Serial Switching for Rewards. Not good.

MisterMotivated

scgf wrote: »

I took that to heart and will no longer criticise a person, just what they have done.

Do what you like, but don't expect anyone to take any notice of your criticisms, either of them or their actions. You're a human (I assume) the same as the rest of us, with no deity-given authority over any other human, so your criticism is, frankly, meaningless.

I have to ask, what did you hope to achieve by starting this thread? It seems to have no purpose other than to criticise [the actions of] a group of people for something you disagree with but which many other people find perfectly acceptable, which actually seems rather nasty to me. Didn't your mother ever tell you that if you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all?

Missus_Hyde

I'm an "immoral" serial switcher and make absolutely no apologies for it, nor do I feel the need to justify my actions.

I'm certainly not going to cry any crocodile tears for the poor banks, who have no hesitation about dipping their greedy little fingers into my pocket, if they think that there is anything in it for them!

MisterP123

Wow, this thread has reset my moral compass. The sudden pang of guilt. I have seen the error of my ways!

Does anybody know where I can send this dirty money back to RBS?

Zero_Sum

The banks are the primary reason why I went 6 years without a payrise.
Switching a way of recovering some of my losses. Some might call it Karma.

Nicholas

scgf wrote: »

If these values need firming up I refer to my own choice of religion, Buddhism, and also 'What Would Jesus Do?', which effectively amounts to the same thing. I do what I think is right, just and kind - regardless of the ethics of the other party. A person who will go out of his/her way to make money by taking advantage of rewards which companies offer to attract customers when they have no intention of using the account in the way it was intended is, in my opinion, doing something wrong.

Am I in a minority of one? On this forum I feel I am.

What would Jesus do? (He'd probably say "Go forth and switch no more"). More importantly what would MSE Martin say if there was an opportunity to save money and you squandered it?:D

Yes, to some people (not saying me) money is a religion too, although I am not adverse to "sticking it to the man".

Katiehound

MisterP123 wrote: »

Wonderful
(shame it's not a cat, could have been purr-fect!)
That's what this thread needed, an apt illustration of shame.
He or she is plain doggone repentant.

Made my day!!

System

societys_child wrote: »

No, just pointing out that I don't agree with you, or am I not allowed my opinion . .

Absolutely you are, of course - just as I am allowed mine. It is very interesting reading between the lines of many of these posts where serial switchers are justifying their actions by castigating the evil bankers. It is clear that by feeling a need to justify what you do there is a suggestion that you know there is something not quite right about what you're doing, but you feel the banks deserve it for whatever reason.

It's also interesting that I am being criticised for giving my opinion in the first place. I think discussions on what we feel is right and wrong are very useful to help us hone our own moral compasses. One person said that the likelihood of being caught and subsequent legal action is what stops them from doing bad things. For me it's a case of not doing what I feel is wrong, regardless of the law. I don't steal because it's wrong for someone in my situation - not because I might get caught. Of course for a starving person in very different circumstances it might be the only thing to do to stay alive and the rights and wrongs of the situation go out of the window.

I think it has been an interesting debate and I'm glad I posed the initial question. I've certainly learned plenty.

masonic

scgf wrote: »

It's also interesting that I am being criticised for giving my opinion in the first place. I think discussions on what we feel is right and wrong are very useful to help us hone our own moral compasses.

It's certainly interesting to discuss what we think is right and wrong as it shows how different our opinions can be, for example I've come up with a list of common activities that I think pass the test for being immoral, some of which I freely admit to doing, and I'm ok with that. Some are contradictory to others. Perhaps you do some of these as well and are ok with them:

- Air travel (on environmental grounds)
- Eating meat and animal products (on grounds of suffering)
- Commuting to work by car (environmental)
- Shopping online at retailers like Amazon (tax avoidance, exploitation, environmental costs of transportation, etc)
- Consuming alcohol and tobacco products (harms caused to self and others, cost to society)
- Gambling (as above)
- Having children (contribution to overpopulation)
- Possessing a 'free' bank account (cross-subsidisation by other customers)
- Not switching to the best available deals (consumer apathy exploited by companies)
- Accepting benefits/perks/discounts/promotional rates that you don't need (cross-subsidisation from other citizens/customers)
- Working for or being a director of a for-profit company (overcharging for goods and services)
- Voting for a party or policy that benefits people like you instead of thinking of the greater good (exploitation of others)

I would consider all of the above to be either worse, or at least no better than switching bank account multiple times.

It is very interesting reading between the lines of many of these posts where serial switchers are justifying their actions by castigating the evil bankers.

I'm a little disappointed that you haven't in any of your posts acknowledged those who have not taken this approach, but instead put forward arguments that challenge your assertion, which you seem unwilling to address.

It is clear that by feeling a need to justify what you do there is a suggestion that you know there is something not quite right about what you're doing, but you feel the banks deserve it for whatever reason.

Personally, if someone told me they thought one of my actions were wrong, I'd justify why their opinion was wrong regardless of whether I felt they might have a point. I'd also be willing to change my mind on the basis of new facts or new reasoning.

One such justification that I haven't mentioned yet is that, if for the sake of argument you take the position that serial switching is immoral, you have two choices (both doomed to failure, unfortunately)
1) Don't engage in the behaviour and persuade others to also refrain (this thread shows how effective that can be)
2) Engage in the behaviour as much as possible and encourage as many people to do likewise as possible (so that the reward for doing so is either reduced or eliminated)

What I like about this forum is that people in the main are not keeping these things to themselves and some actively encourage others to do things they wouldn't otherwise do, which contributes to levelling the playing field for all. If everyone played their part we'd see people treated more fairly in general.

System

masonic wrote: »

It's certainly interesting to discuss what we think is right and wrong as it shows how different our opinions can be, for example I've come up with a list of common activities that I think pass the test for being immoral, some of which I freely admit to doing, and I'm ok with that. Some are contradictory to others. Perhaps you do some of these as well and are ok with them:

- Air travel (on environmental grounds)
- Eating meat and animal products (on grounds of suffering)
- Commuting to work by car (environmental)
- Shopping online at retailers like Amazon (tax avoidance, exploitation, environmental costs of transportation, etc)
- Consuming alcohol and tobacco products (harms caused to self and others, cost to society)
- Gambling (as above)
- Having children (contribution to overpopulation)
- Possessing a 'free' bank account (cross-subsidisation by other customers)
- Not switching to the best available deals (consumer apathy exploited by companies)
- Accepting benefits/perks/discounts/promotional rates that you don't need (cross-subsidisation from other citizens/customers)
- Working for or being a director of a for-profit company (overcharging for goods and services)
- Voting for a party or policy that benefits people like you instead of thinking of the greater good (exploitation of others)

I absolutely agree with you. There are many things we do which contribute to harming either the environment or other people. I do what I can. I cycle over 6,000 miles a year. I own a very low CO2 emitting, economical car but drive only 3,000 miles in a year. I avoid flying and would use the train where I can. My political views are based on social-democratic principles and I always think about the effect of policies on ordinary people. I strive to be kind and as a teacher I am very aware of how the students' personal circumstances can affect their attitude in school. I am very concerned about the mental health of young people and constantly monitor students for the tell-tale signs. I financially support the children's mental health charity Place2Be on a monthly basis. I do what I can - but I'm far from perfect.

dreaming

scgf wrote: »

I do what I can - but I'm far from perfect.

Didn't Jesus also say (if you believe the stories in the bible) "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"?