Reply
Thu 26 Jul, 2007 05:35 am
A Conversation between a Customer and Bank of America
Bank: This is the Bank of America , can I help you?
Customer: Yes, I want to cancel my account. I don't want to do business with you any longer.
Bank: Why?
Customer: ; You're giving cre di t to illegal immigrants, and I don't think it's right. I'm taking my business elsewhere.
Bank: Well, Mr. Customer, we don't want to see you do that, but we can't stop you. I'll help you close the account. What is your account number?
Customer: (gives account number)
Bank: For security purposes and for your protection, can you please give me the last four di gits of your social security number?
Customer: No!
Bank: Mr. Customer, I need to verify yo ur information, but in order to help you, I'll need verification of who you are.
Customer: Why should I give you my social security number? The reason I'm closing my account is that your bank is issuing cre di t cards to illegal immigrants who don't have social security numbers. You are targeting that au di ence and want their business. Let's say I'm an illegal immigrant and you've given me a cre di t card. I have a question about it and call for assistance. You wouldn't be asking me for a Social Security number, would you? < BR>
Bank: No sir, I wouldn't.
Customer: Why not?
Bank: Because you would have pressed '2' to speak in Spanish. We don't ask for that information when calling in on the Spanish line.
This is funny for a few reasons.
1) For people on my side to win the political debate over immigration, we need to make you guys look like extremists. Silly actions... like closing an account at a bank, not only ineffective, they also make great publicity (both for the bank, and for those of us on the pro-immigrant side).
I recently received email that we should boycott Dunkin Donuts because they are anti-immigrant. This made me cringe since I would rather have these silly ineffectual protests, that do more political harm than good, stay on your side.
2) In real life, the bank wouldn't care. They would simply leave the account open and say they asked for information the customer wouldn't provide. They would charge account maintainence fees which they would collect through legal action.
3) Many of us (people on the pro-immigrant side) are just upset about the Bank of America policy as you are.
This is not good for illegal immigrants. It is really just a way to exploit them with very high fees at huge profits on the backs of very vulnerable people.
If a boycott of Bank of America would be effective at stopping this exploitative program, I would probably join you.
You're not dumb, but geesh are you stupid.
If I am an extremist for being anti-illegal immigration - then I love the label. Seems like there are an awful lot of extremists out there too.
I love the extremist label for you too, CJ. At least we agree on something.
ebrown_p wrote:I love the extremist label for you too, CJ. At least we agree on something.
Me and a majority of Americans....
The majority of Americans support a compromise that includes border security combined with a path to citizenship.
Every reputable poll that asks Americans if they support a path to citizenship gives the same result-- over 60% of Americans say they do.
That makes your "majority of Americans" a minority -- a loud and annoying minority, but a minority none the less.
Quote:
"One proposal would allow undocumented immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record, to start on a path to citizenship by registering that they are in the country, paying a fine, getting fingerprinted, and learning English, among other requirements. Do you support or oppose this, or haven't you heard enough about it to say?"
Support Oppose Haven't Heard Unsure
% % % %
6/7/07 - 6/10/07
63 % support
23 % oppose
12 % havn't heard
2 % unsure
Link to polling data
Yes, and that path to citizenship leads back to their country of origin. From there, they can complete the application process.
That is what the MAJORITY of Americans mean when they talk about a "path".
So the "majority of Americans (tm)" would insist these immigrants learn English before they are sent back to their country of origin?
The majority is a bit silly, I would say.
I think your misleading, poorly worded poll is silly too.
From the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (taken 6/8 - 6/11 of this year) in the link I posted above..
Quote:
Regardless of how you feel about it personally, do you think that having illegal immigrants who are currently in the United States voluntarily return to their native countries before applying to become legal citizens is a realistic and achievable goal, or not?"
20% is realistic.
76% not realistic
4% unsure.
(hint, this is even less of a majority...)
ebrown_p wrote:The majority is a bit silly, I would say.
but we already knew that, didn't we...
That's fu--ing sad. Use the fu--king National Guard.
The political part of my discussion with CJ is interesting as it relates to the presidential election.
All of the major Democratic candidates are in line with with what the majority of Americans want according to polls.
The Republican candidates are going to have to do this little dance. They will be more anti-immigrant to appease their base... but then in the general election they will have to swing back to the middle to get in line with American opinion.
It will be a neat trick for the Republican nominee to pull this off without pissing off their base.
This process is going to be fun to watch.
Meanwhile the extremist tag for the anti-immigrant folks fits nicely.
Yes I'm extreme. I'm extremely sick of traitorous, subversive numbnuts such as yourself.
Who said this to American people "My fellow immigrants....?"
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace