Grim -
<font color="blue"> I'm not going to respond to the various economic illiterates who have posted to this thread... </font>
I agree. It's a lot easier to pull out of a losing battle, pivot, and attack from a different direction when it is obvious you can't effectively rebut valid points. An approach that works wonderfully in war but is definitely a losing methodology when it comes to debate. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif (I's gess I's jusT ONe's Of themm ThErE IlllLetirates... /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif)
To your latest points:
re: (1) <font color="blue">Marketing by telephone, if done responsibly, is more personal and less expensive. </font>
Wow, you agree with one of my points!!! - Telemarketing is such an attractive avenue due to its low cost. Cool! Will it be a nail for
some businesses - yep. But that's the principle of evolution - you either evolve or you die. i.e. the whole buggy whip thing again.
re
2) <font color="blue">As a direct result of this legislation I will be adding a surcharge to every product I sell. </font>
Interesting. Even though the
facts I put on the thread illustrate that your $30K expense is really almost $0 and the "weeks & weeks" of effort will most likely only be a few hours or even minutes instead, you say you have
no choice but to raise prices. Hmmm. Seems to me you are really looking for an
excuse to raise prices since in reality there is no other viable reason (i.e. effort = minimal; cost = virtually $0) Sorry.
re: (2) <font color="blue">There will be an increase in "fly by night" boiler rooms. </font>
Another alarmist statement. No proof of this what so ever in the telemarketing industry due to regulation. Haven't heard of a huge growth in "boiler room" activity since the Texas no-call list went in to effect. Initially it
sounds like a reasonable argument, but there is no proof of causality here. Besides, you honestly think that any "boiler room" is going to sell a legitimate product anyway? They will simply operate in a criminal fashion duping folks for their money and offering them nothing in return. It's called fraud and will be around regardless of if the no-call list goes in to effect or not. Caveat emptor will always apply regardless of the outcome of the no-call list decision.
re: (3) <font color="blue">There will be an increase in jobs going overseas. </font>
This is already happening. Please explain the direct relationship and the no-call list? Reality is that there is no connection - if a company wants to save $, they look to lower costs, and right now since labor rates in India (and other countries) is so low, that's where they are migrating to. Just look around Wal-Mart and observe how many products are made in China. Your argument is an invalid one commonly found debate known as a "Non Causa Pro Causa" - or more accurately in your example, "Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc." Sorry.
re: (4) <font color="blue">I do not think this legislation is that straw, but it IS another straw ...But it is a REAL additional cost imposed on an economy already dangling by a thread. </font>
Yes, there is a lot of regulation out there - some good, a lot of it bad. Some regulation is necessary as it serves to protect the public at large. Making restaurants keep meats below a certain temperature, disallowing toxic substances in our water supplies, etc. The no-call list is meant as a protective regulation, and was never devised or intended to put all telemarketers out of business. This all goes back to what one believes their rights are. Basically by putting one's name on the list, it is the same as hanging a big "NO TRESPASSING" sign on your phone - no different than putting a "NO SOLICITING" sticker on your door.
All the list does is provide a centralized way of doing it because face it, a lot of individual telemarketing businesses don't take "don't call me back" seriously. I've had those I specifically told not to call back call back multiple times - that is until I used the Texas no-call list. Guess what? No more calls - and if someone does violate the law, you're darned right I report them. 'Course I'd report someone physically trespassing too.
As far as the "state of the economy," that's a whole other thread (actually found on CBN if I remember correctly). Suffice to say, not everyone shares your "doom and gloom" view of the U.S. economy.
<font color="blue">I could go on, but what's the point. I doubt if anyone supporting this legislation has given ANY serious thought to any of the issues/consequences just mentioned. Anyway, thank you, MikePA, for having, and showing, a grasp of reality on this particular issue. </font>
Continually insulting the intelligence of others on TBN who don't share your view neither helps to validate your arguments nor does it reflect reality. I've seen multiple posts from other individuals who make valid arguments. Very few are as verbose as I am, but that doesn't mean they aren't making good, solid, logical,
well thought out arguments.
If you simply want to rant, hurling insults wherever because it makes you feel better, well, that's one thing. But if you are trying to make people see the "other side of the coin" in the hopes of converting their viewpoint, I'd suggest that you take a different approach.
