ACCOMULATING DEBT,RATHER THAN PAYING OFF?greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
I HAVE LITTLE DEBT...BUT...IF & WHEN VISA ETC. LOSE THEIR RECORDS...DOES PAYING OFF NOW...MAKE SENSE? IF SO...WHY? ASSUMING "THEY" GET THEIR RECORDS BACK AT SOME FUTURE TIME...I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THEY COULD CHARGE YOU FOR "BUILT UP INTEREST" SINCE YOU HAD NO ALTERNATIVES BUT TO "WAIT AND SEE" IF AND WHEN, THEY HAD RECORDS OF YOUR BALANCES...SEEMS TO ME YOU WOULD HAVE A "SHOT" AT NOT PAYING THE DEBT AT ALL...COMMENTS PLEASE...THANX
-- BOB BOWMAN (email@example.com), April 19, 1998
Yours is not really a technical question, it's a moral one. What you really should be asking is whether it's ok to steal from the credit card company. My answer is, no.
-- David Palm (firstname.lastname@example.org), April 20, 1998.
David David David! It is our moral DUTY to steal from the credit card company, even in good times. As long as you don't get caught, that is. In pre-y2k times money you steal from credit-card co's, or any institutional lender for that matter, is money you can convert into preparedness resources that might save a life or two hundred. If you DON'T steal the money then their money will just disintegrate in y2k related finance meltdown, with noone benefitting at all. It's nice to be principled and all, but it's consequences that count, not rules.
-- nichomackie (email@example.com), October 02, 1998.
Keep this in mind. Just because a computer system can't handle the rollover to 2000 doesn't mean all the data stored in the system will be lost. Visa, Amex, etc. aren't stupid. They will have their data backed up and their records of transactions before 1/1/2000 will be OK.
-- Buddy Y. (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 02, 1998.
If our definition of moral is going to change to justify y2k preparedness, then what is the point of the preparedness? We are doing it because we feel morally bound to protect our families, to avoid being part of the demoralization that will surround the meltdown. If stealing from the credit card company or anyone else is part of the equation, I'll need a different equation.
-- margie mason (email@example.com), October 03, 1998.
You're morally required to pay - that is you are morally required to put a check and a 32 cent stamp- for the correct, legal amount on the bill, (or minimum legal amount, if you choose) in the US mail for delivery to their business.
Keep a paper copy of the check. Keep your receipts. If they don't cash the check, that's then their problem, not yours. You can prove you paid.
If they overcharge in Jan's bill, if they get a bill to you at all, pay the closest legal amount you think is fair. Keep a copy of the "wrong" bill, and of the amount you paid.
But you are obligated to pay for what you consume. And the last time I looked, the good Lord wasn't saddled with this Y2K memory problem when comes the final audit on your judgement day. I think He'll remember just fine.
-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 03, 1998.
Stealing is stealing is stealing is stealing. Sugar coat it, buff and wax it, it's still the same thing. If you do it you are a THIEF. If you have ever had anything stolen from you, you'll understand feeling the way that I do about thieves. Maybe we'll start hanging them again, when TSHTF.
-- Uncle Deedah (email@example.com), October 04, 1998.
My belief is to get out from under all the debt you can. What you can't prove is paid for - can be taken away. Might not apply with clothes and previously eaten restaurant meals, etc, - stuff you buy with credit cards, but have you ever had your only car repo'd? Anyway, if I were a Visa vendor, the FIRST thing I would have is HARD COPY reports on who owed me what, so I wouldn't count on their databases going haywire. If they do, it will only be to say you owe $6 trillion!
-- Melissa (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 04, 1998.
ok, so stealing is stealing is stealing. But is stealing neccessarily bad? Seems to me that if you could scam $millions and spend it on the well-being of people who would otherwise be totally stuffed, then you are doing a good thing. Especially if that money were going to be of no benefit to it previous owners in a short amount of time, and especially if the owners were mega-rich vampires who've shown no concern for the billions of poor noe for the planet which supports us. Lots of the mega-rich attained their wealth through various corrupt means, destroying the lives of so many people. To steal from them is moral, especially in an emergency time. All this doesn't necessarily mean that I have the courage to undertake such an effort, but it's worth pointing out.
-- Robin Q. Hood, esquire. (email@example.com), October 07, 1998.
Two wrongs don't make a right, three rights, however, make a left.
-- Uncle Deedah (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 07, 1998.
Besides two wrongs not making a right, do you want to be like those people fleecing the masses? Just because you're doing it on a smaller scale, it may be less obvious, but it's still just as wrong. Attitudes like that, my friend, will be contributing to the chaos.
-- Margie mason (email@example.com), October 07, 1998.