https://gizmodo.com/nearly-25-percent-of-your-cable-bill-is-bullshit-fees-1838787373
A cable bill survey of 2,057 U.S. adults in 2018 by Consumer Reports found that a staggering 85 percent have encountered surprise or hidden fees—especially non-government imposed fees and those different from fees outlined by the company for the service—in recent years. In examining consumer-submitted bills, Consumer Reports found that these hidden costs tack on 24 percent of the service's base price to consumers' monthly bills.
In examining almost 800 bills for cable services, Consumer Reports found that those fees can be for anything from set-top box rentals to broadcast and regional sports fees. Consumer Reports said that based on its nationally representative survey results, it estimates cable companies may be pulling in roughly $28 billion annually from these charges. These charges result in about $450 per consumer annually in additional costs on average, the report said.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Sunday October 06 2019, @09:43AM (41 children)
isn't "charge what the market will bear" a basic tenet of capitalism?
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 06 2019, @10:09AM (23 children)
Well, yes, it is one of the basic tenets. So long as damned fools pay you what you ask, you're good. It's the damned fool's fault for supporting the greed of the cable company. Long ago, I paid a cable company (In Jax Beach, Florida) so that I could enjoy MTV, which was then a new phenomenon. I don't remember now what I paid for cable service, but I do remember wanting to spend that money on other things. So, the cable went bye-bye after only one year. I also remember that I got far more enjoyment out of my brand new Kawasaki, than I got from television!
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @03:16PM (22 children)
We need to eat the babies! - some liberal at an AOC townhall meeting
That is a lie and YOU know it's a lie. It was a Larouche nutbag.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 06 2019, @03:33PM (20 children)
Did AOC shoot the idea down, out of hand? Watching the video, the bug-eyed broad seemed to be considering the possibility.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @03:44PM (12 children)
I did watch the video and you are a liar.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 06 2019, @04:19PM (11 children)
If you can't do any better than that, then you are a cockroach. Liars need take no notice of cockroaches. You disappoint me - I thought you were actually going to challenge me over my sig.
Now, here is the honest to God truth. AOC's little town-hall thingy was preempted by some woman who appears to be a nutcase. That woman proposed some crazy shit. And, Miss Bugeye stood there, and listened. She DID NOT have the crazy woman shut up and evicted. She DID NOT speak out against the crazy woman's proposals. TO THIS DATE AOC has not disavowed the ideas proposed.
It has been proposed that LaRouche was somehow behind the crazy woman. And, I read one blurb in which LaRouche seems to accept some responsibility for Madame Nutcase. Is it an established FACT that LaRouche was responsible? Nooooo - not yet, it isn't established FACT.
If you're not an annoying little cockroach, it's time for you to do more than just annoy. The ball is in your court.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @05:03PM
But you assume she was a liberal.
--
We need to eat the babies! - some conservative at an AOC townhall meeting
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @10:30PM (9 children)
Because, as we see with you on pretty much a daily basis, engaging the crazy only creates more crazy bullshit to deal with. I've been trying to just ignore you for the most part, but you shitpost so much that there needs to be some pushback if only so lurkers don't think all of SN agrees with you.
It is amusing that one of the few things you've managed to glom on to to criticize AOC is that she simply ignored some crazy lady. Meanwhile we have a crazy corrupt POUTS who is even being turned on by the few journalists at Fox with some integrity, and you need to spew about AOC?
Lawl, thank GOD this crazy stupid ride is coming to an end. Highlighted best by the extreme avoidance of Trump's corruption here by you. Tired of "winning" yet? Did you NOT realize that Trump lies about everything so when he said "winning" he meant "losing"? Wellllllll, winning for his corrupt buddies, but losing for his voter base who is so brainwashed they can't see the forest for the trees.
Let me guess, you'll chime in with how he's a chuckle head so you can avoid responsibility again. "What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening" lololol what a brilliantly simple way to sucker a bunch of angry white dudes.
(Score: 2, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 07 2019, @03:18AM (8 children)
So, you're still pissed that the populist vote did not go to your preferred candidate. And, I'll repeat that the Court Fool is highly preferable to the Wicked Witch of the East. OF COURSE the Court Fool is going to be a fuck-up. What else did you expect? Where would we be today, if the Wicked Witch were in charge? Among other things, we would be hip deep in blood in Libya.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 07 2019, @03:53AM (7 children)
Unfortunately for your discourse, pissed or not of the populist vote is irrelevant for the matter [soylentnews.org] of "Runaway1956 chooses to knowingly propagate on Soylentnews a self-confessed LaRouche troll [twitter.com] or is an idiot enough to be useful to them".
Just from my curiosity, which of the two: trolling or a useful idiot?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 07 2019, @04:02AM (6 children)
Probably the best reply on that page:
As for "useful idiots", you're describing AOC and her Squat Club. Once again, what about that Green New Deal bullshit?
I'm thinking about using this guy's ideas for my next journal entry, you might want to check it out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 07 2019, @04:08AM (5 children)
Ok, so you are trolling. Thanks for the clarification.
I have much better things to do with my time than to waste it with a person that doesn't respect it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 07 2019, @04:21AM (4 children)
Cool. Yes, I'm trolling, I thought everyone had figured that out by now. Respect your time? Mehhh - I didn't see the armed guards who forced you to read any of my posts, my sig, or anything else on Soylent. I believe that it is always your decision to read anything on Soylent. If/when the outrage over my sig dies down, I'll change it to something else. Maybe even something more outrageous, from the left's point of view, if I can find it.
Meanwhile, I think you'll agree that today's politics in the US is the laughing stock of the world. Kinda like when I was traveling the world in uniform, time and time again, I heard that Carter was the laughing stock of the world. Except, this time around, the prez is a joke, but congress and the Dem party is the bigger joke. That Trump Disorder Syndrome causes a lot of people to do truly crazy shit.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 07 2019, @04:38AM (1 child)
Yes. And the way I see, your trolling is on the "doing more of the same", therefore I can't conclude you are interested in doing something better.
The association with "armed guards" raises quite a big question mark to me on your meaning of "respect".
I don't feel compelled to subscribe to it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 07 2019, @04:44AM
Somehow, the QOTD at the bottom of the page seems so apt.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday October 07 2019, @07:21AM (1 child)
I've modded you Troll because of your statement:
Idiot.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 07 2019, @07:26AM
I'm close to ROFL here. ;^)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @04:17PM (6 children)
How do you handle a obvious nutjob?
Ignore them and move on?
Antagonize them and maybe watch them pull out a weapon?
--
We need to eat the babies! - some conservative at an AOC townhall meeting
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 06 2019, @04:28PM (5 children)
You seem to be suggesting that AOC has no security with her? Not even local police in attendance? Have you forgotten that she's a CONGRESS-WOMAN? Well, congress-girl, anyway. Congress-crazy? Mabye I should stick with congress-critter. That last is a nice neutral term that applies to all races, genders, ages, and states of mental imbalance.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @04:51PM (1 child)
Sounds like you are the one with mental imbalance.
--
We need to eat the babies! - some conservative at an AOC townhall meeting
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 06 2019, @04:57PM
Whatever. Are you suggesting that AOC is sane, rational, and maybe even normal? Would you care to extend that description to all of the US congress, and American style politics?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @04:58PM (2 children)
How much security did Rep Giffords have? How much security did they have at the republican baseball practice?
--
We need to eat the babies! - some conservative at an AOC townhall meeting
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 06 2019, @05:15PM (1 child)
Alright, you make a (small) point. Security isn't always effective.
I might argue that if you don't have the balls to stick up for what you believe, then you shouldn't be in politics.
I might also argue that if you're stupid enough to rely on ineffective security, then you deserve to die.
But, I'm not going to make either of those arguments, because I understand that a large percentage of the American public thinks that it's alright to just lie down and die if an opponent might have a weapon. And, amazingly, a large percentage of the aforementioned percentage is Dem.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Sunday October 06 2019, @09:34PM
On the other hand, sometimes the best strategy with a raving lunatic is to just let them feel they've had their say and move on. There's no pointy in refuting them, they will never be convinced and everyone else already knows they're a raving lunatic.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday October 07 2019, @12:06PM
FWIW I watched the video and Cortez handled it fine. the woman was obviously crazy or a plant so treating her with kid gloves was the right move. it was never the gotcha moment many thought it was.
it does make for a funny meme, though.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Sunday October 06 2019, @10:12AM (7 children)
It is one thing to say “my service costs you $x”. It is a completely different thing to then add in the fine print, “oh, and $y on top of it.”
Those extra fees, when not government mandated, should have been included in the main price (unless it is really something you ordered extra, of course).
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by canopic jug on Sunday October 06 2019, @01:43PM (3 children)
The government mandated fees are not quite what they appear in the line items either. The companies are allowed to tack on additional fees for handling and adminsitrative overhead. So a tax of $0.03 per account may end up listed on the account's bill as $1.45 because that is the maximum they can get away with legally.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Sunday October 06 2019, @09:19PM
The bill is the bill is the bill, I don't give a flying flip how they justify it, or don't justify it.
The problem comes when it's a monopoly service that you "need" like electricity, or internet access.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday October 07 2019, @11:24PM (1 child)
Not to mention throwing in costs of doing business as if they are a government mandated tax per account.
(Score: 2) by canopic jug on Tuesday October 08 2019, @11:51AM
Oh, come on. Everyone knows that you need 4 hangers for that because when using only 2 they get hot to the touch.
Seriously, the point is that while the government fee might be only $0.50, and for a good purpose, what shows up on the bill might be $25.00 because they piggyback handling fees onto each and every line item.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @01:46PM (1 child)
Why "when not government mandated"? Here is how it works:
1) People think "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"
2) Government and big corporations pretend to be enemies but are actually friends
3) The government and big corporations are both the enemies of the people
4) People foolishly try to ally with one or the other "side"
5) The people get screwed over
Replace government and big corporations with Republicans and Democrats if you want.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @02:58PM
You forgot the bit where the incumbent writes the laws. Have seen that little gem played many times by both the Democrats and Republicans.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday October 06 2019, @09:17PM
Dirtbags lie, in depth story at 11.
I knew cable was bad, but this is more than I have paid for Netflix, in total, ever.
It's the same B.S. as car dealers, which is why I approach the salesman with a: "Tax, tag, title, I'm driving off the lot and you'll never see me again price." And they whine and moan that those aren't their fees, and they're hard to figure out, and I push back with "I don't give a damn whose fees they are, if I'm paying them before I get this car, they will be in the price we negotiate." Then we agree on a price and they try the hard sell for the extended warranty, which is easily thwarted with this pen my wife has with a button and a speaker, and every time you push the button the pen says "NO!". It helps when you don't "need" a car and you can just walk out whenever they say something stupid.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @10:19AM
Agreed. Which is why I paid the up front cost of an antenna.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bradley13 on Sunday October 06 2019, @11:35AM (5 children)
The problem comes when you get an unfortunate interaction with government. The government allows them to pass on fees, in addition to their normal charges. So they don't quote those fees in their published prices. More: anything they can possible claim to be a "fee" - even if it's part of normal business - gets billed separately. Finally, in areas where they have a sort of local monopoly (likely due to government *in*action), they know you have no other choice.
So, sure, part of capitalism is charging what the market will bear. The other half is competition. Ensure that a variety of ISPs have access to that "last mile", so that they can compete in the market. Enforce "truth in advertising" by requiring the total price (including all fees) to be advertised. Watch the prices fall.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Sunday October 06 2019, @11:37AM (4 children)
I said "ISPs" - and then realized that things may be different in the US. Not sure. Here, it is now the case that you can get Internet service from your cable provider, and TV service from you ISP. And both from the phone company. I.e., everyone can do everything, because it's just bits on a wire.
Is it the same in the US, or do cable companies have some sort of a lock on TV service?
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 06 2019, @01:16PM (2 children)
That's a rather complicated thing, Bradley13. You can get internet service from the cable company, and you can get internet TV from an ISP. So, yes, in that respect, the US is very much like the EU.
The cable companies want to lock you into using their service(s) and would like to bundle all their stuff. So, if you get TV, you also have to take their internet, and vicey-versey. I think local governments challenged that first, then states. That kinda broke up, and/or prevented that monopolistic nonsense, but the cable companies still try to sell you their bundles.
As for internet TV - I guess it's great for city dwellers with access to real "broadband". Not so much for us in Outback, Nowhere. If the wife is watching a streamed broadcast, my internet goes to hell. A 2 MB internet connection sucks.
Keeping the above in mind, several articles have suggested that less than 10% of the US population actually has a broadband connection. Only a few years ago, I presumed that anyone living close to a major city had good internet. Alas, if only one or two people (or institutions or businesses) has genuine broadband, then the telcos claim the entire county as being "broadband" connected.
Since our local high school has great internet, the entire county shows up as being served by high speed broadband internet. So, things suck here, despite resembling what you're accustomed to.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by HiThere on Sunday October 06 2019, @06:42PM (1 child)
It's actually worse than you imply. When I was a child a TV antenna (not *that* rural...just a farm 20 miles outside a small town) could pull in basically everything that was available. (OK, it was a pretty tall antenna.) These days the broadcast media are broadcast at less power, and cover a lot less of the material. So even in a city an antenna would pull in less that was interesting than the rural antenna did in the 1950's. Well, that wouldn't be true if I wanted my programming in Chinese or some such, as now it's available, and then it wasn't, but even there the subject matter isn't much better than "Beat the Clock".
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 07 2019, @01:38PM
have you tried setting up a small antenna in the city for tv? saying that you would get less interesting content than in the 50's is nonsense that was able to gain some points from some pea brained moderators - I get many 10s of channels in the city including all major broadcast channels as well as channels showing old content from various decades including the 50's -- having some programming options in Spanish and Korean is a bonus
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @01:32PM
It depends upon where you live in the US. Most of the rural and suburban areas only have one ISP choice + satellite internet, and satellite internet is low bandwidth, very expensive, and has high latency which makes it unsuitable for multiplayer gaming. If you want options, you have to live in a city or very close to one.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 06 2019, @02:06PM
Sure it is. It's supposed to be kept in check by the other primary tenet, competition, though. In the cable industry that has long not been the case. Which is why you've seen cocktastic business practices from them. Which is why they're losing business in a non-recoverable way now that alternatives are becoming viable and giving consumers a way to escape the regulatory-capture-and-corruption-caused shit pile that is cable.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday October 06 2019, @08:26PM
Only when combined with vigorous competition that makes sure that the market will only bear slightly more than the marginal cost of production. It's also predicated on buyer and seller being within an order of magnitude or so in economic power, a well regulated market, and deceitful marketing and advertising (such as bullshit fees) being exposed and punished.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @01:03PM
As if the government imposed fees can't be counted as bullshit. The propaganda is so strong and pervasive: https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=hWLjYJ4BzvI [youtube.com]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @04:37PM (2 children)
where i live, it seems to be no problem to make a sign that says:"Here Hamburger 1$"
but when you pull out the one dollar bill after finishing the burger in-house it's acctually 1.17 you have to pay.
the 0.17 is made up of 7% VAT (value added tax) and 10% service charge.
okay, hamburger was tasty so, they have to talk to you, walk you to a table and then wash the plate with all the dribblings, so we'll swallow the 10 cents extra false advertising.
after all it could have been avoided if i would have ordered it "take-away" with all the extra non-recyclables one-time-use that it comes packed in and eat it in front of their door, on public floor.
but what really gets me angry is the 7 cents of VAT. there's no way i can avoid it.
so saying the burger is 1$ is a flat out lie but 1.07 for a take-away is honest.
methinks, the advertised price should be for unavoidable things ... and 7% VAT is not. it is also NOT okay to say the minced cow in a bun is 1 $ and then say "not included VAT" because it is NOT avoidable.
(Score: 3, Informative) by pipedwho on Sunday October 06 2019, @09:19PM (1 child)
I like what the government did in Australia when they created the 10% GST (after removing all the other hidden and confusing sales taxes, some of which were as high as 22%). They mandated that all advertised pricing must be the final price inclusive of GST. On the receipt, they are also required to state the amount of GST charged (since some entities are able to claim back the GST as tax input credits).
So if you buy something advertised and marked as $11, and the receipt will have: item = $10 + (GST)$1, total $11.
Not everything is charged GST (for example, certain staple food products such as milk), but the marked price is always the final price you pay for the product.
There are some sane exceptions to this rule. For example, wholesalers that only sell to entities with a company ABN (which is recorded by the wholesaler - so the government can make sure the buyer includes the non-payed GST as an input on their tax form). GST is not double taxed, just passed on so the effective GST is payed by the end consumer, and not compounded at each step in the distribution path. So this avoids the extra GST changing hands until the final step of the product cycle - especially useful for manufactured good made from many constituent individually purchased parts, where the GST is charged on the final sale price of the fully assembled and packaged item.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 07 2019, @07:52AM
It was the same in Japan for a while about a decade or so ago... the listed price had to be the final price including the sales tax.
Then the government wanted to raise the sales tax, realized everyone would complain how much more expensive everything had become, so they erased that law and allowed retailers to only list the price before tax. It worked, too. There wasn’t much complaining, just a vague bewilderment at how the prices hadn’t seemed to have been affected.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 06 2019, @07:21PM
Sure... but given that the cable companies offer a substandard service to begin with, 25 percent of 0 is still 0 for everyone voting with their wallets and taking their business elsewhere.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday October 07 2019, @12:15PM
It's for matters like these that I have been evolving toward a doctrine of corporate minimalism. only do business with a company when you absolutely must, because almost all of them cheat you in some way. Also, when you spend money you're also getting cheated by the government, which always takes a cut. buy nothing, and you pay no sales taxes.
Reclaim the items you need. repair what you have. fashion what you need from scrounged spare parts. build it from scratch. you might wind up wth less stuff, but what you have you will truly own.
Washington DC delenda est.