I've often heard it said, "The proper roll of government is to provide equal rights, not equal things" That said, why then does President Obama feel that he as the right to intervene on a matter involving one of his friends, just because he has legal experience? He needs to back away from the situation, allow the local law enforcement the ability to do there job and for the legal process to work.
This issue has nothing to do with race, or racial profiling; the bigger danger that is lurking with the situation is when the federal government thinks that it has the authority to over step states rights and state governments. The founding fathers understood this, and that's why they called for local government, it is to keep the federal government in check, i.e. checks and balances. The real issue that I see is the current administration seeing how far they can get away with meddling in state affairs. When states allow this to happen, we will no longer be a sovereign nation, we will be under a dictatorship..
Monday, July 27, 2009
Friday, July 3, 2009
Yeah, we'll take it back...
Retail, it isn't what it used to be, seems to me that something has changed, oh wait something did change.. the return policy..
When i started working in retail, the companies had the right to refuse a customers return, dependant on the condition of the merchandise, weather they had a receipt, the warranty period.. I have seen managers that have flat out refused to take a product back, and for good reason, it was beat up, beyond repair, neglected by the owner. What changed? Why are companies so quick to take back products that are clearly beyond the warranty date, been abused, or didn't even come from there store?
Maybe it's the new way of doing customer service, not telling the customer no, the question is, at what cost? Now we are not saying that stores don't get in goods that don't ever fail, they do, we all know that, but at what point does a store have the right to refuse that product that is being returned? When does a retailer have the right to tell the customer, sorry we can't allow that to be returned.
Do you as the consumer of such goods, do you feel justified in returning something that you know is clearly outside the warranty date, or a product that you clearly used, is it your right to demand a refund, a replacement. What happens when you don't have the original receipt, does that retailer have the right to require you to produce that receipt? Do retailers have the right to protect there business from people that make a living off of returning such merchandise, and never having to buy a replacement? What does that do to the bottom line, increase the prices of new merchandise that honest people are buying. So in the end who really wins, the person that will take advantage of a stores return policy, those that abuse the system by raising a stink about NOT being able to return products that have clearly served there purpose. Or you the honest consumer that once again is paying yet more for goods, because of the few dishonest people that feel it's there right to return products, regardless of there condition.. Just something for you to think about, the next time you are in the returns line...
When i started working in retail, the companies had the right to refuse a customers return, dependant on the condition of the merchandise, weather they had a receipt, the warranty period.. I have seen managers that have flat out refused to take a product back, and for good reason, it was beat up, beyond repair, neglected by the owner. What changed? Why are companies so quick to take back products that are clearly beyond the warranty date, been abused, or didn't even come from there store?
Maybe it's the new way of doing customer service, not telling the customer no, the question is, at what cost? Now we are not saying that stores don't get in goods that don't ever fail, they do, we all know that, but at what point does a store have the right to refuse that product that is being returned? When does a retailer have the right to tell the customer, sorry we can't allow that to be returned.
Do you as the consumer of such goods, do you feel justified in returning something that you know is clearly outside the warranty date, or a product that you clearly used, is it your right to demand a refund, a replacement. What happens when you don't have the original receipt, does that retailer have the right to require you to produce that receipt? Do retailers have the right to protect there business from people that make a living off of returning such merchandise, and never having to buy a replacement? What does that do to the bottom line, increase the prices of new merchandise that honest people are buying. So in the end who really wins, the person that will take advantage of a stores return policy, those that abuse the system by raising a stink about NOT being able to return products that have clearly served there purpose. Or you the honest consumer that once again is paying yet more for goods, because of the few dishonest people that feel it's there right to return products, regardless of there condition.. Just something for you to think about, the next time you are in the returns line...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
