Wouldn't they then have to admit that they have used your personal data for non SECURITY based reasons in order to do any of the things you have claimed.
If insurance is refused, premiums go up, payment plans go up etc the first thing as a consumer you will want to know is why.
Obviously not. As always, you're the one who knows so much better than me...Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
No, you won't. But you may get to a point where someone has to pay a bit more for their insurance because of some genetic thing which means, statistically, they're more likely to develop a certain disease. But it probably won't be much more.You'll get the point when one day your child can't get insurance coverage because of a potential problem (statistically speaking) with your left testicle.
This isn't new. Insurance companies already base their premiums on statistics, of course they do. They are effectively betting on the likelihood of them having to pay out. If you're in an area with a higher crime rate you'll pay more for contents insurance. Go skiiing and you'll pay more for travel insurance. Statistically, young people are idiots and cause more accidents than average so they have to pay more car insurance. Is that fair? Well, maybe not on the individual who is young and sensible but insurance is a statistics business, over time the sensible driver will build up a no claims bonus and they'll be rewarded for it.
Again no, no it won't. And you know it wont. If however someone consistently goes far too fast then they are more of a risk to themselves and others and their premiums may well go up.When your car insurance company doubles your Direct Theft agreement because your car grassed you up for doing 31mph in a 200 yard stretch of 30mph zone on a variable speed route.
You list a load of scaremongering things which I think you know aren't going to happen, not to the extremes you suggest. The risk of identity theft is there but it already is, I don't see that as a risk that will particularly increase because of this legislation.
A lot of stuff is monitored already - you started this discussion by saying that "they already do all this". It's no had any noticeable effect on my life. Or yours, I suspect.
Will the price of tinfoil hats go up as well?
NOTE: The location of this post has been moved and the thread title (which was previously Wenger is Leaving) has been manipulated by a notorious pro-Wenger moderator. What was previously a message that contained no profanity and made a comment on a real life event has now been manipulated by a deliberately provocative title. An old and crude propaganda and censorship technique.
The reason we haven't reached the extremities yet is because some people (who can be bothered) are fighting to hold back the tide. If enough people can be persuaded not to care then the battle will be hopeless and then you'll see plenty of these, "never going to happen", instances. By which time they will all be viewed as routine anyway, as privacy and equal representation is stripped away piece by piece. It wasn't so long ago the right to a lawyer and a fair trial were viewed as central to the concept of justice. Now we accept that in certain cases it's okay for the government to "legally" operate outside the law. Some people are practical in their self-interest, if it doesn't affect them directly they don't give a shit. Others are principled in their self-interest, understanding that there's a straight path from one disenfranchised group to your own door.
Yes, invasion of privacy is the norm and has been going on for years. That's not the prize though. The prize is to eradicate privacy with the consent of the victim. Looks like it won't be too difficult to achieve. Your statistical comparisons are a world away from the capability to target each and every individual (excluding those who aren't subject to the law). I have seriously reached the conclusion you believe government exists to serve the people. I don't know where you get this idea from, based on the mountain of evidence to the contrary. But whatever you think, the self evident reality is government exists to serve itself and those it actually represents. And for the latter, they are unashamed in declaring profit as their one and only motive. But they do have an interest in keeping the public fed and watered, as you would do with any productive farmyard animal. And so we play the game of backwards and forwards, debate and manifestos, grave rulings in courts. And quietly, behind the scenes, the exact opposite takes form. Riding on the back of some grand humanitarian ideal or manufactured fear no doubt, like a fox spinning on behalf of the chickens. Someone smarter is always looking out for you (ignore the fact they claim incompetence every time they are caught red handed).
Maybe you are right. What's the worst that could happen if multinational corporations could monitor your every move, read your every communication and have it all stored in one vast livestock management system? After all, what other possible alternative could there be? The Muslims are coming.
Für eure Sicherheit
You don't need a tin foil hat if you've been lobotomised.
Für eure Sicherheit
That's the beauty of national security. Not only would they refuse to admit anything, they could refuse to discuss it at all and prosecute you for discussing it. Yes, insurance goes up. Does that mean you won't pay it? The energy companies, transport companies, government itself don't seem to be having a problem following excessive price hikes. The holy grail for insurance companies is to trade in risk without the risk. They are only a few privacy laws away from making it happen.
Für eure Sicherheit
Well, the worst that could happen - or at least some of the bad things that could - are the examples you cite.
But those things never will happen, not to the extremes you claim.
Not because there are brave souls holding back the tide of the inevitable, but because no-one really cares what you or I are up to. Sure, if they can make a buck out of you - I Google "Dubai flights" and then I get related adverts on Facebook. But no-one's forcing me to buy them.
I do think the Government is self-serving, I don't think they're all out to get me. So far they pretty much seem to be letting me get on with my life.
Didn't say they were out to get you - YOU said that. Not a shred of honesty in you.
Für eure Sicherheit
Its implicit in pretty much every post you make on these sorts of topics.
Well maybe you should forget about what's supposedly implicit and go with what is actually stated. Never said the government was out to get anyone, except the likes of David Kelly. I said they are self serving and work for the corporations and that the only motives are self preservation and profit. You add in the "out to get you" bit because it matches up with the "conspiracy theory" conditioning you and many others have suffered. It's an easy way to divert to safe waters. And the sheep people love to be safe.
Für eure Sicherheit
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote