Paypal's way of doing business is absolutely absurd. I may just transfer my funds elsewhere. Thank you Kyanka for showing what corporate wh***s paypal is, and I do hope they lose business for this.

Also, WHO are they to say who you can transfer funds to? If I want to donate to the Red Cross, I'm not allowed because they said so? That is absolutely unbelieveable, what next? I can't transfer funds to a friend because she's black?

I believe that what was done here was done in pure humility and in no way to gain from it. But what PayPal did, makes me want to look elsewhere to do my business. They were completely wrong and ignorant in doing this. I see nothing right or correct about what PayPal did. I commend the owner of SA.com. He deserves better than this.

So people, are we going to rise up against PayPal?

No, I'm keeping my account and I will continue to do business with them.

Be carefull when you question united way's practices. While they have an overall organization that goverens them, most united way chapters are run locally. that means if you have a question about practices and track record you need to question the local chapter. I have had direct experience with them at two different chapters. The first time as a benificiary and the other as a supporter.

Another example of corporate ignorance (PayPal) in not allowing their PayPal members the freedom to choose which relief organization the members want their donations to be sent to using their Paypal service.

When will corporate stupidity and ignorance end? I guess not in my lifetime.

This article gives me the info (and I hope you as well) I need to make a more educated financial business decision and an opportunity to watch PayPal more closely.

PayPal has a lot of explaining to do if they want to continue their business and to fix the "One Complaint/Account Lockup" procedure if they want me as their customer. If they don't, I will find somebody else who is cheaper, offers better service and better benefits.

D1G1TAL_PH3RR3T

Typical paypal, time we find another solutions.
Paypal is badly managed company. They coul dhave delt with this case totally different and more professional.

http://www.betanews.com/...ina_Disaster/1125604622

When you read this post, you will understand why PayPal did what they did. If you don't understand after reading it, READ IT AGAIN. If you still don't understand, then you don't want to understand. PayPal has some major issues, but on this particular issue, they were correct.

yes, i understand perfectly, the fact remains, the understanding was the money was going to red cross or even united way, so then why couldnt paypal not handle that, they have the money remember that, not some hacker.. So back off,, everyone is entitled to there point of view, dont have to get all piss assed about it..

Well, i cant seem to understand why paypal didnt respond quicker to the matter at hand, fine they locked the account, ok, protecting other peoples money, that is good, but in the same sense, from what i understand is that they were aware it was for red cross, ok, case in point, get on it, and see what is really going on and get the money out, dont lock it and seem to blow it off, especially in a time of need for so many people, me having my own business, would have personally handled it,,and made damn well sure there was a solution and action asap, so now more people can suffer, due to someone else who isnt suffering, give me a break,,,,,,

They don't care who the money was INTENDED for. The problem was whether or not the person soliciting the money was a fraud. That's very plain and simple. Look at this post, and tell me PayPal was acting heartless.

http://www.betanews.com/...ina_Disaster/1125604622

That post doesnt proof anything PAYPAL had a heart. The account setup was known to be LEGIT ! they could have had someone wtaching even over these transactions and made sure the account kept working. Typical Paypal they didnt care

If I might offer a suggestion, don't allow yourself to be sucked in by false arguments.

It's not PayPal's job to "care".

It's PayPal's job to provide a service according to it's rules, contractual obligations, and to some degree it's judgement regarding liability and fraud.

If someone truly believes PayPal has breached their contract, they have several options; civil suit, find another company with which to do business, find another means to accomplish the transaction, etc.

Of course complaining and making irrelevant claims are also an option, but they are among the most ineffective options. That being the case, let your opponent waste his/her time with ineffective methods.

This *is* PayPal we're talking about, so why am I not surprised. This company is just a moving car wreck; and if the recently settled $6m lawsuit is any indication, they're on their way out. This is ridiculous.

For more info on PayPal's shenanigans, you don't have to go very far. Just read about the lawsuit settlement, other acts of tomfoolery etc, at the URL below.

http://www.paypalsucks.com

paypal is a faceless machine, yet people can't stop feeding it. red cross is who you see the most of if you ever take part in relief efforts for any natural disaster in this country, so talk s*** on the united way all you want, but the red cross is there. i've seen it with my own eyes.

Agreed.

Google is a faceless machine also.....yet people keep feeding the beast.

Google is the Devil.

You keep spouting off about how evil google is....and for some reason I have yet to see you give any reasoning as to *why* you think Google is so "Evil".

Give me just one example of Google being evil. Just one. That's all I ask.

I was disgusted when I first read this. I copied the story (with attribution) on my Getting Things Done@yahoo.com list, and several other lists, as well as sending it to The New York Times and CNN. I hope other people will do the same thing -- let's get PayPal and United Way using common sense. After all, if former presidents Bush and Clinton can work together, surely to God PayPal and the United Way can allow other non-profits to receive disaster-related donations.

Daly de Gagne

As far as
"Bill Cobb
President
eBay North America"
He was very nice enough to still explain in detail.

As for PayPal, when you are running money transactions 24/7 and not in one particular country, then YOU HABE TO HAVE 24 HOUR QUICK CUSTOMER SERVICE and also someone deciding matters. It was a total disaster on behald of PayPal, and there is no excuse for that, even when it is about protecting money of people/fraud.

I think the below linked article succinctly identifies why this whole incident has been so disasterous.

http://tiadaily.com/php-...showArticle.php?id=1026

Think again.
Those welfare parasites are a necessary part of a contrived system.
Without them we wouldn't have a billion dollar private prison system, nor a billion dollar insurance/re-insurance industry, nor need millions of middle class attorneys to protect your rights/property.
The so-called welfare state exists for a reason and it is not necessary one of benevolence.

"Think again."

No need to.

The United Way is a joke.

Talk about a bunch of shady characters....who lie and steal.....

They are just a big business out to make money. They are more like Amway.

"...the United Way is PayPal's relief organization of choice."

I've never even heard of "United Way". And how can one relief organization be any different than another? The American Red Cross has been around a lot longer and I'm sure is a lot more wide spread. You don't go to WalMart.com or Apple.com and see them asking you to donate to United Way. This is just a way of the eBay company being more stubborn & difficult.

Both United Way and Red Cross have shady pasts with how they utilize the funds.

I, for one, cannot stand United Way especially how they label your giving into tiers. Nationwide Ins. basically force their employees into giving. Its very competitive for them to be such a "giving" company when they guilt their employees to death into giving. I donate on my own time and will not allow a company play games with me in terms of donating.

I stick to Salvation Army... One of the last true voluntary organization in my opinion. Many of those volunteers who make up the leadership of the organization making little or no money compared to Red Cross leaders who drive their BMWs and Audis.

When you make a business out of helping, it disturbs me.

you have never heard of united way? Where have you been under a rock? United way is the biggest charitable organization in the WORLD. Yes, even bigger than the red cross. United Way has been helping people for decades.

Anyway, the United Way is a business. It accepts money on behalf of contributors, but they disseminate money where they see fit. Everyone thinks that collecting money is FREE. Where people get that idea, I don't know. It takes staff, electricity, funds, food, just like any business, to help sustain your people.

To keep the company in business, they take 12%. That means every 100 dollars, a whopping 12 bucks go to support United Way. The Red Cross is NO different. People have a very short memory, everyone remember 9-11? Yeah, that little incident with 2 huge buildings about 4 years ago.. yeah that, well the Red Cross took some 500 million dollars in donations. But the money wasn't intended to support 9-11, oh no. The Red Cross tried to divert money to other organizations, and only AFTER congress got involved did the Red Cross FINALLY agree to give 100% of the money given the victims to go the familys of 9-11. Incidentally, as much as 20% of those people STILL do not have their money..

Personally, I wouldn't give Red Cross a damn nickle. I don't trust them to do what they say. The United Way isn't a whole lot better, but at least they do more than the Red Cross.

Also, you don't watch any sports? The United Way runs ads 15 times a day, sports stars advertise "give to the united way...". I find it amazing you have never heard of the United Way. You must be blind or living in Iraq, because the United Way is HUGE.

I understand what you're saying about companies virtually "forcing" employees to donate to the United Way. Back in the 1970's I worked as a consultant for several companies where employees were pressured beyond reason, to donate a portion of their wages to the United Way. They'd be pressured into filling out a "payroll deduction" to the United Way and not doing so was hardly the way to enhance one's career. That finished me with them, as well.

IT does not matter how huge a org is but its intent.

Some of the older guys on my department also complained about mandatory participation in the United Way drives of times gone by. Now there's still a push, but the administration has backed off.

Here is the email response from PayPal, in respect to my letter of complaint in this matter.

Hello,

Thank you for writing to Bill Cobb. Bill has requested that I respond on
his behalf.

Just to clarify, Bill Cobb is the President of eBay North America's
Customer Support group; the current President of PayPal is Jeff Jordan.

There is inevitably going to be a lot of misunderstanding on the part of
people who don't understand PayPal's actions, so I would ask that you
keep an open mind over such a contentious issue. There is a lot of
misunderstanding and miscommunication, so I'd like to clear it up. Even
Rich Kayanka admitted that he can understand why PayPal would suspend
funds. The bottom line is that the action taken by PayPal undoubtedly
deals with the issue of fraud, although I am not entirely familiar with
the reasoning behind what has occurred, as I don?t work for PayPal.

A large amount of money began flowing into a brand new account in a
short amount of time. Mr. Kayanka doesn't mention whether or not he
informed Paypal of this, but it seems pretty obvious that he made a
significant mistake in assuming that thousands of dollars could simply
be collected and given away so easily. PayPal is not declaring anybody a
criminal; what PayPal is doing is making darn sure that people who send
money are not losing it, and believe me when I say that many more PayPal
users have had money saved than have been inconvenienced in this
anomalous situation.

Such a large flow of money into a new account would indicate that
something was unusual, to any rational person. I would also reference
other action that financial institutions will take: banks in some
countries are legally required to notify Government authorities when a
certain amount of money ($10,000 and up, for example) suddenly shows up
or is withdrawn from a bank account, due to fraud risks. Debit card
issuers will freeze an account after only two withdrawals of large
amounts of money, which could involve $1000 or less, due to fraud risks.
I once had my credit card provider freeze my card over a ~$2 charge when
I used the card for a phone call, because that was a common use of
stolen credit cards.

The issue of the United Way should not have come up, I believe the
PayPal representative either misstated, or misunderstood just what was
being requested. PayPal can't take action on a user's behalf, and this
includes donating any gathered money to charity on someone's behalf,
because if anything goes wrong PayPal is involved. I believe that the
person didn't clearly understand the request being made by Mr. Kayanka,
and gave incorrect information.

PayPal does not have any high and mighty feelings, it's just that there
was miscommunication and misunderstanding from the moment this effort
began. While people might cancel accounts and think less of PayPal, they
are doing it with far too little information to make a rational,
objective decision. You are welcome to cancel any and all accounts for
any reason you deem fit, but I would encourage you to listen to PayPal?s
explanation before you take action.

Lastly, the most important issue with such a disaster at this time is
how quickly the help arrives, not whether or not money is frozen in an
account. This situation of frozen funds is unfortunate, but there is a
rational explanation, and I have no doubt that PayPal will answer the
charges and do the right thing, based on what is legally possible.

If you have any more concerns, please let me know.

Regards,

Sloan on behalf of Bill Cobb
President
eBay North America
______________________________
eBay Inc.
The World's Online Marketplace

That's very good response. Thanks for posting it.

I find this wholly contemptuous. Paypal makes a BIG speil when you sign up that they are not a bank or a financial institution. They cannot make that speil then in the same breath deliver this claptrap. Their ordinary daily monetary restrictions already in place are more than enough to handle outright fraud. Nowhere in their user agreement does there state a limit on new account actyivity (or established account activity for that matter) in relation to monetary amounts.
Fuirther, elsewhere in the comments is a great point. Paypal STILL takes their percentage cuts out of the funds transferred for this charity effort. Greedy if you ask me.

I have tried to cancel my ebay account for several years, but while they have 'froze' it, they refuse to cancel it, so I am subjected to all the fraudulent attempts that are regularly made to ebay customers. I address this to ebay, please cancel my account as the above message says there is no difficulty doing.

OK, so now we have PayPal's side of the story, and that's good. I do question though how such a misunderstanding could have developed.

Nonetheless, PaylPal has a great opportunity to make lemonaide out of lemons, and act as a vehicle for people to make designated donations to disaster relief.

PayPal did the right thing here not everybody goes to humor sites so theres a lot of people who don't know what something awfull is about so when suspicious activity happens they locked it down to investigate and if you read the article it mentions that someone did know what something awfull was about they phoned and offered to resolve the problem quickly. Remember there are a lot of scum bags out there more than willing to set up donation sites and keep the money so safe guards are needed.

Now for the part i get flamed many of you are pointing fingers at who to blame and it's not Bush the feds the state and the city when it's the people who decided to live there lets look at some of the facts they live below sea level and need levees and pumps just to keep dry and in an area where huricanes can hit so it was not a question of if but when this was going to happen and when it will happen again because the government will let them rebuild there.

They can rebuild there, just with better levees, as was done to improve the protections on the Mississippi River-- now they're ready for anything Mother Nature can throw at them. Also, look at Florida-- & not just the obvious money areas, but also the poor ones: they undergo way more storms, barrages of them, yet they evacuate & cope repeatedly.

At this point rebuilding is the ONLY option, not desertion. In fact, an FDR-type public works program: pay residents to fix themselves up-- would likely be a huge economic boost that may even permanently reverse the fortunes of some of those counties that have endured decades-long abject poverty. The alternative of condemning to worse lives the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of under-educated, country-drawl folk being moved to big cities of other states is just a recipe for creating additional welfare/Appalachia-type pockets of un-employable people that may actually worsen economic conditions wherever they go.

Better levees would only help a bit unlike florda as you mentioned it's below sea level thats why they needed to use a combination of levees and pumps to keep dry.

As for the economy look at it this way these people will need housing construction jobs will be created they will need clothes and food more retailers and restaurants will open up more jobs there and some will open up their own buisnesses so the economy won't suffer as bad as you might think.

Guess i should have clarified a bit i don't mean abandon all the area down there but places most at risk because even with better levees and even better pumps this will happen again maybe not soon posibly years perhaps decades but it's certain another major huricane will hit the area and flood it again.

wow, this paypal topic really did create quite a stir...lets just say its all just in the line of "natural" mistakes...I'll throw some oil on this particular fire: I am sure that if some arab group claimed this disaster, help would have been there before the hurricane had left. the country I live in at the moment still has victims of hurricane georges waiting for their share of help. (the RD= rep dom) millions donated have simply disappeared and live goes on. here the majority is poor and under educated. (also of african origin) and nobody gives a bloody cahoot. in the mean time they try to cope with life as it is.

Your country has beaches that have been called the most beautiful in the entire world. And it is a very desired vacation spot for many Europeans, Germans in particular.

Yeah, usually the biggest problem is not getting aid sent, but having it get to the most needing of it.

Whatever doesn't get pilfered...as we speak, in Africa, there are entire rotting warehouses of grain shipped from here in the states, while populations starve. One excuse in some countries is that since we genetically alter our crops, it's not healthy for them...another further & more insidious one-- some Idi Amin/Hugo Chavez-like strongman, to divert attention from his inadequate rule, embarked on a campaign to convince his populace that we have a dastardly plot ongoing: we poison the food aid we send them so that we can then weaken the men, enslave the rest, & take over their country to plunder its natural resources.

Impossible you say, how can rational folks fall for this? Well, if there's widespread belief in voodoo & witchcraft, then those folks will believe just about anything. When some epidemic hits a small village, most believe it's some witch's fault, so they'll burn alive some poor old lady they think is responsible.

Paypal locked the donation account on LS1GTO.com as well....

I think eBay supports the Red Cross -- they did the Jay Leno tsunami Harley auction for us, and lots of other celebrity auctions for our benefit. Look:

September 01, 2005 | 12:46PM PST/PT

We at eBay are saddened by the continued damage to the Southeast United States as a result of Hurricane Katrina. As rescue efforts continue, we want to make it as easy as possible for the eBay Community to help.
We’ve set up several ways for you to donate funds to the relief efforts. You can buy or list items to support a relief organization with eBay Giving Works. A section of the eBay home page has been dedicated to relief efforts and information, and contains a link to our donation page on PayPal so that you can make a direct contribution to the United Way. You can also visit the Natural Disaster & Relief Information discussion board.

In addition, the eBay Foundation is making a $250,000 donation to the American Red Cross on behalf of the eBay Community.

Sincerely,
Rachel Makool
Director, Community Development

But it does say United Way as the only way to make a donation through PayPal. Strange.

FYI, PayPal is an eBay company.

That being the case, I suspect that all the users who cancelled their PayPal accounts will now cancel their eBay accounts. That would be the principled thing to do given the "evil" nature of PayPal.

I just terminated my paypal account. What a horrible company.

I agree with your comment.. however, in this case, Pay Pal is trying to prevent Fraud. I could start a website, and proclaim I am attempting to help victims of Katrina, but PayPal has no idea who I am and what I am capable of. So PalPal is trying to play law enforcement so that money collected on behalf of this agency is legitimate.

Personally, I have issues with PayPal myself so I think they do suck and they are evil, but for other reasons, but in this particular episode, they are trying to prevent fraud.

I live in Ga, and we have already heard of several people trying to collect money and they have already been nabbed for fraud, so PayPal is not totally off base by making sure that money collected for this purpose is going to the victims and not a part of a scam.

If paypal is the middle man, they would be held liable in a suit and they could be accountable for allowing someone to commit fraud. All they wanted is for this guy to PROVE his identity. I don't think that was asking too much. If he does that, then PayPal will gladly allow him to continue. They did not say he couldn't do, only that the money collected was for the purpose in the ad. That's it.

Everybody's blaming Bush, just like during the tsunami--while absolving the locals-- but whither/what/how the community, city, state leaders(with a full century's forebodings to boot?) Contrast this with Florida, or NYC-- take the latter:
(Giuliani had actually put in place beforehand disaster preparedness & state of the art command center that unfortunately got leveled with the towers) at a time when that wasn't in anyone else's radar screen) NY's been through three major blackouts + 9/11, without looting, shooting & mayhem.
Yes, in hindsight there's things 'everyone'-- locals & feds could've done different; but i remember wondering in the hours/days before what to do(it looked like an imminent direct hit, & I always had this in mind, having once lived down there)-- do you start amassing & transporting troops & volunteers by rail, land & sea in that direction, to have them ready to help right away? But what happens when the hurricane changes course(also spawns tornadoes) & those stationed nearby on land & sea, biding their time to assist, get wiped out?

Yes, we should learn from this & use it to be better-prepared in the future, & we better have at both the national & local government levels catastrophe cash & emergency supply reserves in hand-- just like we do with petroleum-- because we're in for worse incidents. And not just terrorism-- for one, the big earthquake will eventually hit California: a chunk of the state breaking off, with cities as far away as Las Vegas completely flattened.
Another thing is that we've all become obsessed with living right on the water-- right on the very top of it in fact: go to any of our coasts--south, east, west & you'll see how we can't possibly pile up anymore folks right on it: not just individual beach houses, but huge skyscrapers are built & crammed next to each other practically on a foundation of water, that's how close. We pay exorbitant prices for land on the water, that to boot gets eroded by the sea from season to season--necessitating expensive reclamation projects-- but oh, how we want that land, bidding up the prices despite & in inverse proportion to how fast it gets eroded away! We're really setting ourselves up for tsumanis & killer hurricanes-- there's an excellent piece in the latest Wired issue re how we're draining/clearing/leveling away forest/marshland/swamp/barrier reef-- the natural protectants against big storms-- in a rush & race vs the next person, to be even closer to the water.

Giuliani in NY had the presence of mind to be prepared way before disasters were on anyone's consciousness-- hopefully the Feds are following suit on the grandest scale possible.

New Orleans had a plan..they just FAILED to implement it!

City of New Orleans Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan

http://www.cityofno.com/...?portal=46&tabid=26

Hard to implement a plan when your city is under 15 feet of water and you have 0 communications.

Hard to implement a plan when your jails and hospitals are not functioning and you have complete lawlessness in the city because of that.

Hard to implement a plan when your National Guard backup isn't even activated by the Feds until 24 hours after the hurricane hits.

There were a lot of failures here, but blaming the city of New Orleans is just sad.

I agree, but everything you mentioned happened after the hurricane hit. I am referring to that part of the plan that is suppose to take place prior to the hurricane coming ashore.

I agree, there were alot of failures locally, statewide and federally and it should never happen again.

Yeah, states on the Mississippi River also had plans-- but what was really needed, higher & stronger levees, wasn't done until after a catastrophe struck.

It's always been a given that most of NO being under sea level, a big storm would inundate it, & possibly obliterate it entirely, depending on strength & directness of hit-- so part of the contingency plans should've been to setup further upstate/on high ground re deployment of command center/government in exile, if you will; along with adequate/realistic/mass-scale evacuation plans.

National Guard can only be called out by the individual state. This not being a case of war/mass riots, the Feds would have no authority to preemptively do so-- it is a 'union of united sovereign states and any power the federal government has is that which is granted to it by the individual states'. The governors of all potentially affected states should've mobilized the Guard AND asked for additional manpower from neighboring governors & the Feds in preparation BEFORE the storm hit.

God helps those who help themselves. I'm sorry, but you cannot blame government half a country away before you blame the whining/helpless & not-take-action government in the midst-- and even more, the populace who refused to leave & took the chance.
BUT, i only refer to those in New Orleans proper & who had the means to leave. There is abject poverty outside the city & in neighboring states, particularly in rural areas/tiny towns: folks live in the middle of nowhere, in rickety wooden shacks, with very little means of private or public transportation...just a simple trip to a supermarket, for instance, is a luxury & an event that needs to be planned-- unlike you or I that could go to one by ourselves, w/o having to depend on someone else to take us, several times a day if we wanted to. Such folks would face a dang tough quandary: IF they could hitch a ride out, where would they find the money to pay for it, to buy provisions, and to transport with them whatever they valued-- since what little they have that survived a storm would get stolen in their absence?

Finally the voice of reason!!! I have been saying this myself. Everyone thinks about what's happening, but no one has an answer for how to fix it.

I've never had any good experience with PayPal. They are a monopoly and they know it.

Recently my wife sold something on eBay. The buyer wanted the item to be shipped immediately, and she shipped it 2 days after the sell. The buyer reported to PayPal that they weren't happy with my wife's service, so PayPal froze our account "until the situation is resolved". I mean WTF? You sell something on eBay as an auction - you're not a retail store. PayPal had no right to freeze our money just because someone was being a baby and wanted an item RIGHT AWAY.

I've had plenty of other bad experiences with PayPal. They are incredibly arrogant and will find ANY REASON they can to keep YOUR money in THEIR account. They accrue as much interest as possible, then charge the consumers plenty of fees on top of it.

WWW.BIDPAY.COM

No monopoly here.

Well, since Bush caused the crisis in the first place, maybe your anger should be directed to him instead. I mean he does seem to have the the power of God at his fingertips by creating the huricane, then breaking the levee, then sending those poor people to an unspeakable hell for days.

Those poor people were failed by EVERY government member that is in power today, republicans and democrats alike! While I don't blame Bush directly, he does share a piece with everyone else. That mayor did NOT follow protocols for those poor people or provide adequate security, he had several days in *advance* to do this. FEMA's head seems to like to blame these poor people for their situation. Well, the stupid mayor told these people to go the Superdome!! BTW - I hope everyone blaming just Bush knows that the mayor allowed 500+ people to jump ahead of the bus line, coming from a hotel next to the Superdome. How much money have we poured into preparedness since 9/11? Where did that money go, as we have seen nothing to for it?

BTW - On the original subject - Paypal sucks, they provide less security than Microsoft. They are an identify theif's heaven.

Every hurricane warning I have ever seen, this one included, is proceeded by DAYS of warnings that it is life-threatening. Additionally, everyone was told in advance that if they decided to stay, they would be on their own, that no police, fire or paramedics would be able to assist them, even possibly for several days after the storm passed.

Those people failed themselves for not valuing their own lives enough to leave the area and seek safe haven.

That is true. I live in the panhandle of Florida where we have had more than our fair share of large hurricanes over the past two years. The warnings are always issued far enough ahead for people to prepare/evacuate.

However, we still need to help the people that didn't or were unable to prepare/evacuate for Katrina. That won't change for anything.

LOL @ the first paragraph.

Yeah because 100,000 poor people with no money, no cars, no family can easily just hop on the highway and get out of town...

Oh wait.

And I suppose that's the government's fault too?

And I have no problem with people CHOOSING to help them. I do public service EVERY DAY, not just when there is a disaster. What I oppose is the notion that there exists an OBLIGATION for people to sacrifice of themselves because of someone else's need. If you are forced or obligated to sacrifice your property for someone else, it's not charity, it's robbery.

Apparently, unlike many other people in this thread, I take the issue of personal responsibility seriously, throughout all aspects of life, further than simple range of the moment thinking. I'm responsible for my life, the quality of my life, and the situations I "find" myself in. I expect to reap the benefit or the consequences of my decisions and acts. That is what I expect of other people, and that is a fair, objective expectation.

The governments job is to protect EVERYBODY, not just the people that can afford cars.

agreed.

That's non-sequitur to my question and comment.

Actually, it goes beyond answering your question. Obviously everyone knows that it's not the government's fault that not everyone has a lexus and 3-story home. But, that's not relevant to the overall point, which is that the people need to be protected no matter what.

lol...these are the pople that are responsible for running our streets...I hope your name is just a name and doesn't mean you're really a cop...;/

Once again, I know this must be very difficult for you to follow, but please try:

You said, "is it the governments falt that 100k poor people have no money, cars or family or any means of just leaving town".

I answered..."it's the governments responsibility to help people even if they can't afford to freely leave town on a whim".

Now, read over your comment and my reply, a few times if you have to, and rethink your "your respons=e doesn't apply to my comment", and maybe even come up with something educated to say.

Thank you, and good luck.

EDIT: After rereading my post, I'm afraid it may confuse you further, so let me help out just a little bit more:

It is not the governments fault that some people can't afford cars or have family outside of town, it is however, the governments responsibility to help these people out regardless.

I'm not sure why you find this a humorous topic with your "lol". Drop the insults, they don't win arguments.

If you follow this sub-thread up to the topic in which I made the statement you paraphrased, you will see I was responding to a claim of the government "failing" the citizens. At no point in this sub-thread, nor in this entire thread in fact, have I disputed that the government should be helping those folks out. They should be, and in fact ARE helping them out. That is why your statement in response to mine is non-sequitur, it's not an issue of contention. Rather, my statement dealt with attributing fault and failing in places where many folks on this board are overlooking, on the people who created this emergency situation by not evacuating.

So after you re-read you post, you apparently realize YOUR confusion because you then actually address the issue I was talking about, except you try to indicate that I was the one confused.

Rather than simply insulting you, as seems to be your forte, I'm going to assume that the physical layout of these threads can make it confusing to follow specific sub-threads of the discussion, which are frequently addressing seperate details of the larger issue.

(Out of 8 of your paragraphs, you spend 4 insulting me instead of addressing the dispute. Do you honestly believe that bolsters your argument?)

See my comment above. (to Niro 9/6 0730)

I also forgot to mention that I think we operate on different definitions regarding the use of the word "whim". I don't consider leaving town because a Category 5 Storm is about to hit (only 3 others of which have struck the country) to be a "whim". I consider it to be a seriously substantial reason to leave because my life is at risk. I may not be able to financially "afford" to leave, but I find it less affordable to die.

For clarification:

whim ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hwm, wm)
n.

1. A sudden or capricious idea; a fancy.
2. Arbitrary thought or impulse: governed by whim.
3. A vertical horse-powered drum used as a hoist in a mine.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

no, the government's job is to GOVERN people, not to protect them. Protecting everyone is not an option. the government is not there to protect people, but to legislate laws that make governing a large body of people in an acceptable manner that allows those people to live their lives under the prtotection of laws. Sorry, I feel bad for all those people out there but if you ask me, you cant be the brightest person in the world to live in a flood plane, have advance warning of a major amount of water to fall on your area and stay around to watch it. You live in a flood plane, you are prone to flooding. floods threaten, get the heck out. sorry, but life isnt a box of chocolates, life is harsh and doesnt survive morons long

it's not the government's responsibility to protect people from their own stupidity. You dont need a lexus to walk out your door and start walking north. Walking is good excersize. if you cant walk then you already have established means from getting from point A to point B. Use them. Don't expect any sympathy from anyone with a brain who can see you had plenty of time to evacuate or at least attempt to.
Homeowners in flood prone areas are required as part of their home loan to secure flood insurance. Property loss isnt an issue
I live on the coast. I have a brain. I am told that within the next several hours, my areas is in imminent danger of being innundated by a life threatening flood. even with just ONE brain cell operating I know that it's time to get out of dodge, head AWAY from that which will take my life.
My point here is that sure, the government is supposed to help out those citizens in need. it is doing that despite the fact that the need isnt a need, it is a want. there IS a difference. Those people WANTED to stay, they didnt need to stay.

I totally agree. Noone but YOU is responsible for Your actions :)

When you have no money, no car, and no family to go to, you tell me that you'll just walk your way 300 miles out of town because there's strong winds on their way.

Yes, if that's what it takes to save my life. You may value your life differently.

the government failed to bring busses, the state failed, the city failed

walking? yer nuts, some of these people are handicapped. If these people were to leave at all, th ebusses should have been there weeks in advance.

blaming the 10,000 peole who died for dying? x_X the heck is wrong with ya? They didn't all stay cause they wanted to. x_x i repeat, ya nuts sheesh

I guess that's why people like me don't get caught in disasters like that. We don't expect the government to do everything for us.

I'll stay "nuts" in that case. Thanks.

Yes, I'm nuts. It's apparently worked well for me so far.

The governments isn't required to protect people? Hm...that's funny, I thought a large portion of my taxes are paying of the government's employees salaries. They suddenly don't have to protect me? The military is just there incase the government decides they want to conquer a country? The military isn't actually there to protect me...this is all news to me, well that sucks...especially considering I'm paying them.

Tell me if you feel the same when your grandfather needs to evacuate only he can't afford any transportation and barely has enough money to live on....tell the guy to walk a few hundred miles and not croak.

You don't live in a hurricane target area do you? Evacuations aren't always possible for a lot of different reasons. I cannot believe that you honestly suggested walking. You want people to walk 400 miles? ROFL You can't out-run a hurricane that way.

Also, remember that the hurricane track was not directed at New Orleans until 2 and a half days before landfall. There were also only a few roads for people to evacuate on (which is always the case) and those roads filled up quickly. Have you SEEN the pictures of the backed up highways before the hurricane!?

Also, a lot of people were told they would be given shelter in a safe place: the Superdome. That was a huge mistake.

For someone who accuses others of not having a brain...

I never said anyone was responsible for others' actions. Now you're just putting words in my mouth. I'm not saying anyone is OBLIGATED to help those people, but for #$%#'s sake, those people are helpless. They need help from somewhere.

It really angers me how some people can have such a cold and callous response to this. Think about what you would do if your house, all your possessions, your friends, your community, your schools, and your entire city were wiped out in an instant. Where would you go?

I've seen the destruction first hand. There are people walking around my area going from shelter to shelter. Don't @$#%ing tell me that the people did this to themselves.

You are absolutely right. No one but YOU is responsible for your actions. You will have to answer for them some day.

I must be crazy as well!!!

*ahem*

Since everyone's getting caught up on insignificant details:

(It was a Category 4)

You have never lived in a hurricane target area have you?

If you did, you would know that that's impossible. Now you're just speaking out of your butt.

OK, since you opened this can of worms, why, would you continue to live in a hurricane zone? Its not like an Earthquake, flood or even a tornado. Those are unpredictable by and large. Think about it.

since the beginning of tracked weather storms, since basically the late 1700's, they KNEW hurricanes would be coming to that region of the world EVERY year. Its repeatable at least 20 times. Its ONLY by sheer luck you have managed to avoid a CAT 1 or higher storm. EVERY storm is potentially catastrophic. Just because a hurricane HAS NOT hit you directly, doesn't mean it WONT happen.

If you stand on the tracks, and a train is due to arrive sometime during the day, YOU WILL get HIT. Why do you continue to stand there and get hit?

I don't mind helping people, but have some common sense. MOVE!!!! Get OUT! Help yourself. We are pouring money down an endless drain, just because you refuse to acknowledge the truth. A hurricane is coming. You had 4 last year all CAT 1 and above, 2 were CAT 4. They didn't hit the panhandle directly, but they were VERY VERY close. Every year there are more coming, its not a coincidence. Its a seasonal certainty. You consider it a living hazard, I think its asisinine that you people won't help yourself, then you whine about assistance.. waaah.. help us, we are drowning.. yeah, well next time move to a region that doesn't get bombarded with damn hurricanes every year, HELLO!!!!????!?!?!

you are still a fat piece of s*** bro..why dont you make the world a better place and die.

woah woah woah... settle down. What can of worms did I open with my comment? Go back, read it, and please explain to me what you are talking about.

Also, please stop shouting at me and get your facts straight.

>You had 4 last year all CAT 1 and above, 2
>were CAT 4. They didn't hit the panhandle
>directly, but they were VERY VERY close."

I have experienced a direct hit from Ivan (Cat 3) and Dennis (also Cat 3). Don't tell me they all missed me, but came "VERY VERY close". I've seen more than you can imagine.

>I think its asisinine that you people won't
>help yourself, then you whine about
>assistance.. waaah.. help us, we are
>drowning.. yeah, well next time move to a
>region that doesn't get bombarded with damn
>hurricanes every year, HELLO!!!!????!?!?!

So just because hurricanes might hit here, no one should inhabit this region? That is bad thinking.

First of all, the last two years have had unusually active tropical seasons caused by El Nino. No, El Nino does not mean global warming. El Nino is a 4-5 year cycle that s***s the ocean currents which affect the development of tropical storms (in a nutshell).

Second of all, along your line of thinking, the entire state of California should be evacuated ASAP. They're just waiting to sink into the ocean you know. Along that same line of thinking, no one should live in the north, because they have ice storms and blizzards. Also, no one should live on Hawaii, they're just waiting to get fried. Oh yeah, and better not live in the middle of the country either. They have tornadoes. So that leaves us.... nowhere.

Oh yeah, and don't live on earth either, because it's going to get hit by a meteorite some day.

EVERY region has its natural disasters. No one is the exception.

No I never have lived below sea level or in hurricane zone and this is by design, choice, and hard work to maintain my quality of life. Only a moron or hard luck case would live there, or when it was time to get off their and improve, they couldn't be bothered. We'll they are bothered now! Honestly is it easier to walk 300 miles to safety or swim 300 miles to safety. You heard the warnings and you thought, it might not hit so I am not wasting time, effort or money on evacuating. Well to those folks, you gambled and lost.

I hope your design, choice, and hard work serve you well during life. I really do.

Don't call everyone who lives in an entire region morons. You will tend to create enemies. I guess your *choice* will have to come into play there.

Your logic is flawed though in thinking that every possible scenario can be thought out flawlessly in real-time. I don't know what the reasons were (nor do I really care) for those people to stay. The point is, they need help.

Additionally, I think everyone is forgetting the people that DID leave. They are still without a home, separated from friends and their community, without all of their possessions, and without jobs. They played it smart, and still lost.

As I said. I really hope your design, choice, and hard work serve you well. But if they don't, you'd better believe there will be people there to help you despite your attitude toward others when they needed help.

***EDIT***
Originally posted Sep 6, 2005 - 3:14 PM

I notice thirdoff didn't respond to this comment even after responding to others...

I suppose everybody that lives anywhere you don't think is "optimal" is a moron? You don't live anywhere near water that can flood, mountains that can have mudslides or something, no nearby airports that have things flying over your house, nothing that can explode or break and damage your house...cuz you just don't want to take the risk right? No gas in your house, too much of a risk of exploding. After all, you're not a moron.

Here is another area in which we disagree. You say "You will have to answer for them (your actions) some day." I realize that I answer for my actions EVERY DAY, here and now, with the consequence being my life, my happiness, my esteem and my quality of living. To me, consequences aren't some abstract, far off judgement by some mystical being.

"Think aobut what you would do if your house...." This assumes one hasn't already considered that, which I have, and that if they did it would make some difference, which for me it won't. I live 8 blocks off the Atlantic Ocean, 7 feet above sea level, in a flood zone. Isabelle (Cat 3) knocked out my power for 8 days. House in my neighborhood had trees in them. Cars were crushed. Tropical storms hit my area every year, hurricanes less often. None of this changes my need to be self-sufficient and it is EXACTLY WHY I have the opinion I have.

You may get angry all you want as only you can control your emotions, and you may not want to hear cold, callous facts, but staying behind in a Category 5 hurricane is DEADLY. Doing so comes with significant risks to life, and it also forces other people to have to place their lives at risk later, namely rescue workers. That is to me the most irresponsible part of all of this. No one places a face or a life on all those folks that have to risk their necks after the fact. "That's their job." Yes it is, but it's still screwed up that they have risk their lives because of other people's stupid decisions.

Yes they are morons, no I do not live near anything you listed.
An explosion in a home is caused by fault, whether it is human error or mechanical failure.
A hurricane is caused by weather (or God if you share my belief) and is NOT controllable. Living below sea level is 100% controllable (and MORONIC).
For the record, I agree we should help the ones who evacuted or tried, we need to help educate them so they understand how MORONIC it is to settle land below sea level and try to hold back the ocean. If they weren't there, there would be no disaster. The hurricane was coming no matter what.
Insurance doesn't hurt either, and I bet it is hard to get insurance at all when you live below sea level (that should have been a clue).
Seems silly to gamble in such below sea level regions to me. If you chose to try, please don't whine to me when you lose.

It wasn't below sea level when they settled it "moron." New Orleans used to be above sea level, and it has been an extremely prosperous port throughout U.S. history. So I guess the entire country is full of "morons" who forced those people to live there to support the port that held 1/3 of our oil refineries.

..."moron."

Actually, oddly enough, I think we somewhat agree on this one. Although, we are saying it differently.

I agree with you about the people that just decided to stay back. That was a bad decision. Some people didn't have a choice though. No, they CAN'T out-run a hurricane on foot. That is absolutely idiotic.

On the surface of things, I would definitely agree with you, but there are some scenarios and cases that fall between the cracks. And that's where I believe the government should come in, to fill in those cracks. And obviously they do. Unfortunately, it seems that Louisana's local goverment might have underperformed in their attempt to protect those people (that's the nicest way I can put it).

Glad to hear we have some agreement anyway.

Regarding outrunning a hurricane on foot, you can't outrun a hurricane sitting still either. Depending on how many days warning you have, how far the distance is, you CAN in fact reach safer ground where your likelihood of survival is increased. So, no it's not absolutely idiotic.

And even after the fact, should one live through it, some people's plan was to sit and wait. That's a very passive plan in my book, relying quite heavily on the actions of others to improve your lot. I prefer a more active plan; Where am I? Where do I need to go to find civilization? Which direction offers the safest route? Etc, etc. Reason is man's primary means of survival. Once discarded, abandoned, or ignored, the likelihood of survival diminishes greatly. I would suggest that many folks caught up in the situation did not maintain a clear head, got caught up in the emotion of the tragedy, and suffered the worse for it.

I'm not going to argue one way or another about the deficiency of the response at this point, as I suspect a considerably amount of investigation needs to be done to determine an accurate, well-informed opinion. However, I would suggest that it's likely that Louisana's local government underestimated the number of people who would remain there, and the degree to which civil order would diminish. As noted in an article I linked above, disasters in the past have typically brought out the best in the people in the midst of the disaster. They pulled together for the most part, helped each other, etc. (9/11 was a prime example) However, in this instance, many people demonstrated a darker side of human behavior to the point of even becoming hostile towards rescue efforts.

In short, this hasn't been the "normal" disaster (in so much as any disaster is normal), it has been more catastrophic in many ways, which would logically affect and complicate the government's response.

My response would have been the same to you as it was to them. They were warned, they were warned NOT to use the island called the superdome. They did not listen. I don't want to be in someone elses flame war. You have every right to build you house on train tracks if you choose, just DON'T cry to me or any one for help when your house gets hit by a train and I WILL NOT pay to help after. If you would like charity to help relocate and you promise to get off your welfare A** instead of drain more resources from our economy, sure.

This is simply NOT true, they drained marshland to build it. A HUGE mistake and separate moronic topic itself. Please show me where N.O. was ever totally above sea level.

They are morons you say? The MILLIONS of people living by everything I mentioned are morons? I'm a "moron" for working in the WTC knowing it's an attractive terrorist target? The thousands that died there were also "morons", because they took a "risk"? Plane crash victims are "morons' for taking a flight...humans weren't meant to fly right?

Thank you, for your opinion...keep believing that god kills "morons" just for being..."morons".

I'll let the millions living in these "risky" places decide who the moron is....

ahhh...theh classic "the poor don't deserve my help"..."the poor are poor by choice, get a job" arguments...This is a brilliant mind at work here, we got a real genius on our hands, you'll make it far in life after you get out of HS.

These statements simply are NOT related in any way. Working in a building or traveling on a plane does NOT compare to blatently messing with mother nature and ruining wetland sediment to create the cess pool that is sinking N.O.. Now they have contaminated the gulf.
Also know that moronic does not mean ignorant or dumb. You are born dumb and ignorant just means you don't know any better.
Being a moron is being foolish to the point you act at the level of a child or simply do not have the mental capacity past a 10 year old. Case in point was your last comment. ;-)

Mother nature intended us to fly then? I don't have wings on my back do you?

The entire country is "moronic" because they allowed NO to be built in the first place?? You definetly smarter then the entire world...why aren't you leading the country again?? Why does a genius such as yourself waste time with "morons" on the internet? Shouldn't you be thinking up something to help the world be a better place. Maybe you can invent some kind of juice that'll make us all as smart as you...wishfull thinking I guess...:(

Maybe god will destroy NY next for being so close to water...why is he taking so long to sink Long Island? Those morons are living on an island over there surrounded by water!! Escape quickly...get your message to them asap they need to know before disaster strikes!!! Actually don't tell them, bunch of morons anyway for living on an island, they deserve to die....

What are you saying, they are poor not by choice but because their region doesn't have any resource to create an economy for the masses of non-educated, non-motivated, non-inovative, "easy street", show your boobs mentality???? Hmmmmm!

Anyone in need no hand-outs but I have a guest room for rent and I can employ one person if they have a high school education and are willing to be trained. The room will be available for 3 months which is more than enough time to budget and save money for an apt of your own. The job will be available as long as you can be responsible stay of the crack pipe or bottle or whatever is holding you "poor". And yes it is that easy, "you wanna eat - you GOTTA WORK!"

Ah, you figured out why the poor are poor...go to a poor city and tell them that, I'm sure they'll appreciate this advice. I mean, I'm sure they haven't thought of getting a job...nahh no way.

Tell the lady working 3 jobs supporting her two kids that if she had a 4th job maybe she could of saved enough money to get a car and drive off into your fantasy land where everybody can get a job and it's all "easy", just as long as you're not lazy or smoking crack.

Wake up son, the world isn't as friendly as your parents bank....especially when you have no money in the first place.

Repeating yourself doesn't make it any more related or closer to being right. It still is no where near the same.

Bing! Bong!

Another brilliand reply, you're on a roll...

I guess it's true...when one discovers himself to be an inconsistent hypocrit...one begins to talk less.

In any case, I still applaud you for being smarter then america.

I would tell the lady she shouldn't have had the kids if she didn't want to support them, was she married or is daddy drunk in Bourbon Street gutter. EVERYTHING you are using as arguments are CHOICES, water below sea level is NOT a choice it is a physical fact. RUINING the world and the replenishment of wetland sediment to the point of sinking, death and coastal contamination just because a few MORONS didn't like change is also now a physical fact. They tax cigarettes so much because of the drain on our economy and they now charge the morons that climb mountains then get stuck then call 911 for helicopter rescue. Living in a danger zone below sea level is the same but we still have to pay for morons that do that. Worse, their children and elders have to pay with their lives. Please understand I have sympathy for the families of the lost. I pray they don't make the same mistake again given the choice. I also have donated my time and services in disasters. I also feel sorry for people that won't get help or resource because it is 'used up' over and over again on people that want to thumb their nose at physics and common sense.

I don't have much to add to this particular thread really (infact, I for the most part agree, however, some really don't have much of a choice).

But...I'm really just stopping by to say "thirdoff says you're a moron". That's all...:)

I addressed this in another part of the thread, but I do in fact live in a hurricane target area, and have most of my life.

I live in Va. Beach, VA, 8 blocks off the ocean front, 7 feet above sea level, in an area deemed a flood zone. We HAVE been hit with hurricanes and tropical storms numerous times throughout the city's***ory.

Plus, being a police sergeant in a neighboring city, I have to send my wife and son off to safe haven, and stay behind to help those people who choose to stay.

So no, I'm not "talking out of my butt" (a quite undeserved and uninformed comment). It's only impossible for those who choose not to act in time, or otherwise prepare themselves for this kind of eventuality.

That's something that people who don't understand the is/ought relationship will never understand. For everything a person learns, there is a relationship that must be formed between that knowledge and the pursuit of a person's continued existence on this planet. Failure to integrate that knowledge, and determine how it affects or can possible affect one's life can be deadly. One may still ignore a proper relationship with that knowledge in pursuit of values that one considers more important, but in doing so that person assumes some risk for which they have no legitimate gripe should the risk bare out.

What if you are 80 years old and on welfare and have no money to leave, and even have trouble getting out of your house. Are you supposed to walk 400 miles to outrun a hurricane with your walker? You seem to think that everyone is able-bodied and healthy and young enough to walk 400 miles. Look at the news. Do you see how many elderly people they are rescuing? Have you heard about the nursing homes and elderly in apartments who drown? Not everyone can get out by themselves. You are right, a lot of people who were able to leave were stupid not to. But the people unable to leave needed help which they didn't get.

I heard of one elderly lady who was trapped in her house. She asked for help leaving before the hurricane but noone came to help her. Two days after the storm she called and asked for help again. They said FEMA would arrive today. They never arrived. 4 days after the storm, she called again. They said FEMA should be there any time now. Day 5, the 80 year old woman was found drown in her own home. She wanted out and couldn't get out herself. She needed help, which never arrived.

Not everyone can fend for themselves. Some people need help. And whether the believe the government's role should be to protect people, that is part of their mission. A popular police motto is to "serve and protect." That is part of what police do. They are hired to keep the peace and to protect the public. In fact, many states have a "Department of Public Safety." Part of the role of government is to protect the people, and they didn't do that very well in this case.

Hopefully we will learn and prevent something like this from happening again.

You said, " The governments isn't required to protect people?"

That depends on whether you mean "the people" generally, or specific people in specific circumstances. You may be interested in looking up Castle Rock v. Gonzales on the US Supreme Court web site. The requirement to protect individuals may not be as all encompassing as you might believe.

Regarding the "grandfather" issue, a person's feelings may be largely irrelevant to the moral or ethical implications of a proper course of action. Emotions are the worst criteria upon which to base principles. Emotions are not tools of cognition, reason is. I suspect I stand alone on this point as well.

I could complain about any number of things that I'm being taxed for (or robbed by the government) that I do not wish to support. However, it would be a waste of bandwidth to discuss that in this forum, and it would not solve the problem.

Demonstrate to me, based on my posts, where I said the government shouldn't be helping ANYONE in my posts? (more than just the one you responded to, because you are context-dropping by not considering the entirety of my posts on this issue) If you can do that, I'll dignify the "80 year old woman" scenario with a response.

Rather, I have consistently argued about whether or not people (not the government) and private organizations have any OBLIGATION to help.

I'll restate that position again for clarity sake. No person, company, or organization (excluding the government) has any unassumed moral, legal, or ethical OBLIGATION to give up their property just because of someone else's need, no matter how dire their need may be, unless they have CHOSEN or VOLUNTARILY made some committment to do so. This certainly does not prevent or preclude anyone from giving money or help should they CHOOSE to, in which case, more power to them.

Secondly, I am a Police Officer (Sergeant actually (and have been for 20 years) so I know what their role is, what legal, ethical and moral obligations they have because of the COMMITTMENT THEY HAVE CHOSEN to make when taking an oath of office. In fact, it's likely I have a FAR better understanding of that than you do since I have taken that oath 3 times (once when hired, twice more for promotions). I have such an understanding of that, that it has not been an issue, with me, throughout the entirety of this thread, save for one remark about how much it sucks that rescue workers have to risk their lives because of the stupidity of others. I have even mentioned that I AM REQUIRED (based on my chosen committment) to send my family off to safety and stay behind to help people.

I could complicate matters by bringing Castle Rock v. Gonzales into this, but I'll let you do the research and come to your own conclusion, should you choose to do that.

Sir VG,

Yes, God does know you have anger; that does not make it right. Are you to say God created sin because we experience it? God forgives, but that does not make it correct. I treat everyone as a brother/sister in Christ, cause only He knows their hearts; and as a brother I was simply pointing out the mistake of mixing charity with foul language.

In Christ,
Erik Fritsch

Ecclesiastes 7:9
Do not be quickly provoked in your spirit, for anger resides in the lap of fools.

I think if someone has it in their heart to give their hard earned money and resources to charity, they can curse and use foul language all they want.

I'd sure as hell rather see someone give to charity and curse the government's lax response than see someone give to charity and preach to everyone. I'd say the former is more constructive and helpful.

you know falls under the category of religion. Free Speech doesn't curtail this behavior, but if some people in here are atheist or agnostic, you will only seek to infuriate those that do NOT want this type of morality. Therefore, keep it to yourself, otherwise you will be in the middle of the flame war.

I find this to be borderline myself, but since you kept it rather short I will spare you, this time.

If we wanted a prayer or preaching we would attend church. Do not attempt to flood us with your brand of morality, and even though you mean well, this isn't the place for it.

This little message is judgmental also. You are trying to judge us by a few words. A subset of our chracter in the forum of opinion does not a full person make. So don't tell us we are making a mistake by mixing charity with foul language. Just because you find it objectionable, doesn't mean you can try to impose your corrective action.

I find people that attempt to quell a situation by quoting scripture as profane as people that are racist. I don't want to read it or see it, because this is neither the place nor the time for it.

We are engaged in banter about the state of the union and the plight of victims of a violent storm. What God has wrought has no bearing. It has happened, we can't do anything about it. Therefore, quoting from Ecclesiastes won't help the situation. you want to help, send money or give your time, don't waste ours.

Amen Brother.

I'm keeping my PayPal account. They did exactly as they should have done to protect the organization from potential liability and/or fraud. If a person decides to use a third party system by which to perform transactions, then they are subject to the rules, practices and limitations of that third party.

And PayPal SHOULD be allowed to be compensated for providing such service via a percentage. The choice was always there with the person who originally used that service not to use it knowing that they normally take percentages of transactions. Someone else's needs do NOT infer an obligation on their part to provide a free service. Naturally they stand to lose business (and have) based on their actions, but that is the nature of a free market. But to infer they have some social responsibility or obligation to provide free services is parasitic thinking.

You are correct. I would agree with you in most cases.

But really now, this case deserves one heck of an exception. It's appalling that PayPal could be so in-human to just stick to protocol instead of caring about the situation.

you are a republican, low down piece of garbage...rot in hell pal(and paypal)

Not a well thought out conclusion, and it is in err. I'm not republican. I suspect you are speaking with your heart and not your brain.

Nobody said they have a social responsibility or obligation not to follow protocol in this situation. However, a company SHOULD, and most GOOD companies DO, make exceptions to rules in certain situations. By not bending the rules slightly to help hundreds of thousands of people who are suffering and DYING from a natural disaster, at practically not cost to them at all, they make themselves look bad and leaves a bad taste in alot of peoples mouthes to give this company more business.

Major companies and rich entertainers are donating MILLIONS of their OWN money, paypal can't even wave a 2% fee from a few thousand dollars to help these people??? Give me a $$%^ break, they don't have to, but who in their right hearts and minds would be so heartless?? On top of pretty much destroying their own public image in most of ebays own customers who are just trying to help their own country survive it's most devastating disaster in history.

Thank you PayPal, you are the shining star of America.

Should implies an obligation. You are contradicting yourself.

Should absolutely does not imply obligation. HAVE TO implies obligation.

Here's some examples to help clear things up, I know it's very confusing, but please try to follow:

I SHOULD go to bed right now since I have to work in the morning, but I think I'll stay up a little later, I have no obligations and no real consequences (other then me being a little tired maybe).

I HAVE to be at work tommorow by 8am, that's my obligation to my company, and I will be there by then, otherwise I will be fired.

See the difference? Good.

I think the problem is not really in the fact that they took a small percentage, but that they closed down the account without prior notice.
That is inexcusable, especially in this case. In every instance, before Paypal freezes an account, it should aprise the owner of the account of the situation, and then the owner can decide whether the situation is wanted or not. (or if he does not reply within a certain timespan, Paypal can close it).
But I think this safeguard is only for situations where there are withdrawals not deposits. It is just plain stupid if Paypal flags an account, just because a lot of people send money to it. It would be different, if a lot of money went the other way in such a short time, to so many paypal accounts.

Paypal has a lot of responsibility, and they should handle that carefully.

I'm not cofused in the least, though I think maybe you aren't clear on some definitions, such as the word "should". Definitions, not condescension, can help clarify this...

should Audio pronunciation of "Should" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (shd)
aux.v. Past tense of shall

1. Used to express obligation or duty: You should send her a note.
2. Used to express probability or expectation: They should arrive at noon.
3. Used to express conditionality or contingency: If she should fall, then so would I.
4. Used to moderate the directness or bluntness of a statement: I should think he would like to go.

Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
www.dictionary.com

Take note of the first definition. You are using the word "should" in the context of a moral obligation on the part of PayPal to take a financial loss in order to assist the hurricane efforts. That's very clear.

I suspect you realized this when you edited out "shall" and changed it to "have to" suddenly realizing that "shall" is linguistically related in tense to "should". Yes, I saw that before you changed it.

If you continue to maintain that "should" does NOT imply an obligation, I can only assume you are being intellectually dishonest and any further discourse with you would be futile.

I constructively suggest that you study some Critical Thinking. There are any number of books on it, and you would be doing your argument style an invaluable service. Personal attacks and insults do not win arguments, such as you questioning my reading comprehension skills, etc.

"I suspect you realized this when you edited out "shall" and changed it to "have to" suddenly realizing that "shall" is linguistically related in tense to "should". Yes, I saw that before you changed it."

Really? You saw that before Ichanged it?? That's an amazing power you have there, considering I never even thought of the word "shall" nor typed it in any of my posts. Matter of fact, i don't remember the last time I used "shall" in a sentance. But, you "saw" the word in your magic 8 ball...musta been there.

# Indicates a recommendation or that which is advised but not required.
www.udel.edu/OHS/fireworkdefine.html

# it is recommended that; ought to
www.linuxbase.org/spec/b...-IA32/LSB-IA32/def.html

The term used to state recommended or advisory procedures or identify recommended equipment. (2)
www.shellfishquality.ca/glossary.htm

As you can see (maybe if you use your magic 8 ball properly) that "should" can have multiple definitions...with your "rational" closed mind you chose one definition and stuck with it...and decided to try and invalidate my entire argument over one wordl...if it makes it easier for you and you REALLY don't like using the word "should" as a word that doesn't imply obligation, then stick another word in there that's more to your liking.

I can see your credibility is not something you take seriously, so I'll let my argument stand as is, and other readers can decide.

ha...based on the definition of should? Like I said..replace the word with another word you like better with the definition of "recommended, but not required", not very difficult, I don't think.

I smell your stink pal, youre a piece of garbage

Hmm...interesting point. And those of us with PayPal accounts did read and agree to their rules. But does that infer PayPal change the rules to suit their needs on a whim? They freeze assets based opon testimony from bogus people that whine over anything. They don't even follow their own procedures, unless they figure a way it fits into their perview.

I agree with you about the incident, but I disagree with PayPal as a whole. Until another third party can compete with PayPal and Ebay, we don't have much choice.. the rest are lost in obscurity. PayPal is pretty much the only worldwide recognized escrow service, if you attempt to use someone else you will not be regonized, that's the problem, and why some people believe PayPal acts like a monopoly.

wow, that was good. Well said.

Umm.. its a business. Why should they waive fees? Do their expenses go down? NO. Will the banks waive their transactions fees everytime PayPal transfers money? Hell no. And its 2%. we are talking 2 lousy damn dollars. Hell we pay more than that for a gallon of gas.

2 dollars out of every hundred is a small price to pay for a company that is established and did all the work to make themsevles known. They suck as a company, don't get me wrong, but it is a BUSINESS. Lets be realistic. Its not heartless, you see the money they take in, and a percentage that goes away, but you fail to realize what the percentage is for. The electric company, phone, rent, mortgage, salaries ... still ALL need to be paid. PayPal makes money off each transaction to pay for this stuff, that isn't unjustified. you need to take a course in economics. Maybe then you will understand how things work. You are an idealist. EVERY company makes money, even non-profit organizations. Its called "The cost of doing business".

Hahaha.. Funny! I love it. Sarcasm at its best.. You will however realize you are having a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent..

Still, I love your responses.

Early votes are in, still awaiting a recount in Florida, however it stands right now:

RationalCop - 1
NIRO - 0

(as in big fat goose egg, zero, zilch, nada, zip, nil)

Feel Free to look those up, you will find they are all synonyms to mean Niro has been spanked!

I think you missed the point. no kidding it's business...it's great how you argue the obvious for 3/4ths of your post and for the rest of the 1/4 you just talk about me not knowing that business are there to make money.

All I'm saying (I guess this must be tough for those with low reading comprehension skills to understand, so I'll assume your in that category and give you a break), is that for this particular transaction (very minute, in paypals world, trust me), maybe wave the 2% and consider it a donation to the united states in a moment of a crisis. Or, at the very least, don't LOCK the money that people are trying to donate...they not only not waved the fees (which is fine, let them be greedy, it's a business), but they HINDERED others from donating. It's almost like them saying..."not only are we not going to donate, but we'll stop anybody else who's trying to donate using us as a middleman as well, we just don't care".

ahh...americas brightest at it's best, I love it. Fortunately for you, you haven't been hit by a hurricane so you can talk all the trash about those that have been....I hope you get hit next, and you come on these boards and tell us how amazingly superior of a human being you are because you own a car and you drove away from the disaster.

Some people "believe" a lot of different things. That doesn't mean their beliefs are justified.

There is a civil system in place to address breaches of contract. If they "believe" they have been slighted, they can utilize that system.

But people do have a choice, they can choose not to use EITHER eBay or PayPal. They can start their own versions of such businesses and provide competition. People don't have some "right" to be provided an online bidding service or an online payment service. I don't see the people complaining about this so-called "monopoly" stepping up and starting a competitive organization. No, it's simply easier to complain and demonize them.

Wow, right above the "Enter Your Comment" part it says personal attacks will not be tolerated. I guess they are anyway.

Still waiting for you to add something of substance.

What makes more sense is instead of freezing the entire account, just freezing the ability to make withdrawls. That way business (or donations in this case) can continue, PayPal can investigate, and if necessary, give back the money to those who paid if there is something wrong.

Part of the problem is that PayPal is understaffed to handle complaints, much of the fraud detection is automated, and until the federal government and several states threatened to close them down, didn't have a customer service department to call that could address problems such as these. The government has already told PayPal they have to behave once, and if PayPal is not careful and continues to anger customers like this, they will be regulated similar to how banks are.

I think it is good that PayPal watches out for fraud, but I think that they could do it in a better manner.

One problem is when donations go through these wacko religous organizations. Christians have shown they are corrupt at every level — look no further than catholic priests and pat robertson calling for murder. And yes, Bush should be sharing the same cell with Hussein. Every time he vacations, Americans die. The conservative media is shocked, shocked! that he's finally proven fatally incompetent.

I think Steve Gilliard said it best.

This comment was un-called-for and particularly offensive to me.

Christians, Catholic priests, and president Bush have nothing to do with this topic.

**EDIT**
That link takes you to a blog with extremely inappropriate language. I recommend the mods remove it.

Yes, Christians have shown they are corrupt at every level. Without their repentence, who is to say they are really a Christian?? Only God knows who the Christians really are. A world title of Christian means nothing outside of the world.

In Christ,
Erik Fritsch

who cares what you think, YOUR PRESIDENT has been exposed for what he is a total BIGOT. Rest in Peace New Orleans.

"who cares what you think"

I guess you don't. =/

Am I supposed to cry now?

**EDIT**
LOL. I got a negative score for this one. And look at the two comments surrounding this one. They get zeros LOL.

You get to talk about your religion. Now can I?

Ouch, well you know this is not the first time christians want everyone to bow to their sensitivities and believe like they do. I only call them christian because they profess to be, just like you are professing jesus all over this board. Last time I checked, jesus himself said some things so offensive to the establishment that he got into big trouble over it. So stop defending Rome, and reread your Bible — especially that part in Matthew 25.31-46. That's where conservatives fail every day.

When did I talk about my religion? I never said anything about it. I'm trying to leave it out of this discussion because it doesn't belong.

Stop posting off-topic comments.

blah blah blah -bible thump->. Blah blah blah -insert appropriate commandment here-. Blah blah, Lord (as appropriate), amen.

** Am I supposed to cry now? **

Only if it includes sulking and hiding your face in the corner... You don't have to go away upset, just go away.

*removed*

First off, you really need to look at the Red Cross. As we in California found out, when you donate money to the Red Cross, they DO NOT earmark the money for use in that particular area. Any money donated for the Hurricane could be used in Europe, Asia, wherever they wish. When we donated enough money for every man,woman, and child that lost their house in the California wildfires to walk away with $50,000, the most they got was a $50 blanket and some water. The local head, a severely rich woman, refused to talk to 60 minutes. Guess no one remembers that story. Trust me, we learned the hard way about the Red Crosses policies.

Oh, and are we blaming the whole thing on Bush? Geez, I don't really like the guy but I get sick of this stuff. I agree that a lot of wind comes out of Washington but come on! It was up to the Governor to activate the National Guard and then ask for help. I don't want to see another politician land there and walk among the crowds, and then cry in the arms of some old lady, just to show he really cares. He stayed home and took care of business, of course he likes business, big business. Complain about that!

lol @ your Bush comments. Agreed. I was trying to imply just a bit of sarcasm in my reply to that post. =p

OffDWall is correct, but not up-to-date.

The San Diego chapter head was run out of the Red Cross on a rail. We have since taken several important steps to address the problems.

Again, not speaking officially...
1. Made all of our 900+ chapter CEO's national employees who can be terminated without us having to wait for a local board of their friends to finally do so.
2. Instituted a policy called Donor Direct that is now the model for donation verification in the non-profit sector. Your donation is used precisely where you tell us to use it: if you don't say, and it is unclear, we are required to call or write and verify your intent. Donations marked solely for the Disaster Relief Fund could conceivably be used in your own community for local disaster victims (big disasters, that is.) Or in another community. But note "Katrina" on your check or select it when making an online donation, and your money will go to that fund exclusively.

Not that we have money for anything else: our DRF was at only $20M last Sunday. Now we've spent five times that this week at least, and we are probably going to spend over $750 million before all is said and done. Not much chance we are going to be diverting funds.

3. The Better Business Bureau now gives us 4 of 4 stars for fiscal management and donor intention-following (sic.) Charity Navigator gives us the highest rating of any non-profit for our efforts to follow donor intent.

We made mistakes, but we learned, and changed.

Oh, you don't have to tell me.. Recall 9-11? 600 million dollars or whatever, the Red Fraud tried to divert assets to anyplace BUT the victims of 9-11. congress had to put their 2 cents in before the Red Cross did anything about it, and some of those victims families STILL have not seen their money . . . . .

Whatever. Like everything else in America, I will believe it, when I see it.

Since everyone is pointing fingers, lets look at the real problem here:

Bush was slow to react. If he hadn't been so slow, there'd be less deaths and less cost.

I think in the first 5 days Canada had more coverage and relief prepared that the US did, which is pretty sad. (Our DART(which could have helped a whole dome of people) was ready before tuesday, but bushy hasn't let it in, or anything else from up here)

Actually, I think almost all countries were faster at having relief ready than the US was. I found it really funny when Sri Lanka offered to help.

On a happy note, Bush did not infact shoot down the rescue jet Martin sent down to grab Canadians. ^_^

Yup. Bush just wants to screw the whole country. I mean think about it. He has so much to gain by purposefully destroying the country he's in charge of. It's so simple. Why didn't anyone think of that before?

It's not that bush is doint it on purpose, he's just not very good at taking care of things. I mean, you can see it in his eyes, I can look at him and see how hollow his head is. ;)

Leave Bush alone. You people were stupid enough to re-elect him, you deserve what you get.

I didn't vote for bush...

** Bush was slow to react. If he hadn't been so slow, there'd be less deaths and less cost **

Umm..no. The deaths were as a result of the hurricane. So you cannot say with ANY degree of certainty we could have saved ANY of those people.

Slow to react.. interesting considering as another user pointed out the City is STILL 15' under water, no power, and lack of total communication. Just how exactly were they supposed to respond, telepathy?

And since no has said anything about this, the Police, Fire Department, Ambulances, hospitals staff are ALSO homeless. And since they couldn't call anyone to form a pow wow or get any feedback the only information they were getting was from unofficial news crews all to eager to show pictures of the bad parts, and not doing ANYTHING to help themselves. So once AGAIN you are getting information from a notoriously poor source and very one sided. You should stop watching ABC news, and drive down there yourself. ONLY then will you realize what a totally futile statement "slow to react" is.

There are only a handful of vehicles that can wade through water of that level. Cruise ships, generators, gas, only just arrived a couple of days ago themselves. Everyone saw TV, why weren't those there earlier, hmmmmm? Yeah, lets blame President Bush for everything. Its all his fault.

This country doesn't run from 1 person, its a democracy, or don't you remember the Constitution? Of the people, by the people for the people... From where I am sitting, those people were helping themselves, so they were fine for a couple of days until proper help could arrive.

Canada did squat. There were 2 countries that were officially recognized by the USA. Venezuela and Spain. They helped, where is European nations? I don't hear diddly from UK, Germany, France.. where are they? yeah lets put the blame where it belongs.

Bush is a president. Which means he presides. Does your CEO personally watch over EVERYTHIMG you do? NO! you have a boss, and judging from your level of intellect, you are no where near the top of the corporate ladder.

Wow. I absolutely agree with you on this one.

All except for the democracy part. The U.S.A. has always been a Republic, but it's a technicality.

Well said.

Interesting comment indeed. And on the whole I agree.
But I do not agree with you on the international part of your comment.
Here in the Netherlands we had a team stand by almost 1 day after the hurricane hit, to send to the US to help out (levees inspection/repair team), but they had to wait for an OK from the US government, which didn't arrive... even more remarkable, I saw a press conference from Pres. Bush, in which he stated that the US did not need help from abroad, and that they could solve this problem themselves.
(That is most likely why Canada and Europe didn't react sooner, while they knew what a ludicrous assumption it was)

Why do people say that Bush was late in reacting to this?
This hurricane hit was predicted quite some time before it hit. But no evacuation plan was executed. But that is not just Bush' fault, but more the failing of my governmental institutions, including the mayor of N.O.
But Pres. Bush didn't even interrupt his vacation for this. No, he went on like 'business as usual'... while it wasn't anything like business as usual.

This is disgraceful.

In Paypal's defense, they had no way of knowing that the account they locked was being used for hurricane relief donations. HOWEVER, once they heard what was going on, they should have done EVERYTHING in their power to make an exception and unlock those funds AND allow them to be distributed to ANYONE who would help with hurricane relief.

**EDIT**
\/That\/ makes sense. I apologize for my accusations.

Actually, Kyanka returned the money so people could then donate it directly to the Red Cross themselves. Otherwise it would have been locked up for days, and sent to a questionable charity rather than the Red Cross folks down in the trenches of New Orleans and Mississippi.

He didn't deprive anyone of relief. In fact, he did this to make sure the funds would reach the people who needed them faster.

You're right. Sometimes, when I get mad, I don't use my powers of reasoning very well =/

No problem, it's an understandably confusing situation. And its possible some people won't re-donate that money, but I think the majority will.

while holding the funs how much profit did paypale make we can see why they wanted to take five days

Please, keep your Christian sentiments out of this.

There were tons of people who wanted to make a difference in the lives of thousands of people who've lost their jobs, homes, and lives. There are people who need nothing and one person was gonna lead something big. But to have some greedy corporation tell them "No, you can't do this" is wrong in every way.

Stop pointing your fingers at us. Point them where they belong.

And if you want to claim that we're anti-Christian with our feelings, know that God understands that we do experience anger. This is a natural feeling for those who have been wronged. Justice will come to those who have been wronged, for him it takes but a moment, but for us it seems like an eternity.

If we weren't suppose to have anger, it wouldn't have been created.

8-]

A bit off topic...

I live in Malaysia. Paypal was stubborn to offer services to my country last time, but they do offer to Malaysia's neighbour: Singapore.

Now, they do allow Malaysians to signup but there is no direct way to send the cash to a local bank in my country. This means all money earned from my paypal account will be stuck unless I use it to buy something.

Sad...

No true, you can do a withdrawal of funds, and it will go into your bank account. Or you can have PayPal send you a check. Or you can apply for a PayPal debit card which you can use to make purchases, but PayPal is an escrow company, which means they hold your money, but they are not a bank, so if you want your funds distributed to another source, you can do so...

Logon to your paypal account and click on the tabs across the top.. Feel Free to transfer funds to my paypal account since its empty in the meantime :)

From everyone's comments, it seems that most of you are also vultures - so easy to point fingers and complain. Anyone who donates money and speaks g**d*** in the same sentence is not giving in the correct manner. Align your heart first, then worry about giving. Stop trying to crucify and start by making intellects and forgiving comments. I'm not saying your enemies are right, but it gives you NO right for hatred and your swear words against them. Salvation is not by works- but by Grace alone.

In Christ,
Erik Fritsch

Yeah, right. Welcome to the Internet.

For someone urging such Christian ethics and responses,your choice of words are at best laughable.DONATE TO THE RED CROSS DIRECTLY.Paypal and the UNITED WAY as partners is about right.Two crooked peas in a pod.

I don't understand what you are saying, can you clarify?? I really don't understand the reference to the Red Cross and United Way as I did not post about those issues.

In Christ,
Erik Fritsch

I didn't expect to get welcomed.

1 John 3:13
Do not be surprised, my brothers, if the world hates you.

In Christ,
Erik Fritsch

So it's more important to be righteous than help other people?

You do realise some people give out of pure generosity, not, because it will gain them a better place in the 'afterlife', what words they use is irrelevant, words don't save lives.

Both are charitable organizations that you can donate money too and they will use it to help relief efforts such as Katrina/New Orleans. SA wanted to give the money to Red Cross. PayPal is restricting them from doing so but offered to give it to United Way instead. SA refused because United Way does not have the best financial record.

By your first post it seems you don't quite understand what happened.

People gave money freely to Something Awful's PayPal account, knowing it would be used to help the Katrina victims. There is no g**d***ing at this point.

Then PayPal decided to freeze the account, meaning the money could not be donated. This is where the g**d***ing comes in.

Those reading this who aren't Christian might as well stop here, this next bit isn't for you. :)

Also it appears you are a Christian. You should know that quoting scripture is not going to win people over, only annoy them if you do it enough. I highly recommend a WWJD philosophy instead, which will show Christ's love through you much better than words many have already heard and rejected.

Well said (the last paragraph too ;-) )

You obviously have not read through the posts. e-Bay/Paypal uses United Way and recommended to send funds there whereas they do not allow direct donation from Paypal to RedCross.

One should thoroughly read the topic at hand before posting anything in the first place. One who spreads the word of God should know that..

Oh, so you spouting scriptuere and accusing us of indigation, what is that, acceptable christian behavior? Why don't you blow me. Let's see how you apply some salvation to that, big boy.

that's because you are a dumb ass. Let me break it down to you.

PayPal. Make rules. Don't follow. Freeze Assets.
United Way. charitable donations. Takes money.

Both are angled toward their own personal gains. Both do things to suit them. So they fit each other perfect. PayPal has aligned themselves with United Way as their personal charity. They don't recognize the Red Cross. Someone at PayPal slept with a United Way intern, and now the United Way is the chosen chartiy.

Even though the Red Cross is an organization the United Way gives to, PayPal doesn't want to seem biased by giving directly to them.

Clear enough now, 13th disciple?

Hahahaha.. They QUOTE scripture, that doesn't infer they READ scripture....

Damn that was funny though.

I love people that takes things totally out of context..

Oh look, I can quote scripture too:

24So there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, very grievous, such as there was none like it in all the land of Egypt since it became a nation

Exodus 9:24

Also include your version of the bible, because your passages are not lining up. Perhaps you are just making this up as you go along?

Of course it takes them 3-5 business days to refund money - they get a little something called Interest from it.

PayPal is the scum of the earth

umm.. no, you are not business minded either I see. PayPal is not a bank. They are an escrow company. *YOUR* bank refunds the money to *YOUR* account. That's what takes so long. It could take 24 hours, if you don't have a fly by night operation. I seldom take longer than 48 hours to complete my transactions

PayPal submits a request to the bank or the clearing house, and it has to clear the Federal Reserve ACH before it can be deposited. There is also a transaction period, thanks to people that take their sweet time. That's why it takes 3-5 business days.

PayPal is the scum of the earth however, but lets get the details correct.

Closed my paypal account this morning. No more Ebay. These people are nothing more than vultures anyway.

Well, i'm argentinian, and i'm with yours, american people, in this horrible hour. And to Pay Pal, are your brothers, take care of this.

I used to think PayPal was all great. Now... my opinion has changed a little... PayPal: get your head in the game!

Certainly we have to appluad the efforts of SA and if your reading a BIG THANK YOU!
It would be easy to point fingers here but think about whats going on.
We live in a society of people that are trying different scams everday. I have seen a rise in phishing scams in my emails labeled "Cheap Gasoline Here" and you know it's just scum bags trying to feed off the unknowing.
PayPal, which I hate by the way, has protection in place to hopefully stop some if not all of these scams.
Their systems red flagged this one and put a stop to it, incorrectly? most likely.
If people weren't trying to scam us everyday this would not have happened.
Is SA a company on the up and up? I don't know and it doesn't matter.
Did PayPal unjustly stop this? I don't know.

Blame should be pointed at the scum bags who try and scam us everyday and make us take measures to block these scams.

Again nice try and THANKS SA and if you are legite please do not let this hinder your aggresion for future disaters. Maybe put something in place so this doesn't happen the next time.

I sent this into cnn. Hopefully they will run with this. Paypal is just getting more horrible by the day.

If they can freeze the account in an hour why does it take 5 days to unfreeze it? Come on paypal fix your problems.

yeah and it takes your phone company minutes to close your phone line.. after you have not paid your bill for a couple of months..and they sent notice after notice. They can unfreeze it just as quick, but they don't make the decision on a whim. Most big companies have triggers, run by a computer program. That computer program is following orders. Any suspicious activity that's been pre-flagged by some accountant or executive, is carried out. Once its flagged, then someone has to manually clear the flag. That takes time to get approval. First they have to find out why it was flagged in the first place. Haven't you ever heard the term "investigation"? there is a reason it was turned off. Once its determined it was justified or unjustified, someone (usually only a limited number of people have access) has the authority to remove the flag. 99.99% of the time there is a legitimate reason something is done. A computer automates the shut down or flag of an account, but someone has to intercede to get it back on, to make sure that its done for the right reason.

Do you people even think through these posts before you just go off half c***ed? PayPal has problems, but part of their problem is people emailing them for stupid stuff, like why did you turn off my account, when if you will read for just 5 minutes the answer is in black and white.

ALL PayPal asked for was additional info about who this guy was, and since it was an intangeable, they wanted to make sure the money was going a legitimate organization, and not some bum trying to make out like a fat rat, like hundreds of other scams. If you actually ran a company, you would understand.

anyone playing with the misery of victims should be courtmarshalled. paypal should be sued and tried for criminal negligence. all people in their right mind should terminate their links with paypal right away. a disgrace to the human race that is what it is.

If they deserve to be sued, so does bush. Look at what his slow reaction time has done? :)

Bush doesn't control the National Guard. FEMA is responsible for the slow reaction.

http://www.google.com/se...amp;ie=UTF-8&q=FEMA

Dude, are you this retarded? Ever heard of Fraud? Let's suppose PayPal did nothing. A year from now we find out that this so called "benevolent" fund was a fraud. You would probably be saying the same EXACT thing.. you want PayPal sued because they should have stopped it. All that money that people sent went no where, and all in the name of "relief"

9-11 if anything should be a reminder of just how opportunistic people are (or greedy). They take advantage of other people EVERY day. This guy neither works for no represents the Red Cross, so what proof do we have that he is legit? The money goes into HIS PayPal account. how do we even know every dime will go the Katrina Relief? Tell me, this would bear a good answer if you had one. how do we PROVE its going where its supposed to go? WE DON'T. we trust, but we NEVER know.

When was the last time you actually gave any money to a charity? I bet you just b**** and moan, but you do nothing don't you? Give to a reputable charity, and leave it at that. Period. If you are not sure, don't. Its very simple. PayPal, as evil, greedy, and idiotic as they are, in this case, did the right thing. You need to get your facts straight before you start hiring a lawyer.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

AS best I understand PayPal would not be donating the money to the Red Cross. It would simply be transferring the money to the Red Cross. For this to happen it would be nesessary to have Red Cross establish a PayPal account and you simply transfer the amount in the account you set up to the account Red Cross set up. PayPal would be totally out of it except for handling the basic ordinary transfer.

Which they get a sizable percentage of.

WOW! I hope many cancel their Pay Pal accounts due to this. I can't believe a site that is known big time would do that???
I never had a Pay Pal account but if I would, I would cancel it. If you have one, I recommend shutting it down. That will show them :)

If there was an alternative to Paypal I would leave that s***ty org in a eye blink!

http://www.paypalsucks.com/options.shtml

yes you got it,the world is full of it ,thats why its dying and the worst part is to come ,
when their our no children smiling and playing and laughting ,then all thses people will blane each other but it will be to late

Surely there is some documentation on the relationship between Paypal and United Way. Either United way is getting a discount, or Paypal is getting a larger chunk? Why the exclusivity for a charitible organization?

Why the PR disaster risk? I hope paypal competitors seize this as an opportunity to take some marketshare.

For disaster relief funds I'd expect no more than .1% of my money to go to the distribution network. I can use a credit card at hundreds of other charitable organizations online rather quickly also.

Good article betanews, btw. This is an issue that needs press.

No documentation, its simple logic. Many companies choose to only support the United Way. Because many companies have creed, race, religion, and gender to consider. The United Way does NOT have prejudice. You do, your neighbor does, I am sure we would like to ALL give to every worthy cause, but we have limited income. And giving 1 dollar to each one is pathetic, so the next best answer is the United Way

They give to many large organizations, which in turn to give to many local charities. So companies, like PayPal give their money to a large contributor rather than individuals or smaller agencies so they don't seem biased.

If the Red Cross has some political offiliation that offends half the company, it wouldn't make sense to give that organization now would it? That company would be considered bias. But if PayPal gives to the United Way, then they are not biased, they are giving to a care giver who then decides where it would do the best. PayPal can't keep up with every worthy cause in the world, but the United Way it's pretty much their job to keep up with charities that need help.

There is no "discount". United Way is a bonafide, government approved charitable organization that PayPal has EVERY right to choose as their SOLE benevolence. This is why many companies choose to NOt participate in ANY charities as a company, because everyone is quick to get into a pissing contest on who is the more "acceptable"charity.

Thanks to people like you, who blow the whistle over some miscommunication, and that is exactly what this is, you spark some half witted non-supported campaign to flame PayPal.

PayPal has some issues, but giving to the United Way and only the United Way is not one of them.

And for you to limit the amount that a company can retain for expenses not only express your lack of knowlege about just how much it takes to run a company it also details your complete lack of knowledge about economic issues.

and if you can use charitable organizations, then why complain? Give to your charities, and shut the hell up.

Disgusting behaviour from PayPal. They should be helping people send money quickly. I have now closed my PayPal Accounts.

> PayPal's automated system explained that it had received "more than one report of suspicious behavior from your buyers."

Let's see how they like it when 1000s of SA users go and report PayPal's employees' accounts for suspicious activity. That would be pretty funny actually.

That is absolutley disgusting. I have just terminated my paypal account.

...and I am sure PayPal just shed a tear . . .

This is outrageous. I can't believe something this idiotic has happened.

Shame on Paypal.
Blocking valid donations is a big no-no.

paypal loves the cawk...

they love stealing peoples money. its some kinda hobby

Yay, yet another example of people paying to be screwed by paypal.

Hurry up google, I'd wrather let you skim my money and get it done right than see others become yet another horror story similar to this, and many others who have lost their livelyhood due to fraudulent claims causing freezing of accounts...

Well if Google does it a ton of people will leave paypal. Whenever google comes out with something new they seem to have it bigger and better then everyone elses.

Most likely if people prefer google they will still keep paypal for ebay shopping. Paypal isn't going anywhere.

Its all g**d*** corporate politics. You know, all these companies start out useful, helpful - and fair - then suddenly they GO PUBLIC(tm) and Lose Their Friggin' Minds(tm).

When it stops being about "fair service at a fair price" and "feed the stockholders extra dividends", the only people that end up getting screwed are the people that made the company who they are.

I can't believe what I'm reading "We can't give to the Red Cross ..." What the HELL is it with g**d*** EXCLUSIVITY? What crap. Xbox only, United Way only, blah blah ... screw the customers - pay the stockholders!

I think not when they are owned and tied to ebay.

As most already know, Paypal has been a horrible entity to deal with for many years now.

Unless if some purchaser acquires them & rights things, they'll disappear off the face of the globe the instant Google initiates their version.

We'll then hear a collective good riddance sigh throughout the land.

Sadly, you're incorrect. *cries*

Google stated their "Google Wallet" will only be for paying for google services. I desperately hope they have or will change their mind, resulting in Paypal going down, but until that day we'll just have to keep hoping.

You're 1,000,000% right, i actually edited out 'cries'-- to avoid accusations of bias or sensationalism.

It will be very tough for any other payment/funds transfer entity to get established due to the Feds' Big Brotherish draconian / fascist impositions:
in the name of preventing usage by any minor, drug dealer, pornographer, fraudster, gambloholic, money launderer, entity/citizen of a banned country, & worse now- copyright-infringers & terrorists... they in effect are turning all money handlers & big-ticket retailers( this includes the majority of commercial establishments, not just finance-- real estate rent/buy, investment firms, lawyers, jewelers, collectors, any retailer of higher-end products...) into 'fascist collaborators' who are obligated to spy on and report any/all suspicious activities/citizens. And this is not just at the official $10,000 threshold, but for multiple transactions of as low as $2K-- piddly amounts in even a sub-developed country.
The fines and penalties for any paperwork not confirmed, with every i dotted & t crossed, are harsh enough to close down the business-- whether directly from revoked charter/license, or indirectly from the onerous fines & legal defense costs.
And this is just from the feds-- any crusading/electioneering state or local DA can further get into the act. Case in point:
moron NY DA Elliot Spitzer(trying to outdo Giuliani and shooting for the Governor's mansion instead) made NYC 'safer' by forcing a group of the biggest banking institutions in the world(Citibank & a bunch of others) to sign a cease & desist agreement to NOT allow credit cards to be used at NO gambling institution, whether legal or illegal in exchange for no and/or deffered adverse legal action(basically because their software & audit controls did not have a way to allow him to at anytime peruse their transaction logs & ascertain 100% that gambling transactions ALL went to legal entities ONLY-- & btw audits by the big accounting firms counted for nothing here).
Of course, the imbecile only managed to hurt the good guys & all American institutions involved, while helping the illegal & off-shore bookies(all they had to do is setup a DBA with some innocous name like Restaurant Holdings, etc. & continue accepting CC's, while the good guys here were left holding the bag).
Of course, all the parties involved, as to be expected, readily kow-towed-- in a business involving such low margins to begin with, spending millions of dollars just to contest indictments & answer subpoenas would wipe out the profits of many decades.
My point in this ramble is that if just one local jackass can bring to their knees some of the world's biggest banks, accounting firms, casinos, racetracks & off-track wagering companies...

Little by little we're becoming the old USSR-- we need to take back our country-- the bad guys are succeding in destroying THE bastion of freedom & personal liberty...and this is someone with a conservative viewpoint telling you this.

In light of all this, one can MAYBE begin to excuse Paypal for SOME of their reticence, though it by no means gets them off the hook for all their other egregious behaviour-- folks having their funds frozen for over a year, etc., etc... someone who does things right still needs to take their place.

Hoping like Alice in Wonderland or Dorothy in the Wiz that things will only get better ain't gonna cut it-- WE NEED to DO something & NOW!

I'm a senior major gifts officer for the national office of the American Red Cross. I found this thread on Google. This is the first I've heard of PayPal not allowing donations to us. I'll look into it.

In the meantime, THANKS to everyone for your generous interest in supporting us.

Now, not speaking officially, but thought I'd weigh in on the timing issue that has everyone so exercised.

The National Response Plan requires that all state and local emergency management agencies prepare and implement a disaster response plan to cover ALL needs for the first 72-96 hours. That means that the Feds are not to be expected to be ready to help until 72 -96 hours AFTER the disaster ends. In addition, the Feds must, by posse comitatus, be asked for help first by the sovereign authority, usually the Governor of a state. I believe the affected states did not declare a national disaster situation until AFTER Katrina had passed. The 72-96 hours starts then.

In my own opinion, the fault lies with the state of Louisiana for not preparing an evacuation plan for ALL its citizens (buses on Sunday for the poor, not buses on Wednesday after the roads are gone, for example.) But even now there are people refusing to leave. Some large portion of the stranded people are there because they chose not to leave -- they did not listen. And many others are in trouble because they truly had no way to leave. Louisiana's governor and the mayor of New Orleans let them down.

The Red Cross and FEMA told NOLA and LA officials over and over for years to get ready. They evidently didn't. And now they want to blame the Feds. I heard that we (the ARC) even told them not to use the Superdome because it would be an inaccessible island after a Cat 4 -- we refused to operate it as a shelter because it was inherently an unsafe environment. Look what happened.

We are running shelters in 14 states holding hundreds of thousands of people. We are the only non-profit agency required by Congressional mandate to do so. We are the only non-profit that has an assigned role following Incidents of National Significance. I like the United Way, but they don't deliver services -- they are a donation bank that takes a cut of every gift before passing it on.

The Red Cross puts more than 90 cents of every dollar into direct relief, the best of any disaster relief agency because we are mostly volunteers.

None of this is the official word of the Red Cross, just the opinion of one tired employee who also happens to be a disaster volunteer.

Thanks for your support during this time of great national crisis.

Thank you for YOUR post.

That was extremely welcome and needed information. I hope this helps clear up the many misconceptions people (including myself) have had about this situation.

Keep up the good work.

ARC Employee:

I second wincemeat-- Thank you for your post, it reinforces a lot of what i thought, & the work you do.

God bless.

Me three, ARC person. That post was the saving grace of this thread. Help the folks now, roast the politicians later. Incidentally, the United Way lost my confidence completely after 9-11. The Red Cross nearly ran aground on the same ethical sandbar but quickly made amends, saving both a lot of donation money and their reputation. The Red Cross and the Salvation Army are the best. I really feel for Kyanka, too. Here he is just trying to help the city that hosts his incredible site, and look what it gets him. Long live SA and esp. Photoshop Friday!

@ARC Employee
thank you and your colleagues for all your hard work.. I'm sure many people in the hurt areas appreciate what you do. And I hope people now come together and help eachother out, and clean up the mess Katrina left behind.
And that the people of New Orleans can go home soon.

Just for the record, The Red Cross, The United Way and The Salvation Army are only 3 of MANY organizations offering assistance to those in need. These three always get the headlines because they are big names and well known, but with any disaster, anywhere, they are just 3 of many so those who wish to tip their hats at the helpers dont name them by name, simply state "all those who lend assistance".

You're absolutely right. I tip my hat to "all those who lend assistance".

Thanks for the information and post. God Bless all who are trying to help these people. It is sad to see so many lose homes, family members ect.. Only hope they are able to pull through and recover with as little problems as possible.

// Regards,
Crypton