Steal This Title: Seeing (Infra)Red

Friday, April 28, 2006

Seeing (Infra)Red

I am just wondering what the justifications for internet incurred fees are. For example; Internet banking charges. Let us not drift into bank charges (in australia) in general, because the intricacies that we have to deal with are something i don't want to go into right now, and we know that many of them are a farce. Internet Service Bank Charges. Charging 5oc for a single monetry transfer between non-connected accounts - certain banks began charging for logging onto the internet system, but someone somewhere decided that this charge was going a little too far; they don't charge for balance views. In a user-pay system, i want to know what the user is paying for? There is no man power involved. Hence no wages. The system and infrastructure has already been completely paid off, so there is no initial cost left to be paid. The internet transfer is a self purporting service. I hear people shout out for the security programmers - they must be paid. Most definitely these people must be paid by the banks. By no meanss should the user pay here. The security of an internet portal on a banking system is a given. The same goes with actual banking security; safes, ATM, insurance, armoured guards. This is the only reason we give our money over to banks - so we don't lose it. Security is the only thing the bank is offering. The consumer loans money to banks so that banks may invest on a larger scale thus recieving higher returns, and loaning our money at higher rates of interest. This is how banks have always made their money. All i ask for is the justification for fees so late in the game?

Another example of internet robbery in Australia are the Internet Service Providers themselves. Australian ISP's are holding the internet (and telecommunications) for a high ransom. Most services, such as free area calls and high quality broadband internet, are standard in other first world nations, such as the USA, Great Britain, Netherlands, and France to name a few - i'm not even going to start with the dismal comparison of Australia to other first world pacific nations. While other first world nations are embracing new telecommunication technologies, offering them at cheaper and cheaper prices, Australia is stagnating at a test-like stage for commercial purposes. For decades mobile phone corporations have been using Australia and New Zealand as test nations for new services and technologies. Both Australia and New Zealand completed their mobile communications networks at similar times. The difference: New Zealand stopped charging infrastructure costs while Australian providers continue to do so. This include mobile and internet communications.

For example, the $1 charge for adding another computer onto cable internet. While paying infrastructure costs in the monthly bill - infrastructure falls onto cable and phone companies such as foxtel and telstra rather than ISPs - ISPs will charge you for every extra computer you wish to connect to the one account. What is this dollar paying for?

In post-enlightenment era are we as free-thinking individuals supposed to merely sit back and accept this seemingly unjustified restrictions and charges upon living? Not only should we be demanding transparency and accountability, there should be a demand for logical justification for the expenses of the consumer.

¶ 12:19 pm

Comments:

Yes mate, I have lived in Japan for 11 years and when I first got here the whole country was light years behind Oz with regard to the internet etc. Now Japan and Korea are light years in front.

Here in Japan I have 24/7 fibre optic connection (100 mps max) for about AU$25.00 a month .. when I was last in Oz people couldn't believe the price I was paying in Japan for such a service.

As for banks, when I was at uni and all the go was "use a cash card at the ATM", my bank manager (R&I at the time)pleaded with me to get cash card to use at an ATM.
I told him "No, because it would put tellers out of work". And more importantly, the banks (being greedy bast*rds would, eventually, find a way to charge us for using the ATMs whilst they cut their staffing levels and saved money. He looked pained and said "John, you are a good customer but you don't understand that banks aren't like that at all ... we pass on any savings to our customers" (I was only a good customer because I was a mature student with three houses rented out and I paid interest on the monies I had borrowed from that bank).

I digress. Guess what? The banks cut their staff, limited their service, are charging enormous fees. Now, using the ATMs is attracting fees so as the banks can make even more money for hiring less workers. The day will come when banks may be controlled by a few "executives" and no staff to give support to customers, or maybe the customer service will be outsourced to India or where ever ... but I will bet London to brick it won't be an Aussie in Oz who will answer your phone call. Currently, try to ring your local bank and you will likely get the bloody automatic switch board lady saying ... "PRESS 1 FOR ACCOUNTS, PRESS 2 FOR LOANS, PRESS 3 FOR ....." ad nausium.

God help Australia because our government can't.

John

# posted by

Anonymous : 6:36 pm