I like the show, but...

[atomiccat]

Fighting within the freedom movement solves nothing. lets just work on fixing the piece of shit we have now, or getting rid of it entirely.

Even if that means taking money from a collection agency. hey we aren't perfect but at least Sakal CAI is a pro liberty collection agency.

And if you want to pick on someone pick on alex libman he likes it

[Dylboz]

In the business world these days, net 120 is the new net 30. Sakal must be kicking ass in this market.

[Bill Brasky]

Fighting within the freedom movement solves nothing.

Really? 

I'll bet I've got a million page views.  Statistically speaking, I know I've weighed into peoples decisions. 

Thats why I do this. 

[ttibby]

Well, here is another one for cross dressing, hate mongering freedom for everyone as long as it's by my standards King Richard the turd play ground bully.  I am born amercain to Canadian parents, moved back to Canada at the age of 7, continued through University in Canada and moved overseas at the age of 30.  I have never defaulted on a bill, paid everything that I owned except for one cell phone bill. I thought my fees were unusually high so I locked the thing in a drawer for a month and recieved another bloated bill.  When I explained to their call center that I would not be paying that bill and cancelling my subscription, asked for an audit on my number with the calls that I made they said that a representative would call me and 2 days later equifax called.  I tried to petition the case but everywhere I turned said they couldn' t do a thing cause it was in collections.  That is whan I decided to get out of the system.  I found a posting overseas and have been loving every minute of it since.  
As for the word Git, I have heard it a great number of time, I am from the east coast, I dunno, Canada's a pretty big place, maybe it's a colloquiliasm but I don't think so caused I lived in Ottawa too and heard it polenty of time there.  To further my argument, there are a load of Brits in my close circle of friends and I have never heard the word used by these people.  
Finally, just because I cite political terms doesn't mean I have to be either right or left winged.  I don't have to be centrist either.  I take what I like from either side, I live in accordance to what is right morally and contextually, there is no finite way of action and law cannot provide for every exception.  So I say that I am a-political cause I refuse to tie myself to any party, any movement.  I am not a hippie, punk, beatnick, ska, emo, radical, indigo, unionist, seperatist.  I evaluate every situation according to the situation that I am in and believe that every man should have the freedom to do what is best in a certain situation.  
So in response, I don't think I would have been flushed out sooner or later cause I have no strong affiliation to the liberal movement nor to the conservative movement.  I am freedom minded and open to others opinions.  I like to express my own and don't like to be labeled for having them.  
Now, I am not sure...  To be in this forum do I have to be politicaly liberal and economically conservative, politically conservative and economically liberal, or do I have to be open minded and politically unmotivated...  Or Do I have to agree with everything that King Richard the Turd says, only use words that Dip shit the turd has heard and understands.  I dunno Richard, on the first post that I put up people already saying, Yeah, I don't like Richard too but...  And I'm a new commer.  Seems like I'm not the one on the verge of getting exposed, you're on the verge of alienating yourself.  So, thatis my final chapter on this tirade, Call me what you will, I know what I am and I am not.  I don't think you've exposed me to be anything that I'm not and by you flaming other posts you;re jsut digging your own grave.

Peace, love and Groovey,

Eric...

Oh yeah, Richard.. Bang, Bang

[hellbilly]

 

[Osborne]

First off, you say that you are for freedom but your main sponsor is a collection agency.  They are direct antagonists to the propagation of freedom.  They call your work, your family, they harass you untill they get your money.

Sorry, contract enforcement is foundational to freedom and is key for reducing transactions costs in the market place.

Sorry, "freedom" does not include being free from having your phone ring if you have a phone line and a number associated with it. If you don't want your phone to ring, turn it off or resolve the contract breach with your creditor.

Sorry, it's not "your" money. It's someone else's money. The direct antagonists to freedom here are you and those individuals you support who are not fulfilling their contractual obligations.

[BobRobertson]

Private contract enforcement is the ultimate in "free market" activities.

[ttibby]

I think there is some misconception here.  I don't believe in not paying for what I have gotten.  I have never skiped out on a bill, (except that one bill with the cell phone company) nor do I condone taking without the intention of paying.  However, you are telling me to go the proper root to get my contract agreement resolved.  Would it then be the same for me to hire a contractor in my landlords name, have him do the work, then get him to collect the money that he owed from the landlord.  No, I don't think so.  So therefore, if my landlord want to get his money (and this is only an expample) why shouldn't he in the same argument as you are giving me not have to use the right venues i.e. take me to court.  Why should buisness and the land owners have that quick fix which is private collections.  Why should they not be made to take me to court.  It's not a fair situation.  Now, maybe I wouldn't be so critical of collection agencies if they also had a role as mediators, if both parties had a chance to present their arguments.  Sit the 2 parties down and have a full assessment of the conditions and evaluate the degree of non-complience and arrive at an equitable settlement, however, it is not done that way.  Collections have a client and act on behalf of their client without knowing all of the facts.  Then if the defaultee (i guess that's what he would be called) doesn't agree with the charges he has to take the legal measures to the courts that you here on these forums so often bash. 

I don't agree with people not paying for things, but sometimes with holding payment is the only way to get things done. 

Creers,

Eric...

[JWI]

Some companies have thousand of customers, should they hire people just to take customers to court, then have to go through the meat grinder that is the court system in hopes of recovering what is owed?  How long should a company put up with the courts idiocy before they get what is rightfully owed them?  Perhaps they should file bankruptcy first and then maybe just maybe the courts will get around to actually doing something.  How much more in taxes would you be willing to pay to make sure these issues are resolved in the courts, rather than the company taking the responsibility to hire it's own debt collection agency?  What if the court rules in the companies favor and the customer still doesn't pay up...then what?

Deadbeats that don't fulfill their obligations and ignore their debts deserve to be harassed until they pay up.  Don't want to be bothered on the phone, pay your bills.

Also, you do have the option of hiring a collection agency.  However the money owed to you is usually so small it's not worth it.  Now a company with thousands of customers that have past due bills is a large amount of money and well worth the expense of a debt collection agency.

[ttibby]

Point well recieved.  I guess as an individual, my needs for such a service are quite rare and if the need is strong enough I could possibly see the taking to court of some one as a minor nusissance.  In the case of a mojor company, on the other hand, dealing with 1000's of deadbeats might become a little overwhelming.  In my case, (the bill that I chose not to pay) was a cell phone bill for 183$, the phone was locked in a drawer, could not have been used as I was single and living on my own at the time. When the bill came around, I guess that my mistake was to call and threaten not to pay, and verbally asking for an audit of all the outgoing and incoming calls instead of doing it in writing.  Should have known better as I was a social worker at the time.  Needless to say again, but I was called by equifax, told them my position asked them to get me the audit of my phone bill and I would gladly pay for the services.  They said I could not prove the phone was locked away and there could always be a paper trail of phone records found somewhere.  That my only option was to pay or they would even worsten the report to the credit bureau.  Again all over the phone.  I called my bank they told me that a mark was already on my record, it would influence my credit while dealing with their branch, however they did say thea it would affect anything else that I would try and do.  They recommended that I pay the bill, cause the consequeces would greatly outreach the 183.90, that the bill was for.  Reluctantly, I paid...  All the while still requesting my audit, after they recieved payment, they said that if I wanted detailed billing that I had to ask for it when I signed up.  I would have to get a subpoena for it now and they wanted to charge me for the10 days that my number was frozen before this was resolved, before I could cancel the service.  We arrived at an agreement,but I never got my audit, never was able to represent myself and I was at risk of considerable personal dammage.  The collection agency  just wanted the money that was told to them by their client was theirs, it wasn't I didn't use their services.  The phone was locked up.  Maybe I should have gone to court, but I didn't have the ressources.  I just wanted to get an audit before paying what I know that I didn'tt owe and 3rd party intervention, took that option away from me. 
Now like I said I guess I'm probably the one out of a thousand that got burned by the system so I have a sour feeling about them.  But I don't think companies should have recourse to 3rd party agencies as an easy way.  Not all people are honest and neither are all the people that run companies.  There should be a better way.  I don't know what it is, but I still don't beleive in collection companies as being legit.  Maybe as a last recourse, but I think it is an easy way out. 

Cheers,

Eric...

[freeAgent]

I believe collections agencies are incredibly pro-freedom organizations.  They enforce contracts.  They are not "pro business".  If you wanted to hire a collections agency to collect money you are owed, I'm sure they'd do it just the same as they do for anyone else.

[MacFall]

POP QUIZ: Choose the solution to the scenario below which is the most pro-freedom. Answer at the bottom of the post, explaining your reasoning.

SCENARIO: You do a week's worth of work for Bob in exchange for him paying you $1000. At the end of the week, with the job completed, Bob fails to pay you.

SOLUTION 1: You take Bob to court.

SOLUTION 2: You call a collection agency, and for a fee, they do your collection for you.

SOLUTION 3: There are no collection agencies, and you have niether the time nor the resources to collect the debt. Bob keeps the money.

















ANSWER: Solution 1 involves employing the dispute resolution system of the state - by definition, an anti-freedom organization. Solution 3 means that Bob gets away with theft, a violation of your rights - and not a condition of freedom.

Solution 2 employs the division of labor in the free market to enforce your just claims, while you do the thing for which you went into business. Solution 2 is therefore the only pro-freedom solution.