Re: Beware of VERIZON'S THIEVERY!

"Robert Coe" <bob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:dfh4c2pqqnhqcepg3thjhhk0rsh2gj1rrk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 21:31:00 GMT, "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> wrote:
> : "RNess" <richard@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> : news:_JKdnYgXoZQH3lzZnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> : > Do you honestly think that the mechanism that bills these calls
> : > is smart enough to know if you were successful - or not?
> : >
> : > Please get real - you called 411, you got connected - you got
charged.
> : > The charge is for the call - and that is how it's billed - real 
> simple.
> : >
> : > *****ing about this is moronic and shows a high level of naiveté.
> :
> : To the contrary, it exposes how greedy corpserations manipulate such
> : cir***stances to maximize their profits, even when the way they do so
> : amounts to thievery. Charges should only apply when an actual service
is
> : rendered. I do not believe that Verizon, with all the technology at 
> their
> : disposal, cannot implement this so that their customers are not
subject 
> to
> : unjustified charges. The reason is that profits are all that is 
> im****tant to
> : them, and they couldn't care less about ethics and fairness.
>
> Fair enough. But with all the cor****ate greed and sleaze rampant in this
> country, can't you find something more significant to ***** about than a
> beasly $1.48?

I wouldn't miss the $1.48 at all, but there is a principle involved here.
If 
Verizon or any other greedy corpseration gets away with this with one 
person, they make very little. But more realistically, with say 1000
people 
a day? Perhaps 10,000? That amounts to grand larceny!