no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

Category Archives: Legalese

Stupid Banking Regulations

August 6th, 2010

I received a letter in the mail from one of my banks today, consisting of what is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever read:

Federal regulations limit the number of transactions allowed on savings accounts during a 12-month period, and we are required to monitor your account to ensure it does not exceed the mandated number of transactions.

According to the regulations, you can make unlimited deposits or withdrawals to your account in person, by mail or ATM, but by law, you are limited to not more than six pre-authorized, automatic, online or telephone transfers or withdrawals per month…

Your account has exceeded the legal transaction limit in a 12-month period for the first time. Once that limit is exceeded three times within the same 12-month period, we will have no choice but to close your account.

WTF? Of course like so many inane “regulations” that plague our daily lives, nobody is ever aware of this one until they happen to violate it.

bank_error_in_your_favorIs this supposed to be some sort of consumer protection law?  Because I can’t (for the life of me!) figure out how this regulation could possibly be in the best interest of anyone besides the banks — who of course charge a fee if you exceed six “pre-authorized, automatic, online or telephone transfers or withdrawals” in a month. Its ridiculousity is compounded by the fact that there is no limit on the number of permissible transfers — as long as you make those transfers in person, by mail, or by ATM (i.e., the three most inconvenient manners of making withdrawals or transfers).

Now, I’m not particularly concerned about losing my bank account (it probably won’t happen again) and I could give to sh!ts about a “savings account” which pays a paltry .25% interest. It’s just idiotic. That is all.

Are the Russian Spies a Pretext for the Internet Kill Switch?

July 1st, 2010

Earlier this week it was announced that a few Russian spies had been captured operating in the U.S. That’s interesting, and I’m actually surprised that the media hasn’t made a big deal out of it.  Because it’s not. The Wall Street Journal cites a number of sources that say this story, with even as little attention as it has garnered, is still blown out of proportion.

  • Philip Shenon at The Daily Beast indicates that “The Justice Department and the F.B.I. have been unable to point to a single significant piece of classified information that the so-called spies obtained during their many years in the United States; none of the suspects is accused of espionage.”
  • Daniel Drezner, at Foreign Policy calls it the “lamest espionage conspiracy….ever.”

What is notable, is that these “spies” had allegedly been passing information to the Motherland in a manner that was previously only theoretically possible:

The accused spies posted the seemingly mundane photos on publicly accessible websites, but then extracted coded messages from the computer data of the pictures, according to the criminal complaint filed by the FBI. Although computer scientists have theorized about the existence of this communication technique for over a decade, this is the first publicly acknowledged use of the technique.

Off-the-cuff, you kinda have to wonder if this is some sort of pretext for the Orwellian “internet kill switch”, which would really concentrate the dissemination of information and “opinion” among the state-sanctioned media outlets, who would of course remain fair and impartial as they repeat the ruling party’s propaganda, and it would be the coup de grace for whatever vestiges remain of our freedoms of speech and information.

Smoking is Healthier than Fascism: Law Bans Adverts, Labels for “Light”, “Mild” Smokes

June 25th, 2010

From the ridiculousity files: a new US law bans the sale and advertisement of cigarettes which use the words “light”, “mild”, or “low” in their packaging. This, I do not understand at all.

Of course the tobacco companies still make what were previously known as “light” cigarettes, they just aren’t allowed to label them that way any more. Philip Morris USA, who makes the Marlboro brand cigarettes, notified their customers before this law took effect, informing them that the packaging would be changing, but the contents would remain the same, urging them to ask for their smoke of choice by color (e.g., Marlboro “Lights” are in a gold colored package).

The FDA already doesn’t know what to do about this, and various activist groups are calling it deceptive advertising, a means of “sidestepping” the new legislation — despite the fact that Marlboro Lights have had a gold and white package for decades, and Marlboro Reds have had a red package, etc.

The FDA sent a letter last week to Philip Morris USA questioning the terms included in Marlboro Lights packs before the ban [asking] for documentation from the cigarette maker to determine if it was deliberately circumventing the law.

The tortured logic goes something like this: There is no “safe” cigarette. Labels like “light” or “mild” mislead consumers in to thinking that a particular flavor is better or less dangerous than others. Therefore, the FDA must act to prohibit this deceptive advertising by disallowing certain names.

Taken to its logical conclusion, eventually they’ll require all cigarettes be sold in the same packaging (that way nobody is “deceived” by the gold color on the cigarettes FKA “Marlboro Lights”).

But is there anything more deceptive than forcing a manufacturer to use the same labels and packaging on what is, in reality, differentiated products? If Marlboro makes 10 or 20 (I don’t know) different types of cigarettes from different tobacco blends, menthol, non-menthol, etc., how other than the packaging and the name will anyone be able to ask for what they want?

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics