June 03, 2005
Not enough tax cuts...
Bush on Tuesday
CNN on Friday
I guess congress didn’t move fast enough…
June 02, 2005
Electronic Price Gouging
I’m a huge fan of shopping online. In November of 1999, I was working at a mall and wanted nothing to do with them during the holidays. So I did all my shopping via Amazon, and haven’t looked back.
I also consider myself pretty internet savvy, so I was surprised by the fact that this report surprised me (though, I’m not surprised at the actually report). The study was, on it’s face, a study of the naivety of online shoppers. However, what surprised me is the current (and obvious future ) price manipulations which online retailers use:
- The offer lower prices to new customers to lure them in, but if you’re a known customer offer you higher prices
- Offering higher prices on brands that you are loyal to (knowing you most likely will buy it)M/li>
- Offering lower prices if you’re referred to the site by a price comparison site, but higher prices if you go to the store directly
The study found that a large percentage of those surveyed thought that the ‘discount’ travel sights (like expedia and priceline) had to offer the lowest prices.
I actually found out about this the hard way. I had been impressed with priceline and started to go straight there instead of hunting around. I put a bid in for a 4 star hotel in Vegas and got the price I named. I visited the hotel site, and found the fares offered through the hotel were about $15 dollars a night cheaper.
Priceline wouldn’t adjust the price.
** Of course, I continue to shop online as even with the above, prices tend to be cheaper and easier than actually going to a store.
Religion and Choices
There’s been a lot of religious-based news recently.
Alex at Heretical Ideas brings our attention to a judge who is allowing convicts to choose between jail time or religious worship.
Yea, that seems to me to be pretty clear cut. Especially since the the recent Cutter decision, which pretty much assures that the conivtcs can worship in jail. Of course, I find it amusing that the FRC is trumpeting the Cutter Decision. The decision (which really focused narrowly on one section of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000), was based of claims from people the FRC would usually dismiss:
Still, I think the court was dead on in this one. Reasonable accommodations should be made for people in jail to worship – that’s not a church/state issue to my eyes.
America blog, worries about a different issue around religious choice, as the ‘snowflakes’ phenomenon is explored more deeply.
It's disgusting that they allow anti-gay discrimination too, of course, but religious discrimination is in the civil rights act. And this is not a church, it's an adoption agency. So how do they permit discrimination? Do they permit discrimination based on race too? You know, in case I don't want any of those dark folks adopting my sperm child.
I have to admit, I find this one of those ‘there’s no good from dieing on this hill’ issues. Philosophically, I think the thinking is straight on – why do we allow people to dictate what religion, sexuality, or working status an adoptive person may have – but prevent things like race or culture (assuming we do prevent those issues). That said this is an agency that works with a specific population who have specific wishes. As long as they’re not getting taxpayer money, I can’t see getting too upset. Other agencies will provide similar services for non-fundies.
It’s not a tumor pothole!
Are you telling me that, nowhere in California, did there exist a pothole already waiting to be filled in?
May 31, 2005
Next Item!
Well, VP Cheney has said there has been no serious human rights violations committed by the US.
So, you may now all go back to your little lives.
