Slashdot Mirror


BlueHippo Scam Collected $15M, Only Shipped One PC

An anonymous reader writes "Turns out that those BlueHippo commercials advertising financing for computers and other electronics for anybody, regardless of credit, were way more sleazy than you thought. The FTC is bringing this fraud down, but not too soon. 'According to the FTC, the company's brazen business model continued without interruption after the 2008 settlement. "In fact, in the year following entry of this Court's Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for a Permanent Injunction, BlueHippo financed — at most — a single computer to the over 35,000 consumers who placed orders for computers that could be financed during the period,' the FTC told a court (PDF) yesterday. In the meantime, the company took in a cool $15 million in payments from consumers, who don't appear to have received anything in return.'"

216 comments

  1. Why bother? by Renraku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why bother running a successful business with a plan when you can run a fake business and get the hell out of Dodge when it starts coming down around you? The customers, of course, will want their money back, but will probably get a 15% off your next purchase coupon, good until yesterday, while the lawyers will get a few million to settle.

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    1. Re:Why bother? by jo42 · · Score: 1

      You mean like the "exotic financial instruments" crap excreted from Wall Street?

    2. Re:Why bother? by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your post was going well, but I do not know why you decided to blame the lawyers in the end. Class action lawyers are usually the only people these scammers are afraid of. Government agencies are slow and it is rather rare that they actually go out of their way to chase scams. It is great that the FTC decided to go after those bluehippo people, but this is a very rare occurrence.

      Usually when companies try to do something dodgy towards ordinary consumers they are mostly worried about the class action lawyers. Because there are lawyers out there that do nothing but look out for scams so that they can get their payday. Sure it usually ends up that the lawyers get a lot of the money and the scammed customers get a small check in the mail. But even if the lawyers get all the money they still take alot of money from the scammers and thus punish them, and that is actually a benefit to society.

    3. Re:Why bother? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Because if anyone of your customers or competitors is a bigger fat cat than you, the FTC will get you? ^^

      I mean its not as if they got away with it...

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    4. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Only on DSlasdot (I wish) could blaming the victim of a scam be modded up.

    5. Re:Why bother? by Molochi · · Score: 1

      If the money is gone, somebody got away with it.

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    6. Re:Why bother? by witherstaff · · Score: 5, Funny

      The problem with BlueHippo was they thought small. If they got too big to fail then everything would have been alright.

    7. Re:Why bother? by Renraku · · Score: 1

      In the end, the consumers will not get all of their money back, even if the company is sued into oblivion. What will happen is lawyers will get the largest share, with a small sum going back to the actual consumers.

      Maybe not even in cash.

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    8. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a perfect Darl McBride business plan to me.

    9. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you guys read the FAQ on the BlueHippo web page ?
      No small print, clearly states -several times- that you pay first in monthly increments over a year, then they ship.
      How is that different from a lay away plan a KMart ?
      If you can't be bothered reading the FAQ, don't complain.

    10. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with BlueHippo was they thought small. If they got too big to fail then everything would have been alright.

      A la Government -- er .. General Motors?

    11. Re:Why bother? by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      Maybe they'll get a coupon off their next BlueHippo purchase.

    12. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you not know the difference between the terms "big" and "necessary"? How is Blue Hippo necessary?

    13. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not on DSlasdot, your on Slashdot. Completely different site.

    14. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm... these are people who presumably don't have a computer - so reading the FAQ on a web page probably wasn't a practical option.

    15. Re:Why bother? by andymadigan · · Score: 1

      I've always thought that scammers in the U.S. should be punished harshly. After all, we claim to be a capitalist society, which essentially makes money the most important part of society. Those who deprive people of money by dishonest means take away the only thing that makes someone worth anything in a capitalist society.

      --
      The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
  2. Shocking! by eihab · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember watching their commercials and going to their website to check it out. The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc. until after you mail off the last payment!

    I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.

    The lesson here folks: if it's too good to be true then it probably is.

    --
    If you can't mod them join them.
    1. Re:Shocking! by lannocc · · Score: 5, Funny

      The fine print clearly stated

      Oxymoron

    2. Re:Shocking! by mysidia · · Score: 2, Informative

      They were so massively overpriced... I wonder how many of the 35,000 actually sent in all the payments?

      Also, if they were shutdown... I wonder why their site, http: //www. bluehippo .com/default.asp still works...

    3. Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's what user mode in Opera is for. It makes any hidden text or fine print clearly visible in a normal font. I am sure there is a Firefox addon or setting that does something similar, but it is very hard if not impossible to make fine print stay hard to read with any decent web browser.

    4. Re:Shocking! by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      Maybe he meant it was high quality...

    5. Re:Shocking! by an+unsound+mind · · Score: 2, Informative

      Control + Mouse Wheel.

      Or Control + + if you don't have a mouse wheel.

      Or View -> Zoom -> Zoom In if both options are inaccessible.

    6. Re:Shocking! by sdiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      just make the fine print a jpeg file with low quality or embed in flash

    7. Re:Shocking! by slarrg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No it's not, you do it like this.

    8. Re:Shocking! by Stan92057 · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Some people are truly desperate to fix/get credit so they take chances with places like this one. Its not an excuse for poor judgment,but everything that is done has a reason,good or bad.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    9. Re:Shocking! by Entropius · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is the first time that the Nyquist sampling theorem has had an application to legal bullshit, I think. Wow.

    10. Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.

      lets see...

      Their website says...

      To login to your account simply enter your social security number and password (often your mother's maiden name) to the right.

      I'm not from the US but is your SSN really something you should be using as a login?

      From their faq...

      We use SSL to encrypt your data (like most reputable sites).

      Hmmm so your login is used to encrypt your data.. clever

    11. Re:Shocking! by Paco103 · · Score: 1

      Um. . . . too good to be true? Anyone ever calculate up what they give you for what your total payments would be? It was several times what the items were worth, and if you're not going to get them until you're done paying the outrageous markup, why not just save up? Seriously I thought these things were a scam before I even knew about them not shipping PC's. It really just proves how bad some people are with their money (and contracts). It's really just so much worse that the deal was already so heavily weighted against the consumer and it was *STILL* a scam.

    12. Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember watching their commercials and going to their website to check it out. The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc. until after you mail off the last payment!

      I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.

      The lesson here folks: if it's too good to be true then it probably is.

      I will send these 35,000 an ebook on how to not get taken by scams. For the one time low low price of $10.00. $350,000 humm Sounds nice.

    13. Re:Shocking! by spacefrog · · Score: 2, Informative
      From some of the other (albeit suggestive) replies to this.

      That's what user mode in Opera is for. It makes any hidden text or fine print clearly visible in a normal font. I am sure there is a Firefox addon or setting that does something similar, but it is very hard if not impossible to make fine print stay hard to read with any decent web browser.

      An excellent suggestion for those who are already using Opera (an excellent browser, don't get me wrong. I adore Opera on my Blackberry and Wii.), but not something you need to switch away from Firefox/Iceweasel/Kin to achieve, or even install an add-on/extension for.

      Edit (menu bar) -> Preferences (menu item) -> Content (tab) -> Fonts & Colors (group) -> Advanced (button) -> Minimum Font Size (dropdown list). The default is "None", set it to 10, 12, 14, or whatever is comfortable for your level of vision on your particular display. Kudos to the Mozilla folks for managing to hide that incredibly useful preference so well, but at least you only need to set it once! No additional add-on, extension, hack, greasemonkey script, usercontent CSS entry, etc. is needed.

      For those stuck with or who insist on using MSIE, Tools (menu) -> Internet Options (menu item) -> Accessibility (button), then either tick "Ignore font sizes specified on webpages" (which is easy, but is way too global for many people's tastes), or tick "Format documents using my style sheet" and make a simple CSS file that has !important rules for minimum font size. Nope, not user-friendly in the least, but you can at least accomplish it without making your bad situation even worse.

      I'm sure there are ways to accomplish this in Safari, etc. without too much effort as well, but you will have to ask Uncle Google for the particulars.

    14. Re:Shocking! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      It really is sad. They probably could have kept 3/4 of the money they got if they just shipped out computers. And they'd be legal and everything.

    15. Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In what country would a notice like that be legal? They might as well be printing white-on-white in a jpeg as to try that sort of rubbish.

    16. Re:Shocking! by michaelhood · · Score: 3, Funny

      The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc. until after you mail off the last payment!

      So it's like social security?

    17. Re:Shocking! by iocat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Does this mean my server isn't coming?

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    18. Re:Shocking! by BikeHelmet · · Score: 2, Informative

      After finding it though, what do you do?

      I usually run that stuff through EULAlyzer. It doesn't catch everything, but it does spot a lot of dangerous words.

      And it even formats the info with 1-10 bar graphs, so if you get a lot of 7's (like eBay's TOS), then you know it's bad.

    19. Re:Shocking! by file+terminator · · Score: 5, Informative

      Er, is this a serious post? You do realize that the link leads to a thumbnail, don't you?

      Remove the -thumb part of the URL, and you get something more readable. Still a pretty lousy scan, but perfectly legible.

    20. Re:Shocking! by Sulphur · · Score: 2, Funny

      their site, http: //www. bluehippo .com/default.asp still works...

      To replace goatse.

      --

      Financial advice 60% off.

    21. Re:Shocking! by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Insightful

      why not just save up?

      I seem to remember my grandpa mentioning things like that. He also told me that in the old days if something broke you'd fix it.

      He was full of crazy notions like that.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    22. Re:Shocking! by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      Better, actually. You can still be paying into social security (if you have income) even once you reach retirement age.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    23. Re:Shocking! by Digit+Machine · · Score: 1

      Your organization's Internet use policy restricts access to this web page at this time.

      Reason:
        The Websense category "Illegal or Questionable" is filtered.

      URL:
        http://bluehippo.com/csv2/ProductDetail.aspx?ProdId=5000

    24. Re:Shocking! by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      View -> Page style -> No style

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    25. Re:Shocking! by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So it's like social security?

      Not completely. Social Security provides an important benefit right now: It greatly reduces the risk that your mother-in-law will be moving in with you.

    26. Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this financing if you pay up front before receiving the product? Unbelievable that so many people would fall for this. And the FTC seems to be afraid of shutting down this obvious scam.

    27. Re:Shocking! by noidentity · · Score: 1

      His point was that the image was a good example of nearly unreadable fine print, if one wanted to make the fine print that way. The parent posts were discussing ways of preventing the user from magnifying it effectively.

    28. Re:Shocking! by T-Bone-T · · Score: 1

      I see a lot of Toyota ads on TV with really fuzzy fine print. Most of it is illegible unless you can reasonably guess what it says.

    29. Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firefox has a "minimum font size" option. I am not sure what it is set to by default.

    30. Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's cute, but you do have to admit it is still physically hard to read.

    31. Re:Shocking! by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 1

      Okay, the article never actually states that anyone made the required payments without receiving a computer. There was some sort of scammy cancellation policy but did anyone actually put the $99-124 down then make the next 13 payments of $36-88 and THEN fail to receive a computer? Or did they do the downpayment, a couple of recurring payments, then stop sending money?

      I have absolutely no problem believing that only one person was brain-dead enough to follow through long enough to receive a computer. I mean you had to already pay them MORE than the cost of a computer before you ever got a computer and then they have to KEEP PAYING MORE MONEY. It would make more sense to just put $50-100 in the cookie jar every month for 6 months then go buy a much better computer. And then not have to pay any more money. You'd get it just as fast for less money. Even if you're already in for a hundred dollar downpayment and have to pay another hundred bucks to cancel, it would STILL be better to admit you were a dumbass, pay the penalty, then just start saving money.

    32. Re:Shocking! by eihab · · Score: 1

      Um. . . . too good to be true? Anyone ever calculate up what they give you for what your total payments would be?

      I agree, it was clearly over-priced as well. The "too good to be true" part I was referring to was the:

      "No money down, no credit check! You, YES YOU, can get a computer TODAY for the low monthly payment of $x!!"

      ... commercials that they ran all the time.

      --
      If you can't mod them join them.
    33. Re:Shocking! by Tycho · · Score: 1

      And you will receive Social Security at retirement age regardless of the whether or not you need payments from Social Security to support yourself. In fact, the amount of one's payments from Social Security are based mostly on one's income before retirement, so the more money you make, the more money you receive. I suppose this is better than using those funds to improve the lives of those living in poverty in a rural areas without indoor plumbing. One might think that someone with twenty million dollars in assets might be able to support themselves without Social Security until they were 140 years old, assuming they retired at 65 years of age.

      --
      Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
    34. Re:Shocking! by LackThereof · · Score: 1

      This form of financing is actually legit, and a common practice. It's been dying out as credit got cheaper and easier to get, but has been starting to make a comeback recently.

      The scam part is where they didn't actually send out the computer after the 13th payment. And the part where they charge thousands of dollars for a bottom-of-the-line dell.

      Of course, it's foolish to get a computer on layaway - by the time you've made the payments and recieved the computer, it's probably outdated. Not like a vacuum cleaner or something.

      --
      Legalize recreational marijuana. Seriously.
    35. Re:Shocking! by LackThereof · · Score: 1

      According to the linked PDF from the FTC, about 2,500 of the 35,000 made enough payments to get a computer.

      --
      Legalize recreational marijuana. Seriously.
    36. Re:Shocking! by michaelhood · · Score: 1

      This was the most insightful answer possible to my quip, thank you.

  3. I'm fairly surprised, actually... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not surprised that BlueHippo are a bunch of worthless subhumans; but that they would be so audacious about it.

    Had they actually shipped a few thousand bottom-of-range refurb Compaqs or whatever, which are pretty damn cheap by the pallet load, they never would have attracted fire from the FTC. The way that their "business" was structured(at least back when I checked their website when I first heard about them), they should have been able to clear fairly impressive margins on the backs of the poor and clueless even without cheating. And, if they had avoided legally actionable fraud, they presumably would still be operating today.

    Why would somebody do that? Is enforcement so weak that getting away with it is a rational expectation?

    1. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Lord+Lemur · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is always better to have to give it back then never to have had it. This has gone on for how many years. That money has been divided out to "share holders" and other Intrested parties I'm sure. Don't worry, they will BK before they payback anything in the ball park of Millions to anyone. So, yes it is a rational expectation.

    2. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would somebody do that? Is enforcement so weak that getting away with it is a rational expectation?

      Yes. Bernard Madoff being a fantastic example of this.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    3. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by barzok · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, Madoff never expected to make it as long as he did. He was surprised it took them so long to catch him.

    4. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by khallow · · Score: 1

      The thing is this sounds like blatant mail fraud which is a federal offense. The FBI should have been all over this back when the FTC had determined that these guys weren't shipping computers at all in April 2008. The company was formed in 2006 so it appears to me to be a cut and dry case. I really don't understand what could have been going on here that would cause the FTC to hold off for almost a year and a half.

    5. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes they may have been able to clear good margins if they had an efficient operation. But of course companies like that are rarely efficient, because a thief usually does not know how to do anything well other than stealing.

      Also, outfits like these are usually high pressure sales operations which means they have to pay their salespeople a lot of money per sale.

      But in any event, I suspect they were planning on shipping the computers some time but they just did not get around to it because they were too lazy, and having too much fun making money to actually spend any money on computers.

    6. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      In other words, you believe that Madoff intended to spend the rest of his life in prison?

      Are you really that stupid?

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    7. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Fizzol · · Score: 2, Informative

      barzok's post is correct, that's basically what Madoff himself admitted.

    8. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/bernard-madoff/5928899/Bernard-Madoff-surprised-fraud-was-not-uncovered-sooner.html

      Read here motherfucker.

    9. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      No it isn't rational to expect you get away with it, it is just how scammers work. Part of it is many of them actually talk themselves in to believing that everything they do is ok. They aren't entirely rational, in that they are the kind of person who can't feel empathy for anyone else. Thus if it enriches them, they see it as ok.

      Also greed can override the few functioning brain cells many people have. So they get greedy and try to take more and more, even though there's no real reason to and in doing so they are likely to lose everything. I mean look at the Enron execs. You are talking about people who already had enough money to have pretty much anything they wanted, and yet decided they had to have more and thus stole it.

      Finally, some people just seem to refuse to be legit for whatever reason, even if it is a better idea. There was a guy here locally that was arrested for steaming change out of newspaper machines. Now while this was a few years ago, it still wasn't like a bunch of people bought from these. They'd get a few bucks at most. Also it took a good deal of effort to get in, they are sturdy metal boxes. Cops said he literally would have made more working a minimum wage job or being a panhandler. However for whatever reason, he'd convinced himself this was a good idea.

      There's just no explaining some people.

    10. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by tqk · · Score: 1

      "In other words, you believe that Madoff intended to spend the rest of his life in prison?"

      Intended, well, no.

      Expected, yeah, once they caught up with him, which I suspect he always anticipated. I'm shocked at all the times he was on the carpet, yet was let free. I'm shocked at the level of oversight some of the (presumably) smartest people in the world exercise (none).

      Hmm, no, maybe not smartest, just richest. Kinda stunning to see Palm Beach fall for such a cheap con job.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    11. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1, Insightful

      But why would anyone believe something that:

      1. Makes absolutely no sense.
      2. Said by Madoff?

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    12. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by lul_wat · · Score: 0

      Well Bluehippo only ship after you send your final payment, maybe they hadn't finished paying off their order.

      --
      Divide a cake by zero. Is it still a cake?
    13. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read here motherfucker.

      You certainly are!

    14. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Nobody here but us chickens" said the fox in the hen house.

    15. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not unless panhandling is illegal there, leaving a minimum wage job. And with a job, there may be a dress code, having to deal with people, etc. Logically, for some people, being a thief makes more sense.

    16. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      It's not that unreasonable, is it?

      I'd be happy to believe that he started fairly sensibly, and then started with little frauds and fiddles as they became necessary, to hide poor performance and boost results. His investment business did have a core business model at one point- it's what enabled him to hide his scam from his sons and colleagues so long.

      Once your result-faking and number-fiddling has reached sufficiently large proportions, and your business has become nothing but a Ponzi, there's no real way out of it without turning yourself in. It's about that time he was probably expecting the Feds to be kicking in his office door.

      The fact he was allowed to carry on for years after that point is something that he would be justified in being (pleasantly) surprised about.

      He's still a bastard, though.

    17. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      In other words, you believe that Madoff intended to spend the rest of his life in prison?

      He didn't have a crystal ball. Spirits didn't visit him in the night and map out the future for him.

      I think you need to consider two points in time - before he started, and when he'd got in so deep there was no turning back. Maybe a third - where he started fiddling a bit but thought he'd be able, Micawber like, to somehow cover it.

      Sometimes events take on a life of their own.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    18. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you really that stupid?

      That is very stupid sentence to include in your post. Especially when you are the one who claims not to understand something.

      In other words, you believe that Madoff intended to spend the rest of his life in prison?

      He was long into his middle age when he started. In his 70s when he got caught. The rest of his life in prison = the last few years, certainly not decades. That in exchange for being able to spend a few decades as a multibillionaire? I would take that deal.

    19. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I think you need to consider two points in time - before he started, and when he'd got in so deep there was no turning back.

      Madoff could have cut and run and moved to Barbados to suck down rum drinks for the rest of his life at basically any point. There's no such thing as "no turning back" unless you jump off a cliff with no hang-glider, bungee cord or similar.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Madoff was a convenient show pony to give the impression that people were actually being arrested and jailed for the financial meltdown. The reality is criminals held the economy to ransom and the goverment payed up.

    21. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intend (want) to spend the rest of his life in prison? Absolutely not.
      Expected that someone would eventually catch him? Yes, I believe that

    22. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The only places with no extradition treaties in place are places where you probably wouldn't want to live the rest of your life.

    23. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The only places with no extradition treaties in place are places where you probably wouldn't want to live the rest of your life.

      ridiculous. Shit, I can afford one in most of those nations, and still have enough left over for a lot of booze. His problem was greed, plain and simple.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    24. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Hmm, somehow my comment got badly mangled. I wanted to say that it was ridiculous to think he couldn't afford to buy a new identity in one of those countries.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    25. Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      If the US government wanted to find you hard enough, they would. The exceptions to that are heads of large criminal organizations who have zero direct contact with non-associates. Buy an identity? That's easy. Get the money to that identity? That's much harder. Oh, and a single phone call to a friend, or a single person recognizing you (not that hard, being the rich American that just moved in) and it's all over.

  4. Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by NoYob · · Score: 5, Insightful
    How about naming the asshole or assholes behind it? So that way, if we see those lying thieves we'll know to run. Many times, these guys close up shop and just start all over again with a different business entity.

    How many would invest with Bernie Madoff if he somehow miraculously got out of prison - regardless of the name of his company?

    --
    It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
    1. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by TSHTF · · Score: 5, Informative

      From the court documents linked in the article: Joseph K. Rensin is the sole owner and shareholder of BlueHippo Funding, LLC. FTC 26. Mr. Rensin acted as Chief Executive Officer of BlueHippo from its inception in 2003 until July 20, 2009. See FTC 28 at 7-8; FTC 22G at 3. As CEO, BlueHippo's corporate officers, including the Chief Marketing Officer, reported directly to Mr. Rensin. FTC 28 at 20-22. In addition, Mr. Rensin was involved in BlueHippo's day-to-day operations, "manag[ing] the overall structure and direction of the business" and "overseeing the senior management team in formulating strategy." Id. at 22; FTC 22G at 3.

    2. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by rodgster · · Score: 1

      Just like with Madoff. I wonder, WTF was the "exit strategy"? Since the FTC has shut them down. I assume more than 1 person sent that final payment. It's a house of cards. When you build it. Don't you think about getting out before it collapses?

      --
      Who will guard the guards?
    3. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Informative

      Previously, Rensin operated a collection agency at the same address. He was sued for that one as well. And lost.

    4. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

      So why is the FTC throwing lawyers at BlueHippo instead of arresting Rensin?

    5. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by nomadic · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure the FTC has agents with police powers.

    6. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

      Well apparently BlueHippo was held in contempt by federal court in April.. and this isn't the first time they've been in trouble

    7. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the exit strategy. Notice they took in $15 million and were fined $5 million. Sounds pretty good to me. I can't believe how my country has sold out it's ethics on the alter of capitalism.

    8. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Steal one item from one store worth $10 and most likely you'll get handcuffed, arrested and processed for a criminal act. Even if the charges are dropped the next day that arrest record will follow you forever effecting your employment, housing, auto insurance and credit worthiness regardless of you credit score. Many places will not rent to someone that has been arrested. Many businesses will not hire someone with any arrest record. Just or unjust, it does not matter. It is the "mark of Cain."

      Steal hundreds of dollars from thousands of people with the same well seen intentions as the first case and no arrest. They steal and hide behind a corporate shield and run away when said shield is too damaged for further use. Mr. Rensin needs to be tried on fraud and if found guilty spend some time in a federal "PMITA" prison thinking about how he ripped off the poor. Too bad the justice system does not have the intelligence or backbone to make that happen.

      One criminal act: jail time; thousands of criminal acts: no jail time with the lawyers and the government taking what little cash is left after the fact leaving nothing for the victims. Kinda like: "One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic." - Joseph Stalin

    9. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Rensin started another company already. I looked him up on Linkedin...http://www.edisonworldwide.com/. What an entrepreneur.

    10. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about going after the TV station or cable provider that ran the ads?

    11. Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out the slideshow at http://www.edisonworldwide.com/aboutUs_fun.asp - some positively awful office space-style birthday party set to music and recorded for posterity forever on the web.

      On a corporate web site? Just... Wow.

  5. Winning gold at the scam olympics by ZackSchil · · Score: 2, Informative

    I just went there and clicked a purchase button that said I needed to log in, but my SSN would do just fine to log in.

    This is a pretty great scam.

    1. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by mkiwi · · Score: 5, Informative

      So they have your SSN for the user name. Just think of what they could do if they knew your mother's maiden name! Oh never mind, that's the password!
      https://www.bluehippo.com/csv2/Login.aspx

    2. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by Sporkinum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Normally, I would be horrified. But in this case I'd like to congratulate them on taking Darwinism to a new level. They not only took those saps for a wad for an over priced computer that they would rarely have had to deliver, they also got they keys to the kingdom in the form of ssan and mothers maiden name!

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    3. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by JimboFBX · · Score: 5, Funny

      At least they used HTTPS.

    4. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by dufachi · · Score: 1

      good lord.. I am speechless. 35,000 people thought it was a good idea to give this company their SSN *and* their mother's maiden name? And people wonder how come identity theft is so rampant.

      --
      -Kinsey
    5. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by ECCN · · Score: 3, Informative

      No worries... They have alternate login information options, such as the harmless "Bank Account Number/Zipcode", etc.... https://www.bluehippo.com/csv2/LoginTrouble.aspx The rampant stupidity of sheeple in dire straights never ceases to amaze me.

    6. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by julien+dot · · Score: 2, Informative

      So they have your SSN for the user name. Just think of what they could do if they knew your mother's maiden name! Oh never mind, that's the password! https://www.bluehippo.com/csv2/Login.aspx

      Don't worry if you're having trouble logging in, you can also use your bank account number.

      --
      Julien C.
    7. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DUDE Look at the requirements if you click

      "Trouble Logging in"

      Any of these combination will grant you access

      Social Security Number/Home Phone
      BlueHippo Account Number/Home Phone
      Social Security Number/House Number
      Bank Account Number/Zip Code
      Social Security Number/Password
      ( https://www.bluehippo.com/csv2/LoginTrouble.aspx )

      Now I only wonder once in if a person would be then able to see the SSN number ?

    8. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by ffflala · · Score: 1

      Wow.

    9. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excuse me, but why the hell is this website still up??

    10. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      That is an excellent question.

      Why the hell is this place still apparently operating?

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    11. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by GravityStar · · Score: 1

      My brain hurts. Must find beer.

    12. Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics by Venim · · Score: 1

      seriously. you could tell this was fishy just from the lame commercials. these 35,000 people should be hitting themselves in the head for being so stupid.... oh wait that might make it worse.

  6. Re:I'd do it! by Rip+Dick · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hey! I like drugs...

  7. if they shipped only one PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    How did they get 35,000 people to agree over the choice of a Windows desktop theme?

  8. Is this the free market? by fermion · · Score: 4, Insightful
    So I see that Gates and Buffet said recently that the economy is picking back up and all is well and there is no reason for anyone to be worried and the free market is perfect.

    But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money. If $1 gets spent by ACORN in a questionable manner, an act of congress is immediately enacted,but when those not so well off are robbed, we can't even make the criminal parties stop, much less put them in jail.

    Or look at Verizon. They are stealing from their customers in $1.99 increments. And don't tell me it is not stealing. If you went to store and got charged for everything you put in your shopping cart before you checked out and left the store, and the store refused to refund you money if you did not actually want the merchandise, I am sure the cops would be called.

    Of course Billg loves the free market. If a contractor installs unlicensed versions of MS Office on a clients computer, that contractor can earn a million dollars bounty forreporting the company, and then the BSA has every right to put the company out of business with exorbitant and irrational penalties. But if MS steals software, they can just blame it on a contractor and then apologize.

    People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    1. Re:Is this the free market? by east+coast · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.

      Are you trying to say that what has happened recently isn't theft by the elite? If you are you seriously need to wake up. Instead of Verizon taking from their customers with little scams and contract foolery we now have big brother telling us that it doesn't matter if we like it or not; he's going to take from you regardless of position.

      We've effectively gone from a system that we could opt out of (for the most part) into one where the government forces you to give it up till you bleed. Tell me how much better things are again?

      Your problem with the free market is that you don't seem to know the difference between a luxury and a necessity. If you don't like Verizon's business practices boycott them. No one was twisting your arm. Now you have no choice.

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    2. Re:Is this the free market? by mc6809e · · Score: 5, Informative

      So I see that Gates and Buffet said recently that the economy is picking back up and all is well and there is no reason for anyone to be worried and the free market is perfect.

      But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.

      The elderly are doing the same thing to workers right now through Social Security and Medicare.

      We're promised future product (retirement money and health care) if we make payments up front. And it's unlikely the state will be able to deliver since they've already spent the money.

      Sound familiar?

    3. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't have any idea why you think the free market is going to protect the weak and stupid. The entire concept of the free market is to fleece the weak and stupid. Welcome to reality.

    4. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite...

      Are you trying to say that what has happened recently isn't theft by the elite?

      I don't understand your question to him.

      I think both of you are complimentary - he's referring to commercial predators, you're referring to governmental predators.

      ------

      If you don't like Verizon's business practices boycott them.

      I thought it's like a monopoly or duopoly in some places?

    5. Re:Is this the free market? by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.

      Anyone over the age of 25 who decries the direction of the US isn't referring to the horizontal direction, but the vertical.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    6. Re:Is this the free market? by copponex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We've effectively gone from a system that we could opt out of (for the most part) into one where the government forces you to give it up till you bleed. Tell me how much better things are again?

      I see your point, but the idea you're missing is that much of technology moves from a luxury to a necessity very quickly. Ten years ago you could compete in the job market with no computer skills, and that's no longer the case. Shorter patent lifespans would allow companies to profit from good research, but not set back an entire society to profit a single corporation. Imagine if GE came out with a solar panel that was dirt cheap to manufacture, but charged 400 times more than it cost to make. China, India, and Russia could reverse engineer the product, and then we'd be competing with international companies that pay far less for electricity.

      Furthermore, you have zero input on the actions of corporations who provide these necessary luxuries, like oil, electricity, information infrastructure, and so on. At some point, you have to assign a third party with more power to keep them in check, or we'll all be living in company towns, shopping at company stores, which isn't a hell of a lot better than soviet communism.

    7. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the point being made about the free market system, you can sign up with verizon in good faith and then subsequently realize you don't like a particular business practice. Once you realize that they are cheating you, poisoning drinking water, or suffocating babies it is too late and you are stuck in a contract with no way out except to give them more money. Only after this will you be able to boycott them, the problem is how much damage they cause in the process, before people catch on. Face it, a phone is a necessity in our economy, whether it be land locked or not. Try conducting a job search without one, you'll never know if you got hired. When you are poor a phone call is cheaper than gas used driving around to check on job applications. Pay phones are dinosaurs that most people cannot locate when hard pressed, and they cost more than a nickel these days.

    8. Re:Is this the free market? by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      ? You need a smartphone?

    9. Re:Is this the free market? by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Shhhh, more than a single axis political scale scares him.

    10. Re:Is this the free market? by Lucidus · · Score: 1

      Look, I understand that the situation with Social Security and Medicare is messy, and that you are concerned about how this will affect your future, but resenting the elderly - or accusing them of stealing - is just stupid. People who paid into the system over the 40 or 50 years of their working lives quite reasonably expect to receive the benefits they earned and were promised. Do you want your parents and grandparents to die, homeless and destitute, because the government failed them?

    11. Re:Is this the free market? by CodeBuster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.

      As PT Barnum once said, "the fool and his money are soon parted". This notion that the government has to step in and protect people from themselves is completely misguided; it treats everyone like grown up children who cannot take responsibility for their own choices. Do you want to live in the real world and be treated like an adult? If your answer is yes, you have to be willing to let people make their own decisions, no matter how stupid, and own their failures. That is what it means to be an independent adult.

      If $1 gets spent by ACORN in a questionable manner, an act of congress is immediately enacted,but when those not so well off are robbed, we can't even make the criminal parties stop, much less put them in jail.

      Personally, I was glad to see ACORN go. They were a criminal gang of election fraudsters and two-bit street hustlers who were out of their league and got what was coming to them. Did they honestly believe that they wouldn't be infiltrated and exposed? Their operational security was a joke and they paid the price. Good riddance.

    12. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Verizon has competitors. I know of one (T-mobile) who doesn't even rip me off. There are probably others.

      Every time people talk about Verizon, I shrug. Just look at the dollar amounts. You don't even need to know that they're evil, in order to know that you will lose if you have anything to do with them.

    13. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      where as if people had their pension with Enron they would be safer right? at least you're guaranteed that the US govt will be there when you retire.

      That's the way it works. where I live I would rather pay my taxes to the government and only deal with companies if and when I need to.
      Would you rather have 0% tax, but be dependent on all the Wall St crooks for your medical/pension/insurance needs?

      The difference between govt and private pension/medical/insurance is that the govt only needs to break even rather than pay for the CEOs gold plated toilet seat on his pink yacht.

    14. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the mess was the government borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund.

      Kind of like a landlord "borrowing" rent money to pay their own private bills, eventually hitting a point where they're out of money, and your power gets shut off. (In the situation where electricity is part of your monthly rent.)

    15. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.

      Ah, it's the invisible hand at work.

      People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.

      The bailouts are the latest big theft by the elite -- how are things changing at all?

    16. Re:Is this the free market? by east+coast · · Score: 1

      I see your point, but the idea you're missing is that much of technology moves from a luxury to a necessity very quickly.

      Nothing is certain but death and taxes. And the part of my post you missed is that we no longer have a choice. Maybe one hundred million own a cell phone with a choice to switch or to boycott. Now the "elite" that the OP was bitching on about have a direct tap into the tax flow of this country. What do you really think the stimulus is? And both parties subscribe to the idea that stimulus money to corporations works. You no longer even have a valid choice between dumb and dumber!!!

      Furthermore, you have zero input on the actions of corporations who provide these necessary luxuries, like oil, electricity, information infrastructure, and so on. At some point, you have to assign a third party with more power to keep them in check, or we'll all be living in company towns, shopping at company stores, which isn't a hell of a lot better than soviet communism.

      Uh, guy, we've already passed that stage with the federal government already taking your tax money and deciding what corporation is worthy of it. And in return the corporations are beholden to the government. Can't you see what's going on here?

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    17. Re:Is this the free market? by inviolet · · Score: 1

      The elderly are doing the same thing to workers right now through Social Security and Medicare.

      We're promised future product (retirement money and health care) if we make payments up front. And it's unlikely the state will be able to deliver since they've already spent the money.

      It is impractical to 'save' wealth on the scale necessary for Social Security or Medicare.

      Certainly you can save money, but money is not wealth, and so when you spend those green pieces of paper later, the current workers must then cough up the wealth via inflation.

      The Social Security program does not go through those motions because they would accomplish nothing. A stack of money sitting in a warehouse does not produce any wealth; green pieces of paper themselves do not generate wheat or oil or gold or land. So money comes in the front door of the Social Security office and then out the back door, faciliting a quick flow of wealth from worker to retiree.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    18. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      obviously. perhaps the GP was concerned about the possibility of unbalances in the system - more retirees than workers, for example.

    19. Re:Is this the free market? by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      If you didn't understand that ACORN was a scam when you first heard about it, you don't understand people. Same with BlueHippo.

      There are times in everyone's life when you look at someone poor unfortunate soul and decide you should do something to help them or lift them up somehow. But to make a business out of doing this? No, sorry, it doesn't work that way. Neither financially or psychologically. What this means is that when you encounter any organization, group or company that seems like they are doing only good, altruistic work 100% of the time there is something wrong. Say, like when you hear about a company that takes people with no credit history or bad credit history and helps them get a computer by financing them. You can bet there is a substantial amount of fleecing going on.

      Now, could Dell give 1 computer to poor people for every 1,000 they sell? Sure. Or the equivalent in some form more useful to poor people than a computer. And maybe they do with far less publicity.

      So do you think an organization that is dedicated to getting housing for poor people, people with limited means, bad credit history and unstable work history might have some sort of alterior motive? Absolutely. And everything I have read about ACORN since the 1970s indicates that they have been playing games since their very inception. Games that have to do with power, control and influence that have nothing to do with their supposed mission.

    20. Re:Is this the free market? by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Your mistake is believing that either Wall Street or the government has to deliver. They aren't, they can't and people are beginning to figure it out. And it isn't that there is a choice between the two - the government doesn't have the ability to back up their promises to people working today.

      Social Security is based on the idea of a growing labor pool. It works because the factories got larger and employed more and more people. The office buildings got taller and taller and more and more people were employed. Today, the US in a shrinking labor pool. There are almost no factories left in the US and the workers that are left are tending to the machines that replaced the thousands of workers there were in the 1950s.

      Once the labor pool starts to shrink, Social Security is doomed. There are more people collecting than paying in eventually and the system has to collapse. The time to fix this was in 1980 when the factories started to disappear - if the government allowed that trend to continue - and they did - the future was written in stone. There is nothing that can be done about it today.

      Maybe the only reasonable way is for the people to finance the government. Your savings go into bonds that the government pays interest on. Because of compounding interest, your deposits grow so they money you put into this in your 20s is enough to support you in your 80s. Unfortunately, that wouldn't have helped the old people in 1935 and everyone knew that factories and the labor pool would continue to grow forever.

      Today about the only thing that will bring manufacturing back to the US would be a trade war or maybe a shooting war with China. We cut off their ability to send us cheaply made stuff and suddendly our government realizes they have outsourced the military supply chain to China. So rebuilding a factory to make bullets gets really, really important when China stops sending them over to shoot at Chinese people.

      Without something like that, the US will have a permanent 10-20% unemployment rate and Social Security will be gone.

    21. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, someone stole money from someone else. Clearly the free market is broken and we need to pass some more laws and change the system! Did you know they don't have theft and fraud in Socialist countries? It's TRUE!

    22. Re:Is this the free market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like any great pyramid scheme, social security and medicare will screw the last to pay in before it fails. If you could stop people from paying in it would screw those one level up. A good compromise with social security would be to reduce benefits now. Perhaps by basing it on financial need, and increasing the retirement age 10 years. It could be done gradually over a few years. Ultimately we should encourage people invest in their own retirement and use social security type systems as the support system of last resort, rather than something everyone gets.

    23. Re:Is this the free market? by phorm · · Score: 1

      Of course Billg loves the free market. If a contractor installs unlicensed versions of MS Office on a clients computer, that contractor can earn a million dollars bounty forreporting the company, and then the BSA has every right to put the company out of business with exorbitant and irrational penalties. But if MS steals software, they can just blame it on a contractor and then apologize.

      Actually one of the conditions of filing the BSA report (or at least the snitch rewards part, which is more or less the incentive behind them) is that you cannot be the one who installed the software, unless it was under orders from somebody else who could be held responsible.I found a bunch of info on that when the last "what to do if my company is using unlicensed software" question came up on slash.

  9. hahah call the number by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    call the bull hipo number in the story. it took them under 15secs to ask for my bank info and close the deal.

  10. Immoral people by blindbat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can never make enough laws to keep people like this from exploiting others.

    It would never occur to those of us who have been raised with an inkling of an idea of good and evil to treat others in such a despicable manner.

    It has nothing to do with free market. It is an issue of ethics and values.

    Without the adoption of some standard of right and good within the individual heart, there is no hope of restraining people from similar scams.

    1. Re:Immoral people by Ostracus · · Score: 1

      "Without the adoption of some standard of right and good within the individual heart, there is no hope of restraining people from similar scams."

      So which standard shall we use? "Survival of the fittest" or "the golden rule"?

      --
      Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
    2. Re:Immoral people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about slow, public execution and forced sterilization of his entire family tree?

    3. Re:Immoral people by Machtyn · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Policemen and laws can never replace customs, traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we’ve become." -Walter Williams, “Laws Are a Poor Substitute for Common Decency, Moral Values,” Deseret News, Apr. 29, 2009, A15

      Your statement reminded me of this quote.

    4. Re:Immoral people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      well, at least they didn't pirate music, because that is the WORST type of criminal

    5. Re:Immoral people by blindbat · · Score: 2, Informative

      The golden rule works very well, but it only works on a voluntary basis.

      See http://godsvaluesystem.com/ for a discussion of "sacrificial love for the benefit of others" as a value system.

      There is actually a free book on relationships from that perspective that even a non-religious person would find helpful at http://blackstripespublishing.com/

    6. Re:Immoral people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right now it is the "survival of the fittest," and they attribute it to the natural order of things as if its the best and only way. The problem is that evolution is not survival of the fittest, it is the ability to survive in a particular environment and have viable offspring. Being small and nimble is sometimes an advantage and sometimes being a behemoth confers some advantage. Since it is environmentally specific, it is therefore an imperfect rule to guide the morals of society.

           

    7. Re:Immoral people by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      And the next thing he probably said was:

      "Thank goodness we have a right and propery Theocracy here to control how people live in the Nation of Deseret...I mean the State of Utah."

    8. Re:Immoral people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your are a dumb fuck. By your "logic", there should be no laws punishing murder, because people will c0ontinue to kill no matter what the law says. I hope that someone shoots in a driveby and no one is ever charged,

    9. Re:Immoral people by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      That's not what he's saying at all. Do you think the police could actually stop murders if everyone decided to go on a murdering spree? Of course they couldn't, and that is not their job. Laws are codified versions of the ethical values of the society that enacts them. They can only function because most of the population will abide by them irrespective of whether they exist or not. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't bother with them, it means that the purpose of the police is to apprehend those who lack the required social instinct and indoctrination to participate in a complex society. If these people are ever more than a small fraction of society, the police will fail. The only way that you can ensure this is by controlling the education system. Unfortunately, with sociopaths in government the education system in much of the world is indoctrinating people to believe that they can do better exploiting society than participating it (which is true, if only a few people do it).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    10. Re:Immoral people by formfeed · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but laws and business regulations can make a difference. Do they try to prevent this or do they (even inadvertently) set up an environment that helps these kind of people?

  11. so frustrating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not doing great financially, but those of us in the know are pretty good about staying on the connected side of the digital divide.

    Not only that, but we are the same folks that keep old parts around and every now and then are able to build a workable setup for someone that could really use a computer. People that are thrilled to have something, even if it comes with a CRT monitor and has a 7 year old video card.

    I've 'volunteered' hours working on crappy emachines for people because I know they can't go out and buy something fast and great.

    F you BlueHippo. I know these people personally, and a computer means a lot to them.

    1. Re:so frustrating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up. I've been on both sides of this coin. I know this story all too well.

  12. Go Try to log in... by jesseck · · Score: 5, Informative

    I went to their website (Google for bluehippo), and when I clicked "Purchase" I was taken to a login screen.. where my username is my SSN, and password is my mother's maiden name. Yeah, I'll give them some more personal info after I enter that...

    1. Re:Go Try to log in... by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Username: 457-55-5462

      Password: Davis

    2. Re:Go Try to log in... by CaroKann · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you have trouble logging in with that, their helpful "Trouble Logging In" screen gives you plenty of other ways to log in. You just have to select and enter one of the following combinations:

      Social Security Number/Home Phone
      BlueHippo Account Number/Home Phone
      Social Security Number/House Number
      Bank Account Number/Zip Code (!)
      Social Security Number/Password (Mothers Maiden Name?)

    3. Re:Go Try to log in... by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      mother's maiden name

      Password: Davis

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    4. Re:Go Try to log in... by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Yeah, well, a cursory Google search didn't turn it up, and I'm only willing to go so far for a joke an hour before bedtime.

  13. Didn't receive anything in return? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    In the meantime, the company took in a cool $15 million in payments from consumers, who don't appear to have received anything in return.

          Well, they received a lot of advertising, didn't they?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  14. Failed step 3 by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    1. Scam idiots
    2. Collect millions
    3. Flee the country with your millions. Looks like China is about the only livable country without an extradition treaty to the US. Hong Kong sounds very nice.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:Failed step 3 by DrXym · · Score: 1
      1. Scam idiots

      Except it's actually "scam the poor".

  15. Even their logo was stolen by tepples · · Score: 2, Funny

    Compare BlueHippo's logo to Demby Wishingwell from Playskool's Weebles videos and toys. Is it coincidental?

  16. Forget the White Elephant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude! You got a BlueHippoed!

  17. The guy isn't new in this business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just like in VINCENT HUMPHRIES's story in Business Week

  18. And more ways to protect yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With the job market being what it is these days, there are plenty of nasty job scams too, that aim to get free work or gather personal info for shady purposes. I'm still getting spam after applying to a Toronto internet marketing company in June.
    A few things to watch for: A company hiring for essentially the same thing every week or two is worth a careful look before you leap. (I have a certain 'thoughtful' media company in Edmonton in mind.)
    Perhaps a few enterprising souls could check government databases or ride the wayback machine to see who the 'responsible' individuals were before the days of infamy and post the info on an appropriate scam monitoring site or two? Perhaps a court decision or official finding of some kind that could be posted as a simple, but effective, statement of fact?

  19. What law would you pass to stop a lawbreaker? by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.

    The free market is not perfect.

    But how on earth would you stop someone like this in an un-free market? Remember they are quite willing from the outset to break any law. If all the laws you pass men nothing to them, how have you helped except make it harder for honest people to run a business, who then quit leaving more room open for scams?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:What law would you pass to stop a lawbreaker? by shentino · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I bet that passing laws would be a lot more effective if they were actually enforced.

      Give the FTC and the FBI some teeth and let them bite these assholes HARD.

      If a law is worth passing, then it's worth enforcing.

      Might be kinda hard though with all that regulatory capture getting the watchdogs cozily in bed with the bad guys.

    2. Re:What law would you pass to stop a lawbreaker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Decimation would help.

      i) The US is an empire.
      ii) Rome was an empire.
      iii) Rome used decimation.
      iv) Profit!

      Ooops no ???? stage, my bad.

    3. Re:What law would you pass to stop a lawbreaker? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      how on earth would you stop someone like this in an un-free market? Remember they are quite willing from the outset to break any law.

      You could pass laws that guide the lawful away from the lawbreakers. Punish victims and the victims will shy away from the criminals. Of course, this is unconscionable behavior for a government, which is why we'll get it in our lifetimes.

  20. No one can protect... by Hasai · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...the Sucker.

    Somewhere, P. T. Barnum is laughing at you.

    --

    Regards;

    Hasai

  21. The pitchman by __aapbzv4610 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah, but who here cringed every single time he said the word labtop instead of laptop?

  22. Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Sorry, I don't believe it. Scammers don't run a solvent enterprise that a class-action lawyer would approach. The lawyer wants money, the scam is a scam, not an operating business, and doesn't hang around with money for a lawyer to recover.

    Do you have any good examples?

    1. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      OK how about one involving this same guy CEO Joseph K. Rensin.

      http://baltimore.bizjournals.com/baltimore/stories/2005/05/09/story7.html

      This guy doesn't seem to be very worried about lawyers or the government since he has long since made enough money to live comfortably forever.

    2. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by ffflala · · Score: 3, Informative

      Milli Vanilli: they settled a class action lawsuit.

      A more recent example is the class action lawsuit brought against auto dealerships for refusing to disclose hidden points the added to financing charges. "Those few percentage points of interest that dealers add on for themselves - without telling the customer - is called "dealer reserve," and it can add thousands of dollars to the cost of buying a car." http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/01/60minutes/main609870.shtml

      Excluding scams from operating businesses seems to me an inaccurate distinction -- an operating business can be a scam. Just look at magnetic arthritis bracelets, or The Secret.

      My favorite is Excel Communications -- a wildly successful business that managed to beat Microsoft to become the youngest operating billion-dollar-annual company in history. Their MLM scheme was practically indistinguishable from any gifting club pyramid scheme. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excel_Communications

      I do not know of any class action lawsuits against them, but believe there were a number of actions brought against them by state consumer agencies.

    3. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by maharb · · Score: 1

      We are talking about scams , not legit businesses. Scammers are not afraid of lawyers because they offload the money to accounts not related to the business, instantly. You can't recover what isn't there. If you think this is outlandish you are ignorant to how many legit businesses use the same offloading model to protect their separate business units. They offload everything that they can so that if a lawsuit occurs they can cut losses and start over.

      Strictly speaking your examples are talking about dumb-asses who didn't properly structure their businesses or scams to be successful. If you do it right you win unless the governemnt finds you, and that is only if it is an illegal operation. (I'm not condoning, just giving facts)

      Why would a lawyer work a case where they get nothing because the defendant is effectively broke? They won't. Lawyers want deep pockets, with lots of real and predictable money in those pockets. Since most(all?) class action cases get paid on a % of the settlement it is impossible to get a firm/lawyer to proceed with a case if the target has no way to pay because the money is hidden or out of legal grasp.

    4. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Informative

      Strictly speaking your examples are talking about dumb-asses who didn't properly structure their businesses or scams to be successful. If you do it right you win unless the governemnt finds you, and that is only if it is an illegal operation. (I'm not condoning, just giving facts)

      Those aren't "facts", those are semantic games to carefully redefine terms in unusual ways so your original claim is true by definition, creating a nice, tight circular argument that means nothing.

    5. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All of your examples where there was an actual class action suit are about companies that actually delivered products. Blue Rhino is a level of scam beyond these companies - their intent seems to have been to take money and not deliver anything. The point being that they have disbursed money which is now beyond collection through a class action suit. The Excell example is illuminating - nobody brought class action against them because they were bankrupt. Class action requires a large enough source of money to attract the attorney.

    6. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by maharb · · Score: 1

      It is a fact that if you are going to run a scam you should move the money the scam makes into a place other than the business/entity that you are conducting the scam with. If you don't do this you are a failure at scamming because there is not one reason to keep it there and a million reasons to move it.

      People who leave money in an account labeled "scam account" are terrible scammers. Arguing this is false is like trying to argue that a bad(or terrible) basketball player is good because there is no real definition of what a good basketball player is. Sure you can argue it, and technically be "right", because there is no set definition of a bad basketball player, but you still are wrong, the player obviously is bad by the standards of any onlooker.

      This is what I am talking about. Anyone with common sense is going to think to not keep money in an account directly associated with a scam. Anyone who does, is an idiot. Call it circular reasoning if you want but language is based off of definitions that are self created thus many true statements could be classified as circular reasoning because by the very nature of language it is based off of itself.

      By your standards no-one can be called bad because they did something bad because that is circular reasoning. Fuck off, you are the one using games to redefine the situation and make yourself look right.

    7. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm....Blue HIPPO is the company being discussed; Blue Rhino is a propane company.

    8. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by ffflala · · Score: 1

      I do not believe that Excel ever went bankrupt. After several years $1 billion/year revenue, their founder and CEO retired, Excel was bought by another company (Shaklee, another MLM giant), and ultimately the brand was retired.

      As for the point that big money is a necessary ingredient for a class action lawsuit: true, but blatant fraud such as in this case allows for piercing the corporate veil and going after the personal assets and future earnings of the officers of a company.

      And while biglaw might not take on a class action suit where the depths of the pockets is questionable, a smaller firm might find great publicity value to gain from such a suit.

    9. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2, Informative

      blatant fraud such as in this case allows for piercing the corporate veil and going after the personal assets and future earnings of the officers of a company.

      That's pretty difficult to do without first winning a criminal case. I've experience of one such case - an outfit called "Starving Students Movers" which passed ex-cons off as "bonded" employees, and when the poor customer's stuff was stolen or just broken through negligence, the company paid for damages at a flat rate per pound of weight divided by the total weight of the shipment, calculated to give those customers a few cents for the dollar of value. All of this came out in testimony, and wasn't under seal. But that happened because a lawyer went after them about his friend's stuff, not for any class action. The lawyer knew he had nothing to make, even though it turned out the owners had Millions in assets.

    10. Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blue Rhino makes and recycles Propane gas tanks. I use their propane tanks for my grill and have been nothing but happy with them. Because of Blue Rhino and companies like them, propane tank exchange is possible and available at gas stations and home improvement stores everywhere. Please do not lump them in with the totally unrelated company: Blue Hippo.

  23. The Wrath of the Almighty Bunghole? by Pezbian · · Score: 1

    Looks like we have a good test target for one of those tungsten rod gravity projectile satellites.

    I got the terms of yer settlement right here.

    --
    In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
  24. almost. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Scam idiots
    2. Collect millions
    3. JAIL!

  25. and so what? by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

    your criticism is only valid if complete enforcement was ever a goal anyone ever considered practical

    law enforcement is just a maintenance function of civilization:

    1. it never ends
    2. it can never possibly be done to completion

    and the realization of either truth isn't discouraging or disenheartening. it's just the way it is

    people with a moral compass and people who will screw little old ladies out of their hard earned cash are both reborn in every generation anew, in a sort of statistical stasis. its an eternal state, and we must continually pursue and punish wrongdoers, forever, job permanently incomplete

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  26. Their phone number still works by whois · · Score: 4, Informative

    I just called it and got through to someone calling themselves Danny Archer. They did not provide a company name in their greetings instead asking immediately for my first name.

    If they're shut down they need to be shut down.

    1. Re:Their phone number still works by SeNtM · · Score: 1

      I called (800-747-4260), they said it was "Boost Credit" doing service for BlueHippo.
      Most agents that work in call-centers are anware of the companies illegal activities. I say flood their phone-system with calls informing their agents that it is a scam.

      --
      "There ought to be limits to freedom." -George W. Bush
  27. Re:Hey Libtards by ravenshrike · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If schools actually taught things like basic economics and proper math this wouldn't be a problem.

  28. The FTC isn't a police agency by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    They can make regulatory rules in their area of authority, and they have the ability to bring people to civil court for failure to comply but that's all. They aren't a police agency they don't have anyone with arrest powers.

    An arrest would have to come from someone like the FBI, or the state's police agency. However for that, there'd need to be a criminal charge brought by a government prosecutor.

  29. Should've answered with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    They did not provide a company name in their greetings instead asking immediately for my first name.

    Should've told him your first name was "Detective" to see how he reacted.

  30. Also by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It isn't worthless. Enforcing the law, imperfect though it may be, does help and serves two major functions against people with no morals:

    1) It deters some of them. While the sociopathic types that just don't care for others can never be made to care, they are generally extremely self interested. Well, something that often works then is threats. "If you do this, we will punish you." They don't want to be punished so they don't do it.

    2) It gets rid of some of them. Lock a criminal up, they can't go and commit their crimes. For those that won't be deterred, you simply remove their ability to cause problems.

    So while not perfect, it is worthwhile. It is also really the only thing you can do. There is no way to have a perfect moral code that prevents crime. Reason is even if you had such a code, and if everyone were taught it all their life, you'd get the scoiopaths who just don't care. They really don't have morals like most people. They can't empathize with others so all they care about is themselves. Morals won't work for them.

    Anything involving humans as they are now will not be perfect. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do the best we can.

  31. To lazy to login by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not from the US but is your SSN really something you should be using as a login?

    Never ever

  32. Apparently, Peter Potomus was running this scam... by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

    ...even while he was working for Sebben & Sebben.

    And he even had the utter gall to appear AS the corporate symbol, too.

    --
    Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
  33. Comeuppance. by Web+Goddess · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People have god-given frailties, which scammers EXPLOIT by victimizing people's blind spots or weak points. Your post blaming the target of BlueHippo fraud was insensitive and cloddish. But you will mature over the next few years, and become more aware that humans who are *average* or even *below average* still deserve our respect. You, too, have your blind spots and two Achilles heels.

    Wendy / the Darwin Awards

    1. Re:Comeuppance. by lastchance_000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wish I had mod points. There's a dearth of simple human compassion around here.

    2. Re:Comeuppance. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish I had mod points. There's a dearth of simple human compassion around here.

      Compassion is for genuine victims. Idiots are not genuine victims. They invite their misfortune by means of their idiocy. First of all, they wanted to finance something that can be had for around 200-300 bucks. Financing makes sense for a car or a house because those things cost many thousands of dollars. It doesn't make sense for a PC. Therefore the people targeted by this scam were a self-selecting group. Self-selection means they are not true victims who suffered through no fault of their own.

      They also failed to read the fine print. It stated that they won't get their PC until after the last payment is paid off. This is a bad deal, unfavorable to the person who accepts it. Yet they accepted it. Strike two.

      What I don't understand are people who have this misguided bleeding heart that wants to have 100% sympathy for the victim and 100% hatred for the perp. I say the victims did something stupid and the perp did something malicious. What's so terrible about that? Oh right, it doesn't let you play the knight in shining armor. So sad.

      Incidentally, malice is probably more curable/reformable than stupidity. You guys blame the predators who pull scams like this. You guys totally ignore the idiots who provide a steady supply of prey. Predators cannot exist and would all die out without a supply of prey.

    3. Re:Comeuppance. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      I call bullshit. People need to finance a home, and many people need to finance a decent car. Beyond that - almost anything that a person "needs" can wait til he has cash money. I'm all for cutting up every credit card in the country, and SEVERELY limiting credit on everyday toys. A computer, worth less than a thousand dollars? No freaking way. Save the money, and buy it. If you can't afford it today, you CERTAINLY can't afford it next year, with interest tacked on.

      It's been said a million times: A con artists gets rich on his "victim's" greed. As far as I'm concerned, all the credit card companies are con artists, and an outfit like BlueHippo is merely one of the bottom feeders of the con artists. But, every one of the con artists are enabled by fools.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    4. Re:Comeuppance. by bobzaguy · · Score: 1

      Wendy! God loves your website. How else would He be able to control human nature? Keep awarding, sweetie! bobz

    5. Re:Comeuppance. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Toys? Computers can be educational tools, used to help children rise up beyond the limitations of their (obviously) struggling parents. Without my childhood computer, I wouldn't be pulling in a 6 figure salary today.

    6. Re:Comeuppance. by Aldenissin · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you need to read The Creature from Jekyll Island if you think everyone needs to tear up their credit cards.

      --
      Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
    7. Re:Comeuppance. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell modded this insightful? These people weren't frail, they were stupid. They chose not to manage their money and got themselves into a jam. In almost all cases this is 100% preventable with a dash of common sense.

      Average? Below average? Do we call white trash "below average" now, so as not to hurt their feelings? Regardless of race, the concept is the same: Some people just don't get it and never will. These are the people buying crap from infomercials, getting charged out the a** because they need check cashing services, and getting govt money. They're the waste.

  34. Better them than me by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do you want your parents and grandparents to die, homeless and destitute, because the government failed them?

    No, but it's them or us.

    People who paid into the system over the 40 or 50 years of their working lives quite reasonably expect to receive the benefits they earned and were promised.

    They didn't do that in good faith. They knew it was a scam and cannot possibly work, just as well as we know now.

    Why not blame the previous generation? The generation after us sure will.

    If we don't end it now, then here's our next choice: do we try to con our kids into being the ones who die homeless, or do we accept that fate for ourselves?

    We all know it has to end some day. The longer we continue the lie, the more unbearable it becomes. If we stop lying and our parents and grandparents pay the price, I don't see how that's our fault. They're the ones who tried to stick it to us.

    --
    "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    1. Re:Better them than me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed! it IS the previous generation's fault, they had a possibly sustainable and working system but got greedy all the way along, and still will not give up a small amount to help.

                The quote "People who paid into the system over the 40 or 50 years of their working lives quite reasonably expect to receive the benefits they earned and were promised" is bunk, pure and simple. *They* are getting FAR FAR MORE benefits than they earned OR were promised, depleting the system so people like myself pay more than they did and (if trends continue) will NOT get back "what I was promised". They don't have to be cut off to save the system, a small cut would do.

                They system was set up in the 30s, ramping up through the 40s. It was sustainable then. It was in fact racking up significant cash reserves, which were to be used by the 1970s when a lot of the people in the system were retiring.

                Through the 50s and some of the 60s, all these people who had only paid in for like 10 years pushed for raises in benefits. Congress was all to happy to go ahead with these huge raises in benefits, since there was so much money in the fund. Ignoring entirely that the cash reserve was there to handle the increase in retirees by the 1970s, and the Social Security Administration knew this would be non-sustainable by then. They did it anyway.

                  Then, by the 1970s (1972 in particuar) they began raising the rates us younger people pay while also delaying retirement age -- again screwing younger people specifically to gain ADDITIONAL benefits for older people. Retirement's been raised from 62 to 67, witholding raised. For part of the 70s, Social Security payouts increased at double the cost of living increase, due to a mistake in the law that took until 1977 to fix (note they did not roll back the 2x increases, just stopped further 2x inflation increases in the future). So they got WAY more than they were "due" by then.

                  Now, Social Security will be broke decades before I possibly get ANY benefits, despite paying in a large percentage of my pay check. it could be made solvent with something like a *5%* cut in benefits (reminder, these are benefits that were increased far above cost of living from 50s through 70s, cutting 5% still is paying FAR more than these people were promised.) But nooooo, the current retirees want WAY more back than they paid in, and seemingly do not care that those of us paying in now are just handing our money over to them and will get nothing when we retire.

  35. If you thought SS was bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you thought SS was old people stealing from young people, wait until the current government passes health care reform.

    That scam is the same, only worse, since today, 90% of people are covered by their employers, now the government will force you to buy about $5-10K of insurance a year (like a tax, but worse, since it is a direct payment from you to some private company) so that you can cover a relatively tiny number of people.

    Only it will get worse, since most employers will quickly drop their coverage and tell you to buy your own. They'll give you a modest one time payment to cover about 1/2 the first year's payment and then they're out of the business, forcing the government to cover what will now be a gap in coverage.

    You'll end up spending about 20% of your income in the end to pay the insurance companies, and if you don't, you'll be fined by the government.

    The BlueHippo this is small potatoes by comparison to what your government is going to do to you.

    1. Re:If you thought SS was bad... by DavidTC · · Score: 0

      That scam is the same, only worse, since today, 90% of people are covered by their employers,

      Bzzzt, wrong, thank you for playing.

      90% of the people in this country aren't even employed, you nimrod, so certainly '90%' can't have insurance via their employer. Even being generous and counting people who are covered by someone else's employer, like their spouse or parent, I assure you, more than 10% of the population is either retired or nonemployed without someone else providing their insurance. (Hell, the unemployment rate is very close to 10%, and that doesn't include all the people not looking for work or retired or too young to work.)

      Likewise, the percentage of the insured in this country isn't 90%, so you've managed to be mathematically impossibly stupidly wrong two entirely different ways. 90% of people can't be insured a specific way if more than 10% of people are uninsured!

      But let's really be charitable, and assume you meant '90% of insured people are covered by their employers, or someone's employers'. This is also hilariously incorrect, although at least now we're in the realm of mathmatically possibility.

      Sadly for you, currently only about 56% of insured people are insured via their employer, a drop of 10% from a decade ago. Another 29% get it from the government. The rest buy it themselves.

      But even those numbers are silly, because many of the 'employers' still providing insurance are, in fact, the government.

      The amount of insured people who are getting insurance from a non-government job has, in fact, recently hit 47%. That's right, less than half of the people who have insurance have it via the private sector purchasing insurance for them.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    2. Re:If you thought SS was bad... by vxvxvxvx · · Score: 1

      The health care system is entirely different. Social security is structured like MLM. You pay people based on those at lower levels paying in. Like MLM, it's sustainability is entirely based on an increasing number of people paying in. With reproduction rates falling in developed countries (the environment can't sustain the old population growth anyway) the system will fail, because there won't be enough paying in. If you think of it as a retirement account where you put money in through your working life to retire on at old age, it actually has a negative interest rate for today's young workers. That's like putting $100 into a savings account today so that you can have $75 in 10 years. You'd be better off sticking the cash in your mattress.

      The health care thing is nothing like that. It's not structured like MLM. It's sustainability is not an issue. As far as employers dropping coverage, there's little motivation. Say they pay $35,000 for the average worker per year including health insurance. If the government forced them to stop providing insurance and forced you to buy a $10,000 family plan, you're simply moving the expense from the company to the individual. It would then cost the company only $25,000 for the average worker if they held all else equal. So they could increase salary by $10,000 and remain at the same cost as they were before, $35,000 per employee. The only thing that could screw people would be the employers, and they're equally capable of screwing people today. In reality, under the health care bills today it would encourage employers to carry coverage and penalize them for not doing so. But your standard Fox News analysis is going to try to scare you into believing the health care bill equals communism.

    3. Re:If you thought SS was bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bzzzt, wrong, thank you for playing.

      90% of the people in this country aren't even employed, you nimrod, so certainly '90%' can't have insurance via their employer.

      Bzzzt, wrong, thank you for playing.

      Now, if you had claimed "not even 90% of the people in this country are employed", that may have worked. Instead, you claimed that 90% of the people in this country aren't employed.

      Pop quiz: Same or different? "Everything in your dinner is not poison." vs. "Not everything in your dinner is poison."

    4. Re:If you thought SS was bad... by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The way I stated it is is perfectly correct when in context.

      If someone says '90% of X is very Y', it's perfectly correct to respond '90% of X isn't Y at all'. That does not mean that '90% of X is non-Y'.

      If I had wanted to say '90% of the population was unemployed', I knew how to say that.

      You've decided to read the '90% of the population' as some sort of statistic, like I was talking about the population.

      A common way to understand it, but in context I was just using it as a repeat of his mention of 90%, and pointing out that his hypothetical 90% couldn't even be employed, much less have insurance than way.

      Here is what I said, rephrased:

      You assert that 90% of the people in this country have insurance via their jobs, but that's idiotic...they can't even have jobs, much less insurance.

      Again, like I said, slightly confusing, and able to mislead people, but correct in the context of talking about 90% of people. And I immediately clarified what I was talking about in the next sentence, which rather makes you a grammar nazi.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  36. Devils advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The frailties in question here could have been plugged by their parents in one line: "If it looks too good to be true..."

    I demand that people use common sense and take some responsibility. If they don't then we end up with a society where everyone lives to covers their ass.
    Bags of peanuts say "Might contain nuts", coffee says "This is hot", people drink 12 pints of larger, then crash Accident and emergency at 3am wasting NHS money because their stomach pump is free (Expat Brit, so I don't care about that one any more).

    It's a brutal world out there, but you will mature over the next few years and come to realise that people have different points of view, which you aren't going to change by patronising them.

    1. Re:Devils advocate by LBt1st · · Score: 1

      Damn I used my last point to mod some tard Funny :(

    2. Re:Devils advocate by dcollins117 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The frailties in question here could have been plugged by their parents in one line: "If it looks too good to be true..."

      Well that is some sage advice there, but I remember seeing the commercials and nothing about struck me as being too good to be true. In fact, they didn't provide a whole lot of details so I just figured they were selling $300 computers for $1500 and financing them at 30% interest. That's a money making business plan, and for some reason perfectly legal in the US.

      I also remember seeing an commerical for a product (probably a weight-loss pill or something) that made a sounds-too-good-to-be-true claim then backed it up with "If it wasn't true, we couldn't say it on TV!" I shook my head so hard it rattled, but it must be plausible to someone.

    3. Re:Devils advocate by Philip_the_physicist · · Score: 1

      It is legal because they tell you almost everything you need to know to tell that it is a stupid way to buy a computer. The only bit of information that is missing is how much someone else is selling them for, but you can't really complain that someone is overcharging for a product if they have significant competitors who aren't unless they do something else as well.

  37. Re:Class Action Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Scams always result in cash and assets to seize. Otherwise, they wouldn't be scams. An operating business that has no money is a bankruptcy, not a scam.

    For example, Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme has assets to liquidate. He has a New York condo, art pieces, and other valuables, as well as cash. The U.S . Govt. will take that and give partial restitution to "shareholders".

    Lawyers can seize assets in a civil courts as well. Class-action suits against criminal defendants are even preferred.

  38. Peter Potomus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...even while he was working for Sebben & Sebben.

    And he even had the utter gall to appear AS the corporate symbol, too.

    Peter Potomus: "Did you get that thing that I sent you?"

    Apparently not.

  39. maybe not by zogger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I bet the full ramifications aren't public yet (and never will be, on purpose).

      I am thinking there was a lot of money laundering going on with all those "investors". Some were legit and stupid, thinking their boy had the magic touch and could consistently beat the market for huge percentages, but it couldn't have been all of them. There are probably cons mixed with cons mixed with even further cons and crimes inside that story and it goes way beyond Madoff. Regulators were aware of him, lower level ones were told to sit down and shutup and we are supposed to swallow their fairy tale bilge "they couldn't find anything" for years and years, despite numerous attempts. I just slap ain't believing that. I don't believe there was an "intelligence failure" with iraq and WMD, some other events as well, including madoff's currency transfer and evaporation service.

        The old adage of "follow the money" still works, in his case, you have to start with him in the *middle* and look and follow BOTH ways, not just use him for a starting point and look upstream only. That's what they WANT you to think, but I don't believe their official story that the crimes all started exactly with him, I'm just too naturally skeptical now from watching government and big business over the years. My default is "they are always corrupt until proven otherwise" on any big money or big power subject. The *best* you will ever get out of them publicly is a rough surface level/convenient facade view of reality. I just do not believe in the "few bad apples" in the barrel excuse they always use. It's a default rotten apple barrel, with a few good apples who get shafted by their corrupt superiors.

        And because those are the market cops who allowed this to go on and on and on and on, I have to therefore assume there was (and still remains) massive crossover corruption at the highest levels.

  40. Tests. . . We have the technology. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

    Agreed. --However, the truly psychopathic types don't believe that laws apply to them. This Hippo company is a good example. I doubt that the company leadership is actually neurologically capable of believing they will be stopped or punished, or that they won't be able to fast talk their way out of their troubles. Those dots simply don't register for them to connect.

    And sadly, the bigger a company one has, the higher up the political ladder, the more true this becomes. The entire Bush team, for instance, should be in jail forever, but instead they're playing golf and sipping beers. This is why psychopaths are determined to turn the entire world population into psychopaths.

    We need a better system. Interestingly, we have the reliable technology and knowledge to determine psychopath from normal human; their brains look a LOT different. We should be using that technology. Heck, even basic questionnaire tests can be used to raise red flags and point out subjects requiring further testing. Presidents of both countries and companies should be required to pass a mental fitness test. It seems pretty obvious to me.

    -FL

  41. Re:Hey Libtards by sco08y · · Score: 1

    What kind of economics or math course teaches you to:

    1. Read the fine print that says they won't ship your machine until the last payment.

    2. Not divulge your SSN and mother's maiden name.

    3. Check out the background of a retailer you're unfamiliar with.

    Or anything else that might help people avoid this scam.

    Don't get me wrong, math and economics are useful, but they don't teach you how to avoid cons.

  42. BlueHippo==BoostCred.com, LLC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, I got and ad for BlueHippo in my weekend paper, so I called to see who answers when the FTC goes after you. Whoever answered denied being any part of BlueHippo. They claim to be BoostCredit.com, LLC. They could not explain how I got them after calling BlueHippo's number. The deal they offered did not even approach attractive.

    1. Re:BlueHippo==BoostCred.com, LLC? by SeNtM · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The agent told me that they service BlueHippo.


      It is a third party corp setup to take the fall should the parent company, "BlueHippo", be sued. That way they can claim that they offered the service in "good-faith", but the third-party was the one involved in the illegal activity.

      --
      "There ought to be limits to freedom." -George W. Bush