Americans are spending billions on stuff they forget to cancel

Post by taffer » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 10:54 AM UTC

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #152

Alupis wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with people putting on their adulting pants and actually being responsible? Why outsource personal responsibility to a third party? That seems, absurd. "Frazzled and overloaded" is not an excuse for not looking at your bank account one time in 6 months or longer. That's just plain old fashioned irresponsible. If you are at a stage in life where a $10 subscription is hurting, then it stands to reason you…

People don't cancel shit because they don't know it's charging, they don't cancel shit because businesses make it artificially hard to do so, oftentimes requiring you to connect with a representative over chat or phone and having them argue with you and try to re-sell you the product. Almost every subscription I have right now was started with a free trial with a few buttons, but canceling? Canceling is usually a 20+…

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 11:02 AM UTC

robertlagrant wrote: post #600

wolverine876 wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really think it's responsible to knowingly take people's money for nothing? I think that's textbook irresponsibility - it's an assertion of irresponsibility as ok.

Well, you'd have to put work in to know. If I get a physical magazine subscription, the magazine doesn't know if I read it, unless they put in the work to phone me and ask. They aren't being irresponsible at all.

Post by robertlagrant » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 11:27 AM UTC

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #603

robertlagrant wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you'd have to put work in to know. If I get a physical magazine subscription, the magazine doesn't know if I read it, unless they put in the work to phone me and ask. They aren't being irresponsible at all.

That's a strawman. It is indeed hard for a magazine to know. It's trivial for someone like Netflix to know, and they probably already track it.

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 11:36 AM UTC

robertlagrant wrote: post #605

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a strawman. It is indeed hard for a magazine to know. It's trivial for someone like Netflix to know, and they probably already track it.

The responsibility shouldn't change just because it's easier. Should businesses track you (whether that's easy or difficult) and auto-unsubscribe you, or should you decide when to cancel?

Post by robertlagrant » Sat, Jan 20, 2024, 11:57 AM UTC

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #607

robertlagrant wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The responsibility shouldn't change just because it's easier. Should businesses track you (whether that's easy or difficult) and auto-unsubscribe you, or should you decide when to cancel?

If it shouldn't change because it's easier, why did you make a point about it requiring work? Just admit your argument made no sense, instead of pretending your argument was just an irrelevant aside. It does matter that it's easier. In fact it can be automated. If a user is inactive for 30 days, the subscription could be disabled and automatically reenabled if and when they decide to use it. You wanna argue that woul…