eager corporations attempting to
get their hands in our pockets, that we overlook the fact that they are
robbers, just as surely as if they had snuck into our home during our
absence and took our possessions.
Advertisers have become extremely clever at misleading us into believing
something that really doesn't exist. Looking into my own "Flat fee for
unlimited long distance", I find some fine print that is buried in the
depths of piles of words, telling me that "unlimited" means up to 5,000
minutes per month.
So, which is it? Unlimited or limited?
Does it matter that I will never come close to using 5,000 minutes per
month? That is not the point. The point is that the phone company, Century
Link, has deliberately lied to me in order to get my money.
But as I say, the real crime is that we allow this to go on.

Carl Jarvis


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Hachey" <bhachey@verizon.net>
To: "'JOHN HUFFMAN'" <J73.HUFFMAN@COMCAST.NET>; "'NJ Lynn'"
<freespirit.stl@att.net>; "'ACB List'" <acb-l@acb.org>
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 5:19 AM
Subject: [acb-l] Coddling Corporations was RE: east & west state names


Hi all,
I have fallen a bit behind on this thread.
I am amazed that anyone here on this list could side with the phone
companies in cases like this. IF they're going to offer unlimited long
distance, it is none of their flipping business who any of their customers
choose to call. IN fact, I might even venture to say that if they're keeping
track of who we call other than to put it on our bills, that's an invasion
of our privacy unless it is part of a legitimate criminal investigation.
If they want to change their services and stop offering unlimited service,
that's their right but they'd better be letting us know well in advance of
such changes, like at least 60 days in advance.
Corporations seem to accumulate more and more power here in America and it
is ruining our society in a number of ways.
The most obvious is how corporations buy and pay for many of our leaders in
Washington and state capitols on both sides of the aisle.
I am equally dismayed over a more subtle way that our society is worse off.
IT seems that, through advertising and other means, many Americans are
almost brainwashed into thinking that we owe something extra to
corporations. After all, some say, they create jobs. Perhaps it used to be
that way and perhaps not. But nowadays any American jobs created by
corporations are purely incidental to the creation of short run profits. Too
many corporations are happy to export jobs overseas if they can squeeze one
more nickel of profit as a result. I do highly commend those corporations
who choose to keep jobs here in America even though that might mean a
smaller profit margin.
Finally, back to Bonnie's phone issue. Even if one argues that those who use
the phone for commercial use ought to pay a higher rate, folks like Bonnie
ought to be exempt from paying a higher rate no matter how many minutes she
uses. Bonnies phone use is not earning her one thin dime in hard cold cash.
I see here a case of Frontier using a one size fits all approach and Bonnie
is unlucky enough to be on the bad side of that approach. While I agree with
Ann that Bonnie might consider getting a lawyer, that won't come cheap and
the way the laws of this nation have been twisted to favor corporations, I
have a sinking feeling that the law may not be on Bonnie's side.
Bob Hachey

_______________________________________________
acb-l mailing list
acb-l@acb.org
http://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/acb-l