Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
rcmaehl

Toto, I don't think we're in China anymore - US companies adopting social credit score system

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Because a payment processor or creditor doesn't actually have any business getting involved here. I mean can you explain why they should? Or why you should accept that product warranties not actually be aligned with expected service life of the product and not more arbitrary made up lengths of time? It's more silly to treat that is normal, sure it's normal in the context of that's currently how it is but objectively is does this actually sound normal? If I had of cash or pay by debit my product warranty is now somehow expected to be different? Doesn't that sound strange? Does cash make it fail sooner?

 

As for proof of purchase, you can prove that with a bank statement which has the information required for the retailer to re-print purchase invoice. Also it's fairly common for the sale record to be sent through to the distributor and tied to the product serial number so in a lot of cases all you need is that serial number to get warranty support. Case by case difference without any common standard from what I have seen.

 

These are just some of the practices identified as increasing the cost to consumers so they can just knock it back down to the normal price if you use a credit card, an incentive to get people to use credit cards and common business deal struck between credit card companies and businesses. Because of what this actually is in reality it's not allowed here, all currency and payment methods are equal.

That’s the thing... I’m not making any indictments on what should or shouldn’t be.  Only what is.  Any company can employ any value added service they want.  Doesn’t matter what it is or why there is a need for it in the first place.  They do this to gain competitive edge and is ultimately a good thing for consumers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, thedude4bides said:

That’s the thing... I’m not making any indictments on what should or shouldn’t be.  Only what is.  Any company can employ any value added service they want.  Doesn’t matter what it is or why there is a need for it in the first place.  They do this to gain competitive edge and is ultimately a good thing for consumers. 

No they actually can't, but I mean should my country apologize to yours for having an effective consumer protection agency that looks in to these issues and rectifies them?

 

Well to correct that first bit, yes they can if there is nothing to prevent what is actually anti-consumer practices.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, leadeater said:

No they actually can't, but I mean should my country apologize to yours for having an effective consumer protection agency that looks in to these issues and rectifies them?

 

Well to correct that first bit, yes they can if there is nothing to prevent what is actually anti-consumer practices.

Incorrect, my friend.  They can and do this quite regularly.  They have teams of people, focus groups, 3rd party consultants, and all sorts of money being thrown at finding the value added services  that will differentiate their company from the rest of the pack.  

 

And, no, your country has no reason to apologize for being a great example.  However, now that you clued me in to this, it does make a little more sense as to why my counterparts below the equator in that half of the world often pay higher prices than over here.  I believe someone in here at some point did say “nothing is free”.

 

Edit- I see you did acknowledge the first point... didn’t pick up on that right away

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thedude4bides said:

I’ve stated my points and backed them up with examples or logical arguments.

 

 

The sad part is you probably genuinely believe that.

 


QuicK and DirtY. Read the CoC it's like a guide on how not to be moron.  Also I don't have an issue with the VS series.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, thedude4bides said:

However, now that you clued me in to this, it does make a little more sense as to why my counterparts below the equator in that half of the world often pay higher prices than over here.

Actually no we do not, the only extra cost we have to pay is shipping because we are half a world away, but then again we don't have that many US manufactured products. Prices seem higher here because our currency is lower value and tax is included in prices. If you can get something without having to pay tax on that sale sure you can get it cheaper in that case, no idea how easy or common that is for you. Here it's not possible to not pay GST.

 

12 minutes ago, thedude4bides said:

Incorrect, my friend.  They can and do this quite regularly.  They have teams of people, focus groups, 3rd party consultants, and all sorts of money being thrown at finding the value added services  that will differentiate their company from the rest of the pack.

Doesn't mean these 'value added' services are not anti-consumer. It's anti consumer to discriminate on method of payment, requiring people with bad credit to pay more so you are increasing the cost to those that are in debt or have bad credit making their financial situation worse. That is just one of the reasons it's not allowed here, it's not just my opinion either this was a conclusion by our Commerce Commission based on years of evidence across multiple countries to determine if they are harmful to consumers.

 

You can like the benefits you get from such things but that doesn't make them not anti-consumer. Consumer protection agencies have to look at the wider impact and make decisions on those not on any one individual's situation.

 

For example here were are just about the change the law so that energy companies are not allowed to offer prompt payment discounts because as it turns out, after a lot of research, these are a poor tax. This does not mean we will now pay more this means they must only charge the previous prompt payment rates as standard, everyone wins and there are no losers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Actually no we do not, the only extra cost we have to pay is shipping because we are half a world away, but then again we don't have that many US manufactured products. Prices seem higher here because our currency is lower value and tax is included in prices. If you can get something without having to pay tax on that sale sure you can get it cheaper in that case, no idea how easy or common that is for you. Here it's not possible to not pay GST.

 

Doesn't mean these 'value added' services are not anti-consumer. It's anti consumer to discriminate on method of payment, requiring people with bad credit to pay more so you are increasing the cost to those that are in debt or have bad credit making their financial situation worse. That is just one of the reasons it's not allowed here, it's not just my opinion either this was a conclusion by our Commerce Commission based on years of evidence across multiple countries to determine if they are harmful to consumers.

 

You can like the benefits you get from such things but that doesn't make them not anti-consumer. Consumer protection agencies have to look at the wider impact and make decisions on those not on any one individual's situation.

 

For example here were are just about the change the law so that energy companies are not allowed to offer prompt payment discounts because as it turns out, after a lot of research, these are a poor tax. This does not mean we will now pay more this means they must only charge the previous prompt payment rates as standard, everyone wins and there are no losers.

While you are right about all that, it is a whole  separate topic. Bottom line is that since the “anti-consumer” practice of standard 90 day or 1 year warrantees are the status quo here, CC companies have filled a void and I’m glad they did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, @leadeater, have you been keeping up headlines in the US?  If so, you’ll know that the furthest thing from the front page headlines is anti-consumer refroms😊

 

its pretty wild over here in terms of what is on the collective consciousness of the nation at the moment

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, thedude4bides said:

While you are right about all that, it is a while separate topic. Bottom line is that since the “anti-consumer” practice of standard 90 day or 1 year warrantees is the status quo here, CC companies have filled a void and I’m glad they did.

True, it's not like I'm saying that this should be prevented before warranties themselves are sorted out, that would be a very detrimental thing to do. This goes for basically every pain point I could give about credit card companies and how credit is treated, making any changes to these situations is very complex and high impact. Rolling in any one change could be detrimental to consumers even if it was done with the intent to benefit, rolling in a huge amount could be worse or better.

 

Like the proverb "If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it", problem is I do believe it is broken but I don't have a plan to fix it. I'm also aware this is also one of the worst things to be, all problems and no solutions. Though in the realistic sense there is no way that I could ever actually give out solutions and implementation plans on an country's economic policies, we have experts for that, but it doesn't nor should it stop anyone from commenting on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, leadeater said:

True, it's not like I'm saying that this should be prevented before warranties themselves are sorted out, that would be a very detrimental thing to do. This goes for basically every pain point I could give about credit card companies and how credit is treated, making any changes to these situations is very complex and high impact. Rolling in any one change could be detrimental to consumers even if it was done with the intent to benefit, rolling in a huge amount could be worse or better.

 

Like the proverb "If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it", problem is I do believe it is broken but I don't have a plan to fix it. I'm also aware this is also one of the worst things to be, all problems and no solutions. Though in the realistic sense there is no way that I could ever actually give out solutions and implementation plans on an country's economic policies, we have experts for that, but it doesn't nor should it stop anyone from commenting on it.

Bringing this full circle, it is unclear to me whether or not social credit will ultimately be anti-consumer or not?

 

For example, will my perfect credit come down a notch or two because I posted a video of myself doing something silly or risky online?  Have certain opinions?  Or buy certain things?  Will there be any way to rectify your social credit score as there is with the current system?

 

Or will it be a means to open up credit to those that otherwise look bad on paper?

 

Both?

 

Time will tell, I suppose.  But right now, the idea of it doesn’t sit well with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Buy VPN

×