"IIRC Robin Hood never killed anyone..."
neither did luigi.
NauticalNoodle
joined 1 year ago
I know your pain. Around ~2008 I made a check deposit and later that day checked my balance at the atm to see that I had a positive balance that I had printed off. That evening and the following day I proceeded to do 7 or more transactions. The following day after that I got notified that I was being hit with multiple overdraft fees. Logically I went to the bank the next day around 4pm, thinking they would work with me since I had documentation from their ATM saying I had a positive balance. They said they couldnt do anything for me locally and had to contact the branch I opened my account with. We contacted that branch but because they were one timezone over they said they couldn't help me until the next day as they were closing and "oh, yeah several more overdraft charges are about too hit the account." The next day I contact them and they proceed to tell me they can only reverse one charge and I had also accrued a late fee because I hadn't payed any of the overdraft fees off yet.
When everything was said and done I had paid over $450 in fees. Contacting my bank to see if they'd work with me only saved me $2.00 because the late fee was that much lower than another overdraft fee.
In 2009-2011 sometime I got contacted by a law firm as that bank was facing a class-action lawsuit for intentionally prioritizing debits over credits but I had since thrown away my documentation so I didn't join. -To this day it blows my mind that a bank can telll a client that they have a specific positive balance and yet can still rip them off under the guise of "overdraft protection"
They call it "protection" because it's fuckin' racketeering by any other standard!
'begging the question' is a specific type of logical fallacy
"begging the question or assuming the conclusion (Latin: petītiō principiī) is an informal fallacy that occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion. Historically, begging the question refers to a fault in a dialectical argument in which the speaker assumes some premise that has not been demonstrated to be true. In modern usage, it has come to refer to an argument in which the premises assume the conclusion without supporting it. This makes it an example of circular reasoning." -per wikipedia
"That story about Dr. Rogozov always struck me as something superhuman. "
It actually says near the end of the article that Rogozov and Gagarin (who flew 16 days later) both served as models for the Soviet superhumans mentioned in propoganda. It's also probably why some countries now make appendectomies compulsory prior to visiting Antarctica.
If we wait until an injury or condition is imminently life-threatening then the hospital is legally obliged to treat regardless of an ability to pay and that's one reason people wait. Also, insurance often penalizes (by paying less) for ER visits that turn out not to be emergencies. The thinking is that you should have gone to your doctor who's booked-up six weeks out instead.
view more: next ›
so fucking lame...