600$ Transactions In or Out monitoring

Well, the ones not declaring their income will be annoyed. I couldn’t care less if my bank share my data. Her Majesties Revenue and Customs get the data at some point anyway, if you’re honest. If it catches cheats, isnt that fair on those who play fair? Only crooks and dishonest people will complain, so your IRS will have a shorter list to investigate.

everyone gets a letter in the post requiring permission to monitor their account, then go after the ones who refuse! I suppose it will be one of the rights things, yet again. Us Brits just nod and think ……. They’re off again. We just don’t have this hang up on privacy, and I’d not trust my bank to already be doing this. On the other hand, nobody complains with Alexa listening in to conversations in your home. What they do with that, as in the advertising you then get on the net is scary but nobody worries about that.
 
stillnessinthestorm.com seems like a legitimate source of fact based news and there is absolutely no reason why I or anyone else would want to fact check it. So I'm gonna just continue to share this on all the social media sites I am active on because it confirms whatever bias I have. And hopefully others will do the same. I appreciate you and I sharing the same biases. It's important that we all stick together and continue to share whatever articles that confirm those biases with each other, true or not.
 
Last edited:
rob aylestone said:
Well, the ones not declaring their income will be annoyed. I couldn’t care less if my bank share my data. Her Majesties Revenue and Customs get the data at some point anyway, if you’re honest.
Click to expand...
My bank told me all of my personal and financial information is already "out there.. everywhere". I mean, not so's any Joe Schmo on the street can access it, but any corporation, financial institution and the IRS can have a look.
 
Last edited:
I think that I have a very laid back attitude to these things nowadays - the sharpness of the terrible events all over the world, and we've had some very poignant ones about the twins towers on British TV this week makes me think that the constant surveillance, monitoring and sharing of info has to be a good thing, for the benefit of the 'whole'. When my mum and dad were young, bank accounts were mega private and so were people's pay. Job adverts used the words "commensurate with age and experience". Now - that is unacceptable. Age, sex and the other stuff are now deemed irrelevant, yet on social media we tell everyone. Our electronic footprint is out there. We have detailed credit ratings we can check online, and some people do it really often - but to get that, their spending, payments and bank transactions have to be recorded. We want the illusion of privacy, but we need to share our info.
 
rob aylestone said:
We want the illusion of privacy, but we need to share our info.
Click to expand...
Sorry Rob thats crap. I understand about catching crims and the like. Equal pay and all that is ok. Criminal activity is ok, but to have authorities possibly build profiles on people from their spending/buying habits is not on.

The last people who should have such information is the 150% honest, law abiding, transparent, godly, idyllic, sweet people who are Politicians and Policemen etc. I mean they are so angelically trustworthy.:unsure:

Besides the authorities can access what they want already if you are involved in criminal activity. Why do they need to know what goods you are buying, who you are supporting, etc etc.
 
Last edited:
I guess because it helps solve crime. Facebook is a real crime solver in the UK. One of my friends is a insecurity finder - he gets paid to find ways into computer systems so they can fix them. He seems to find easy access into so many systems.

When you are on the net, like this forum, is it really coincidence the adverts are things I sometimes click on? I really think that the covert monitoring already happens and has a benefit. Personally, the idea somebody is watching what internet sites I visit, or listening to my conversations is actually OK with me? At first I thrust my chest out with indinancy about the violation of privacy, but then somebody gets killed buy a citizen already being followed by the security services. We have crazies of all persuasions so if that means the loss of a bit of privacy I can live with that - and my three purchases today inspired by 'random' adverts have been a benefit.

If it's OK to spy for one reason, why not another. If I was buying say diesel, fertiliser and large storage vessels and also buying electronic alarm clocks I really hope the Government know about it. This is the world we live in. George Orwell was so right wasn't he? The only thing he got wrong was the thought police, but now, this bit seems to be happening - big names, outed world wide for things they didn't do, because a few others did! People who lose prospective jobs, contracted jobs and long time served jobs because at some time in their past they said something - that at that period in time was perfectly acceptable, but now career ending. We are now penalising people for what they think, and that is the biggest civil liberty crime. Somebody on a UK forum for backstage folk got ripped a new one this week for using a phrase I personally have used since maybe 1984. I don't even feel comfy here typing it. It's a perfectly innocent accurate phrase using the common name of a product all events and theatre folk use. He used it, probably for the umpteenth thousand time in a venue and a recent graduate snowflake reported him for making racist comments. The phrase relates to a process of getting certain common products into the air, ready for the show. It has no bad context, and the words are in common use - however the phrase could be misunderstood if the person doesn't know what things are called.
 
Hmmm. Whoever doesn't believe in thought police hasn't had posts blocked, censored or covered by social media... "Fact Checkers" are often pinpointing a small tidbit of information in an otherwise true statement to make the whole statement seem false. Like the picture of the electric car being charged by a gas van pulling a diesel generator. "Fact Check" says it's a diesel van pulling a battery powered charger. Doesn't change the meaning of the post (especially since the photo was from Australia where 93% of power is from fossil fuels...) Just one example.
 
rob aylestone said:
I guess because it helps solve crime. Facebook is a real crime solver in the UK. One of my friends is a insecurity finder - he gets paid to find ways into computer systems so they can fix them. He seems to find easy access into so many systems.

When you are on the net, like this forum, is it really coincidence the adverts are things I sometimes click on? I really think that the covert monitoring already happens and has a benefit. Personally, the idea somebody is watching what internet sites I visit, or listening to my conversations is actually OK with me? At first I thrust my chest out with indinancy about the violation of privacy, but then somebody gets killed buy a citizen already being followed by the security services. We have crazies of all persuasions so if that means the loss of a bit of privacy I can live with that - and my three purchases today inspired by 'random' adverts have been a benefit.

If it's OK to spy for one reason, why not another. If I was buying say diesel, fertiliser and large storage vessels and also buying electronic alarm clocks I really hope the Government know about it. This is the world we live in. George Orwell was so right wasn't he? The only thing he got wrong was the thought police, but now, this bit seems to be happening - big names, outed world wide for things they didn't do, because a few others did! People who lose prospective jobs, contracted jobs and long time served jobs because at some time in their past they said something - that at that period in time was perfectly acceptable, but now career ending. We are now penalising people for what they think, and that is the biggest civil liberty crime. Somebody on a UK forum for backstage folk got ripped a new one this week for using a phrase I personally have used since maybe 1984. I don't even feel comfy here typing it. It's a perfectly innocent accurate phrase using the common name of a product all events and theatre folk use. He used it, probably for the umpteenth thousand time in a venue and a recent graduate snowflake reported him for making racist comments. The phrase relates to a process of getting certain common products into the air, ready for the show. It has no bad context, and the words are in common use - however the phrase could be misunderstood if the person doesn't know what things are called.
Click to expand...
I am in total agreement with you there Rob.........except real life isn't like that.
 
Last edited:
In the UK - we still have a class Systemj. It used to be upper, middle and working (lower) but now there is a lower one too - those folk who have perhaps never had a job in three generations. Those who in general are despised by every other class. These people are very anti Police. No respect whatsoever - and they shout very loudly. The average working, middle and upper class people 100% support the Police. We trust them, and if you have a problem, no matter what, you call 999. They're overstretched and get flack for no longer rescuing cats from trees or having the time to chat to kids in schools. They now wear stab vests, and have cameras. They don't carry guns unless they are special armed Police - and the nearest armed police to my pretty large town are 15 miles away. A few have tasers, but most just have handcuffs and a telescopic button.

I have been stopped twice in my adult life - once in 1996 - coming out of a pub with a car load - but I don't drink. Taking a breath test didn't upset me, and last year coming home from a gig at 3am on a country road I got stopped again. This time I didn't even get a breath test - but had a decent chat with the Policeman.

I see videos where people with cameras 'test' the Police with audits - baiting them to get cross then slapping it on YouTube. These people are usually in the bottom class - the ones most of us really dislike but have to suffer.

I have a Policeman who 'pops' in every now and then to use my toilet - we've been friendly for a long time. I'm perfectly happy with this.

Of course there are a few dodgy ones - but they really are a rarity. However, if a Policeman says stop, or who are you, or what are you doing with that drone - I'm polite courteous and they always go on their way. They are warrant carrying officers of the law - I respect that. If I saw one getting thumped by yobs, no way would I stand and film it with my phone - I'd damn well help them out - because I expect them to help me. I cannot subscribe to their modern way of viewing the authorities.It's news here today because somebody in our town had (the TV says) a gun - they closed that part of the town off and police with real guns moved in, and arrested him. So unusual that half an hour later, his friend turned himself in at the police station. The people in KFC across the road didn't panic or run - guns really are that rare here, so everyone was really interested. Social media is already reporting it, and guess which class they are?

PS We don't have class now officially. Unofficially, nothing has changed!
 
rob aylestone said:
if you have a problem, no matter what, you call 999
Click to expand...
It depends on what the reason is, obviously, but much of the reason people call the police is for purposes of things like insurance claims if you get burgled or your car gets whacked, getting your money back from the bank if you're hacked, having some proof of action you took etc, not because of some inherent trust, admiration or hope of a perpetrator getting caught.
 
600 bucks is the threshold for issuing a 1099 to contractors in the US. Has nothing to do with minimum wage.
 
skwee said:
600 bucks is the threshold for issuing a 1099 to contractors in the US. Has nothing to do with minimum wage.
Click to expand...
That's true. The minimum wage hasn't risen to $15/hr, yet.
The $600 threshold of 1099 issuance to contractors is certain indication that the current administration is on the hunt to seek out "under the table" workers and employers.
Perhaps with the exception that the current administration will ignore one simple fact.
Tens upon tens of thousands of people are coming across the southern border.
People without skills.
Most of whom expect to receive welfare.
And they will.
 
"People without skills". At least you called them "people" and not "animals" or something.

The fact is that U.S. economy is bound for collapse if we don't welcome a substantial amount of immigrants in the next ten years. We should be welcoming any immigrant willing to make the trip and get them into the system.

"Illegal immigration" is only a misdemeanor, and also a misnomer: historically, the rules and regulations around immigration have been at varying times very lax or more strict, and the current administration's trajectory sadly is not meaningfully different than its predecessor. At any rate, undocumented immigrants receive no social security or other benefits even when taxes are automatically taken out of their pay. Someone telling you otherwise is selling you something or trying to con you into voting for them.

Borders are arbitrary, and severely limit this country's ability to add wage earners to the tax base, entrepreneurial investment, and smarts (mostly due to 30 years of right-wing dismantling and defunding of public education). Tired of it. A state, regional, or even city-based economic model would be healthier than heavily-guarded national borders. The biggest threats we have to our country are most certainly inside the borders already, not some bogeyman from south of the border.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top