Too many people don’t know what true American cheese is. If you’ve had Kraft Deli Selects then you haven’t had real American Cheese. All the others are an American cheese product.
Get some American from an actual deli counter and it’s really good!
Your comment doesn’t really answer my question. Do they actually send a SWAT team?
I don’t really care about how they are armed. Is it called swatting because a SWAT team is deployed, or is it because that happened once or sometimes but it’s not always the case?
Do they actually send a SWAT team? I just assumed that was the term but they actually just trigger a high priority multi officer response based on what they say.
You comment on a news article about Americans and credit cards and argue your opinion which has nothing to do with Americans or their credit cards.
In context your supporting statements for your opinion are factually wrong. You also have yet to explain your original comment.
Your reply and those under you are listing why credit cards are the better choice, however I wonder if they all know they are being played.
The slang term played usually means that you have been outwitted or used as a pawn.
How are they being played?
Those that use their credit card and pay it off in full are subsidized by the number of people that spend beyond their means.
How are they being subsidized?
I’ll be flabbergasted if you can answer either of those questions in any way that makes sense in the context of Americans and their credit cards.
I hope you learned something because I’m pretty sure your spurious statements have made me dumber.
Banks receive a marginally increased interchange fee (~0.1%)
interchange fees for cards are so similar? Or is that 0.1% the big deal?
Back this up because they are not similar. Credit cards charge higher interchange fees and the more people you have using your card, the more you’re making in fees. Seems like an incentive to try and get someone to use your credit card instead of a debit.
Banks incentivise the crap out of credit cards
Every for profit company tries to incentivize their product. I know there are grocery stores in the UK. When they run a sale, promotion, or discount like I’ve seen posted online for items close to expiration they are incentivizing the purchase of that product.
You made a claim that people who use cards responsibly and take advantage of rewards programs are being “played”. How? You also seem to blame-shift the choices of those who spend beyond their means to those who don’t. A person chooses to apply for a card, a person chooses to use that card, a person chooses to spend more than they can afford. That choice is on the individual making it, not some other person who doesn’t make bad choices.
Debit and credit cards have their benefits and drawbacks but either is a viable choice when used responsibly and a bad choice when used irresponsibly. The thing you’re upset with is poor banking regulation, not responsible card owners. The fact that a bank can charge multiple $10, $20, $30 dollar overdraft fees on a debit OR usurious interest rates is an example of a private entity not being kept in check and being allowed to exploit people.
Receiving a service for free means it is subsidized.
It’s not free. It costs an interchange fee, just like a debit card. That’s not paid by users of the card. At most it’s “subsidized” by the business, or maybe everyone if those interchange fees are built into the product price, in which case the card user is indirectly paying for it.
I’m sorry, you have mistaken me for an American
Almost like banking regulation isn’t universal, making your claims ambiguous rather than outright wrong. Especially without any supporting evidence to your claims.
You have yet to convince me that.
Ok, whether you’re convinced doesn’t change the fact your statements are wrong.
It is obvious that banks have the ability to make more off their users bad choices when using credit cards than they do debit cards.
Prove it. Many banks (in the US) charge exorbitant overdraft fees that make them billions and f dollars a year.
Just because you and I are capable of managing our funds well, isn’t the case accross all.
Explain how one persons inability to manage their finances is the responsibility of someone who manages theirs responsibly? Banks engage in plenty of dubious, and sometimes outright illegal, activities. Blaming them because an individual doesn’t have the common sense to spend more on a credit card than they have is patently ridiculous.
I worked for a UK bank for 4 years (2004-2008), however the opinion I am portraying here doesn’t need any inside knowledge, its just common sense.
Opinion. Your opinion isn’t in question. The statements you make to support it, without any evidence, are. You seem to think that when you have an opinion any claim you make around that can just be supported by how you feel.
You know what’s just common sense? Understanding that if you have X amount of money, spending X+1 on a credit card is a poor choice because you can’t pay it. That’s personal responsibility and trying to pass that responsibility on to people who are “being played” by not doing that is blame-shifting.
Those that use their credit card and pay it off in full are subsidized by the number of people that spend beyond their means.
That’s both factually wrong, other users already explained it to you, and patently ridiculous. How exactly is someone who uses a card and then pays the bill in full every month subsidized? I don’t think you understand the word subsidized.
So why don’t debit cards have the same set of features? Because banks want you to use the type of card that has the most return potential.
This is also wrong.
The Durbin Amendment capped interchange rates on debit cards and debit card rewards programs began disappearing because of it.
You make multiple factually incorrect statements. Whether it’s better to use a credit or debit card is a matter of opinion, your other statements are just wrong.
I’ll take “moronic takes” for $500, Alex
Those that use their credit card and pay it off in full are using them responsibly, the way they should be used.
FTFY, the rest of your comment is just wrong.
I’m maybe not who you’re looking to hear from but I can provide a patient perspective.
I never refused my medications but there was a point where I was rude, mean and difficult. For me it was a combination of things. I was tired of being sick, tired of the hospital and wanted to leave but wasn’t well enough, struggling with loss of control and scared.
I did snap out of it and made a point to apologize to the staff I had mistreated. Ultimately it was a negative expression of everything I was feeling because I didn’t know how to process and handle it appropriately.
No idea, I haven’t really paid attention to the case.
I don’t have a preference. I was, and still am, just curious why Justin Trudeau?
Now I am also why you listed all the others you listed as well?
Why Justin Trudeau?
Do you have any? I’d be really interested to learn more. I wouldn’t have thought progressivism unchecked would lead to fascism. Without balance I guess I don’t know what it would lead to.
There are a large number of unscented aftershaves out there as well as other products options like an alum block.
When I’m finished shaving my routine is:
I have aftershaves and colognes that compliment each other or are the same scent for both. I also have an unscented balm for colognes I couldn’t find a good compliment to.
Scents I use are ones I like because I’m wearing it for me, not others.
Likely he hadn’t opened his credit card to that kind of spend on another continent, or he had an Amex which tends to work poorly in many different places in Europe.
You’re wrong. The card reader was not working, the ATM had too low of a limit and the bank was closed. When they brought in a new card reader he was able to pay.
I’m also sure he could’ve gotten an invoice as well but likely just wanted it sorted out directly.
If you can’t pay the tax directly you have 10 days to make payment but the item is held until that payment is made. Since it was bound for an auction that wouldn’t work in this case. Not to mention payment was attempted and the issue was on the side of the customs office.
You really don’t, though. I was not complaining, I was sharing an opinion that you seem to have taken very personally. It’s not my job to police who shops at Costco, you seem to think it is yours. I can only imagine how exhausting it is being you, worried about what everyone else is doing and who’s breaking the rules.
I do not care if Costco stops people from using memberships that aren’t theirs except in the context of my experience shopping there. If the measures they take make my experience worse, then I will no longer take my business there.
There’s no point continuing on with you, it’s clear that you feel your perspective is the only one that’s valid. I don’t bang my head against a brick wall for the same reason I’m done engaging with you, it’s a fruitless endeavor only serves to give me a bad experience.
You’re only saying that because they’re insulating you from the effect of this happening. If Costco had to raise rates because people were sharing memberships and members didn’t want that enforced, you’d complain about that too.
I would not. If the new rates meant I’d pay more for a membership than I’d save over the course of a year I’d just not renew.
Again, it’s odd to me that you’re complaining about them protecting the very benefits that you’re paying for which others are not.
They are not protecting my benefits, they are protecting their revenue stream. I’m not sure why you and so many others don’t understand that companies don’t exist to provide something** for you**. They exist to extract a profit from you.
The gym analogy isn’t a false equivalence.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this and probably the whole situation in general because you’ve just re-stated the same points as in your first reply to me. You may not like my reasoning but it’s not wrong. The only reason I have a Costco membership is because it is currently cheaper for me to get a few items there than it is to get them elsewhere, but just barely. When it’s no longer financially beneficial to me to have a membership, or if they create a shopping experience so unpleasant that it outweighs the nominal savings we get from shopping there we will end our membership.
If that time ever comes and if the family members who have memberships now still do, then I’ll just have them buy for me or I’ll go as a “guest”. The only difference is the inconvenience of not being able to go whenever it’s convenient for me or waiting until we absolutely need something, because I’d have to go on someone else’s schedule.
Just because you can’t understand a logical cost/benefit rationale doesn’t make it wrong. I’m not under the same illusion as you seem to be that Costco, or any business or corporation, has my best interests at heart. This is ultimately about their revenue stream; you can tell yourself otherwise but you’re a fool if you think that’s not a driving factor.
I’m not against them enforcing it, just that their enforcement makes my experience worse. I’m not negatively impacted by this problem they’re trying to fix until their fixes make my experience worse.
I also think it’s naive to believe there’s no financial motivation and they’re only doing it because it’s unfair to their paying members.
Your gym analogy is also a false equivalence. The Costco membership gets you their product guarantee/return policy and the opportunity to purchase things at a cheaper price than elsewhere. Joe Schmo letting his neighbor use his membership doesn’t hurt me in any way, it only hurts Costco.
What I’m saying is actually similar to what has happened, and is happening, in media regarding DRM and various attempts to secure content.
Thank you! I fixed it. That little mistake really changes the message.