Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 249 posts

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#211

Post by ifhd »

dwyerm wrote: post #97
xphilter wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a look at how many YC backed companies have arb clauses in consumer contracts. It's not just a GOP problem.

I've argued before, though, that I can't fault companies for using them. When someone hands you a get-out-of-jail-free card, you take that thing and hold on to it. It would be a special kind of lunatic who wouldn't. The logic is this: "Look, you just need to add this handful of lines to your agreement, and you've instantly got protection against money-grubbing, ambulance-chasing lawyers who would come after you becau…

> I've argued before, though, that I can't fault companies for using them.

You can and should. So should I. If consumers refused to sign they wouldn't put them in.

Unfortunately we don't live in a world that allows us to easily do that (unless you want to live without a phone, internet, a car, etc...). So that's why the government needs to step in. It doesn't make these companies any less scummy for using the clause.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#212

Post by ifhd »

dwyerm wrote: post #149
s73ver_ wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't I fault them for using a decidedly evil clause? These companies are run by people, who are fully capable of knowing right from wrong.

You're a customer, then, and as a customer I completely agree with you. But as an investor in the same company, I would fault them for not taking a simple step to protect their profits. Just because you include the clause doesn't mean that you're going to do evil and exercise it. Again, I can't fault you for taking the get-out-of-jail-free card that's offered. But I fault you mightily for doing something that would r…

This idea that you can shield companies from any and all morality by crying about investors needs to die. It's absurd.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#213

Post by ifhd »

zimpenfish wrote: post #104
katastic wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This only highlights the moral emptiness and naked corruption of the modern GOP. So surely you're just as angry about the Democrats deregulating the telecoms in 1996 and allowing companies to own entire vertical chains. (Comcast owns everything from the News, to the pipe you get it from. Ever notice how they never mention "big corporations are killing America" anymore?) The GOP hates you. The Democrats _pretend_ not…

> letting Wall Street destroy the economy without jailtime The 2007-8 crash was somewhat before Obama's time. > giving guns to Mexican cartels Started under Bush. > spying on and threatening journalists Started decades before Obama. > unprecendented exponetial growth in classified documents That needs a citation. > using the IRS as a political wing Unless I'm reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_targeting_contro…

> It is extremely difficult to smear a neo-nazi misogynist more than he already does by his own words.

I think Assange is a self-serving hypocrite, but calling him that seems pretty extreme.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#214

Post by chillydawg »

emodendroket wrote: post #190
chillydawg wrote: post #37

Is this an opportunity for a new type of law firm that opens up to deal with one type of complaint for one company and offers extremely low fees to file? The idea would be that the paperwork is all the same for the X thousand/million people suing INDIVIDUALLY such that economies of scale take over and the cost of actually filing and pushing the suit through becomes cheap enough for almost anyone. On the side of Giant…

I don't see how that works when the plaintiff and the plaintiff's attorney still have to show up and make arguments.

Yeah, eventually. And probably only a few of them. All the people filing pool resources and bankroll 100 people to actually show up with the same attourney in front of the same 2 or 3 judges.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#215

Post by refurb »

noobermin wrote: post #184
grellas wrote: post #170

It is entirely superficial to cast this fight as one between good and evil. As much as anything, it was about proper process. Legislative, executive, judicial - those are the three branches under the Constitution that are supposed to check and balance one another. The legislature passed the federal arbitration act almost 100 years ago. It was signed into law by the president. And it has been consistently upheld by th…

>For those who don't like it, that is fine. The ballot box is open as the prescribed means to effect a change. Every single sentence you wrote here is extremely ignorant of the political reality in which that usual proper process has been in the muck for years. You're not realizing the effect that gerrymandering, voter suppression, and money in politics has on the ability of the usual system to work to reflect the de…

Remember, just a few years ago, someone would be denied healthcare due to pre-existing conditions and die.

This is an open and shut issue if the only thing you're worried about is the end consumer. The gov't, on the other hand, needs to worry about the system including the insurance companies. Changing the rules so that a person can forgo health insurance until they are sick is a sure fire way to start a death spiral.

It wasn't until the law was changed to include the individual mandate was the pre-existing condition clause even viable. I'd argue the individual mandate is so weak, that we might end up with a death spiral anyways.

What's the popular saying on HN? "Don't tear down the fence until you know why it was put up in the first place."

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#216

Post by dguaraglia »

ifhd wrote: post #201
dguaraglia wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, yeah, the old Republican trick of creating rules that clearly benefit giant corporations and pass it on the basis that it'd hurt "small corporations." I'm sorry, but if your tiny community bank fucked up badly enough to be on the receiving end of a class-action, maybe they deserve to be affected. Same for bigger banks.

> creating rules that clearly benefit I think you mean removing rules that clearly constrain?

Six of one, half-a-dozen of the other. The end goal is the same: consumer rights get restricted in the name of "poor small businesses". That's been their rallying cry for everything, from tax cuts to trying to write homophobia/misogyny into law (the many "freedom of religion" laws that certain states pass at least once a year at great cost to the tax-payer, only to be struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional.)

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#217

Post by tehwebguy »

refurb wrote: post #215
noobermin wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For those who don't like it, that is fine. The ballot box is open as the prescribed means to effect a change. Every single sentence you wrote here is extremely ignorant of the political reality in which that usual proper process has been in the muck for years. You're not realizing the effect that gerrymandering, voter suppression, and money in politics has on the ability of the usual system to work to reflect the de…

Remember, just a few years ago, someone would be denied healthcare due to pre-existing conditions and die. This is an open and shut issue if the only thing you're worried about is the end consumer. The gov't, on the other hand, needs to worry about the system including the insurance companies. Changing the rules so that a person can forgo health insurance until they are sick is a sure fire way to start a death spiral…

I’m sure the free market will find a way to provide healthcare without insurance companies, an all-but-required middleman.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#218

Post by ringaroundthetx »

cinquemb wrote: post #9
ringaroundthetx wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What looks weird about it? Most Fortune 500 companies do not have bug bounties and have poor security. One was exploited using a disclosed vulnerability. This is on the polar opposite side of the spectrum of things that would give you the idea of nation state, before ruling everything else out.

However, it would make some sense that politically connected individuals/companies would stand benefit from any claims of national security related to such incidences in order to protect them from liability, even if the exposure to severity of such incidences were preventable to some degree. When national security claims protect your six, rational actors eventually will seek to exploit such…

at this point, why WOULDN'T you proxy through a server in Russia or even "just" Eastern Europe when you execute even a wordpress vulnerability

A server with an IP in Russia = Russian Hackers = State Sponsored Russian Hackers = Vladimir Putin destabilizing Democracy

While you are eating popcorn and have millions of dollars of cryptocurrency no questions asked.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#219

Post by libertyEQ »

tehwebguy wrote: post #217
refurb wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember, just a few years ago, someone would be denied healthcare due to pre-existing conditions and die. This is an open and shut issue if the only thing you're worried about is the end consumer. The gov't, on the other hand, needs to worry about the system including the insurance companies. Changing the rules so that a person can forgo health insurance until they are sick is a sure fire way to start a death spiral…

I’m sure the free market will find a way to provide healthcare without insurance companies, an all-but-required middleman.

What free market are you talking about?

Until we fix the collusion between the American Hospital Association[0] and insurance companies through the National Uniform Billing Committee[1] to opaquely set pricing, there will be no free market in the healthcare industry.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Hospital_Association

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Uniform_Billing_Commi...

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#220

Post by poorrights »

lr wrote: post #102
poorrights wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, exploiting the poor is a rather lucrative business for the rich: check cashing, rent-to-own furniture, trailer parks, etc. https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2013/09/17/maki...

Don't forget about using collection agencies to collect local government fines. Like, how a $30 parking ticket eventually turns into $1000 and ruined credit.

Oh for sure. That’s where the intersection with the court system comes in. Harsh laws and court minutiae are extremely harmful to the poor and help keep people in the cycle of poverty.
Post reply on HN