|
|
Post by bounce on Jul 22, 2007 10:45:30 GMT -8
If this doesn't piss you off, then......... A conversation between a Customer and Bank of America: Bank: This is the Bank of America, can I help you? Customer: Yes, I want to cancel my account. I don't want to do business with you any longer. Bank: Why? Customer: You're giving credit to illegal immigrants and I don't think it's right. I'm taking my business elsewhere. Bank: Well, Mr. Customer, we don't want to see you do that, but we can't stop you. I'll help you close the account. What is your account number? Customer: (gives account number) Bank: For security purposes and for your protection,can you please give me the last four digits of your social security number? Customer: No. Bank: Mr. Customer, I need to verify your information, but in order to help you, I'll need verification of who you are. Customer: Why should I give you my social security number? The reason I'm closing my account is that your bank is issuing credit cards to illegal immigrants who don't have social security numbers. You are targeting that audience and want their business. Let's say I'm an illegal immigrant and you've given me a credit card. I have a question about it and call for assistance. You wouldn't be asking me for a Social Security number, would you? Bank: No, I wouldn't. Customer: Why not? Bank: Because you would have pressed '2' to speak in Spanish. We don't ask for that information when calling in on the Spanish line. CHECK THIS OUT ON SNOPES!!!!! www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/bankofamerica.asp |
|
|
|
Post by 101ABN on Jul 22, 2007 11:03:02 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Jul 22, 2007 16:26:39 GMT -8
You're right Bob, it's a pisser. My wife does some of her banking with Bank of America. They'll probably lose another customer when I show her the SNOPES article.
101: Love the picture!
|
|
|
|
Post by bounce on Jul 22, 2007 17:29:37 GMT -8
You're right Bob, it's a pisser. My wife does some of her banking with Bank of America. They'll probably lose another customer when I show her the SNOPES article. 101: Love the picture! I don't have an account with them, but if I did I'd cancel it. |
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Jul 23, 2007 17:12:15 GMT -8
You're right Bob, it's a pisser. My wife does some of her banking with Bank of America. They'll probably lose another customer when I show her the SNOPES article. 101: Love the picture! I don't have an account with them, but if I did I'd cancel it. I was right, she's not happy. They may lose her business. What concerns me more is that BofA isn't alone. The SNOPES piece mentions Wells Fargo providing mortgage services. We need to enforce the frigging laws. |
|
|
|
Post by 101ABN on Jul 23, 2007 18:05:02 GMT -8
I think B of A started it.
Wells Fargo and CitiBank followed suit.
I want my country back.
|
|
|
|
Post by AmericanPride on Dec 31, 2007 13:13:20 GMT -8
It's called business. That's the American way. Or are you now advocating imposing limitations on the free market? That's not very conservative of you.
|
|
|
|
Post by bounce on Dec 31, 2007 14:04:26 GMT -8
It's called business. That's the American way. Or are you now advocating imposing limitations on the free market? That's not very conservative of you. This is, quite frankly, the most ridiculous piece of twisted and unmitigated pathetic BULLSHIT that I have read since the LAST POST of yours I saw. |
|
|
|
Post by AmericanPride on Dec 31, 2007 14:07:25 GMT -8
Do you favor or not favor free enterprise? Are companies able or not able to conduct themselves according to the principles of the free market? Do you support or not support restrictions imposed on the movement and access of capital and labor?
|
|
|
|
Post by bounce on Dec 31, 2007 15:43:17 GMT -8
Do you favor or not favor free enterprise? Are companies able or not able to conduct themselves according to the principles of the free market? Do you support or not support restrictions imposed on the movement and access of capital and labor? You know, you just might have a point there. We could sell illegal drugs and call it "THE FREE MARKET" at work. We could sell alcohol and cigarettes to underage kids and call it "THE FREE MARKET." We could sell Military hardware like bazookas and tanks and shit and call it "THE FREE MARKET" at work. Hey, maybe we could enslave people, sell them at market prices and hide behind the "FREE MARKET" guise, too. It's just FREE MARKET CONSERVATISM, RIGHT??? Wouldn't that be kewl! Using your ideas, we could deal in ANY PRODUCT (legal or illegal) there was a market for it, and sell it to anyone (legal or illegal) as long as there was a market for it, and every transaction would pass the smell test! Hey, it's the FREE MARKET at work! You fucking MORON! |
|
|
|
Post by AmericanPride on Dec 31, 2007 15:46:18 GMT -8
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
- Milton Friedman
|
|
|
|
Post by bounce on Dec 31, 2007 16:04:09 GMT -8
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.- Milton Friedman I see your point. If we can't buy and sell PEOPLE, military hardware and illegal drugs when we want to at free-market prices, we're not really FREE AT ALL, are we? I need to ask you AP, did you walk away from a work-release program or something? I didn't know they offered "work-release" in the psychiatric ward. |
|
|
|
Post by AmericanPride on Dec 31, 2007 16:12:56 GMT -8
Intellectual freedom cannot exist without political freedom; political freedom cannot exist without economic freedom; a free mind and a free market are corollaries.
-- Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Dec 31, 2007 17:08:11 GMT -8
It's called business. That's the American way. Or are you now advocating imposing limitations on the free market? That's not very conservative of you. I advocate enforcing the fucking laws AP. That IS very conservative, thanks loads for noticing. You had best get it through your head that ANY nation which cannot control its borders and protect its sovereignty is like a ship on a collision course with a rocky coast ... DOOMED. Anything short of a 180 is just rearranging the deck chairs and signalling the band to play "Nearer my God to thee." The above is my opinion. I've been following the argument you and Bounce have been having. For the record I agree with Bounce. And NO, I will not join your arguement. |
|
|
|
Post by AmericanPride on Dec 31, 2007 19:14:09 GMT -8
That's great. I advocate removing laws that can't be enforced -- like misguided and harmful immigration laws.
Conservatives in the tradition of John Locke and Adam Smith do not support laws for the sake laws, but for the sake of preserving the rights of individuals. Those rights derive not from the whim of government, but from the natural rights endowed upon each individual. A law which violates those rights is not a law at all, but an injustice. Those rights inherently include economic rights in the free market. Bounce's "argument" is that anything he disagrees with is "moronic" and "bullshit" without providing any kind of consistency to his beliefs or understanding of other beliefs.
I have already clearly stated that the United States has the right to protect its borders and that an "unsecured border" is dangerous. Simply disagreeing with the present immigration policy is not the same as disputing the right to make that policy in the first place.
It seems everyone here demands respect of their own opinions but refuses to respect the dissent of others. That's not a reflection of American tradition and culture, which the anti-immigrant stance here presumes it protects, but a siege mentality by an enemy it fears.
You have joined by making a statement. You can't fire across the bow and not expect a response. Reply if you like -- I accord others the same respect they accord me. If you've been following the argument, you would clearly see that.
|
|
