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

FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 691 posts

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#281

Post by drdaeman »

crazygringo wrote: post #80
guidedlight wrote: post #10

They should ban hidden taxes too. The sticker price should be the final price.

If you're talking about sales taxes, they can't until you input your shipping address. Because they depend on where you live. Nobody's trying to fool you by not including sales taxes. There's just no way to show them in advance, unless you want to start typing your address and zip code into every shopping website before you even browse.

GP mentioned "sticker price", so I suspect they possibly meant physical goods or services. If you're in a retail store, there are no real obstacles (except for business unwillingness to be honest to the customer) to calculate and disclose the final price. A store knows where it's located, and that's where the sale happens.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#283

Post by BadHumans »

throw10920 wrote: post #258
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's controversial. They do this to increase profits. A certain portion of the population is pro-profit at virtually any cost. It might seem like Dish employees wake up every day and say, "What can we do today to screw our customers even more?" But usually they're just trying to find ways to make more money.

> A certain portion of the population is pro-profit at virtually any cost. What percent? (Citation needed if it's anything greater than 1%) What does "virtually" mean? This statement has no details and just comes across as political dogwhistling as a result.

Do you expect there to have been studies done on what percentage of the population puts profit over everything else?

> What does "virtually" mean?

virtually /vûr′choo͞-ə-lē/ adverb Almost but not quite; nearly.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#284

Post by thaumasiotes »

belfalas wrote: post #259
thaumasiotes wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fantasy. The same thing is true in China. All it means is that the local culture doesn't tip.

This kind of reply is what makes me want to quit HN forever. There's always somebody out there smarter who knows better. Why bother to try and contribute anything?

Yes, contributing mythology is in fact worse than contributing nothing.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#285

Post by AnthonyMouse »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #182
breadwinner wrote: post #140

This shouldn't be controversial. FTC isn't banning these fees, it is only requiring merchants to disclose the fees. Why would anyone be against that? Another good rule is click-to-cancel. Just a couple of days ago I logged into my Dish Network account to cancel it (after they hiked prices). There is no way to cancel online. There is no way to cancel via chat. You have to call. As soon as you call you're told the wait…

Of course it's controversial. They do this to increase profits. A certain portion of the population is pro-profit at virtually any cost. It might seem like Dish employees wake up every day and say, "What can we do today to screw our customers even more?" But usually they're just trying to find ways to make more money.

[flagged]

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#286

Post by eadmund »

throw10920 wrote: post #255
jfengel wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a move afoot to eliminate all regulations unless they've been specifically passed by Congress. Which is basically incapable of passing anything. Ironically, that inherent dysfunction is the main reason to suspect that won't happen. But politically, every regulation as automatically partisan, even when it has overwhelming support.

> There is a move afoot Who is behind this move? What individuals, and what politicians? By what legal means is this happening? I've literally never heard of anything like this before - without further details, this is just political flame-baiting.

> By what legal means is this happening?

Article I, section 1 of the Constitution: ‘All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.’

It doesn’t say, ‘Congress may delegate its legislative Powers to the Executive.’ Arguably, the ‘shall’ language forbids that! Article I, section 8 does give the Congress the authority to pass laws necessary and proper to execute its regulation of interstate commerce (among other things), but … it’s not necessary to delegate legislative power in order to execute the law.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#287

Post by mulmen »

Alupis wrote: post #143
websap wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will take the blurb which says taxes are an approximate calculation based on web browsing data available, vs, no taxes shown. We're gate keeping good features for large % of users over some edge cases.

Or, just get rid of sales tax anyway. It is the 2nd or 3rd time the same money has been taxed, depending on how you view it, and it's pretty ridiculous that a person with $100 in their bank account (post-taxes) still does not have the equivalent of $100 of purchasing power.

It’s the transaction that is taxed, not the money.

By your logic I shouldn’t have to pay income tax on sales because my customers already paid income tax. We could simply the whole thing by just making dollar bills worth $0.66.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#289

Post by mulmen »

blitzar wrote: post #229
tokioyoyo wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It somehow works almost anywhere outside of NA? It's really not a crazy concept - estimate it based on geolocation and say "more exact will be available once you enter your address". The problem is, that genuinely negatively affect the sales because people see the true price of things.

Apparently they can track you to the nearest 5m 24 hours a day, figure out that your teenage daughter is pregnant and replicate your likeness and voice perfectly - but when it comes to sales tax its an intractable problem.

I believe you are referencing the famous Target case. As I understand the dad was angry that Target was sending baby-related coupons to his teenage daughter.

Finding out your teenage daughter is pregnant based on her shopping is easy. It’s actually harder not to notice. “Customers like you also bought” is an effective algorithm because people are mostly the same. Pregnancy has some very specific and unique needs which create a strong signal.

Nobody is in a shady back room poring over chat logs and GPS coordinates looking for pregnant teenagers. It just falls out of the sysem.

Re: FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices

#290

Post by potato3732842 »

jfengel wrote: post #231
breadwinner wrote: post #140

This shouldn't be controversial. FTC isn't banning these fees, it is only requiring merchants to disclose the fees. Why would anyone be against that? Another good rule is click-to-cancel. Just a couple of days ago I logged into my Dish Network account to cancel it (after they hiked prices). There is no way to cancel online. There is no way to cancel via chat. You have to call. As soon as you call you're told the wait…

There is a move afoot to eliminate all regulations unless they've been specifically passed by Congress. Which is basically incapable of passing anything. Ironically, that inherent dysfunction is the main reason to suspect that won't happen. But politically, every regulation as automatically partisan, even when it has overwhelming support.

>There is a move afoot to eliminate all regulations unless they've been specifically passed by Congress. Which is basically incapable of passing anything.

It's hard to argue with this in principal. The rules as law BS has been a band-aid over dysfunction. It needs to go. It'll hurt in the short term but should be more sustainable in the long term. That people will get more angry at congress for doing nothing is icing on the cake.

Post reply on HN