While checking over our bank account this morning, I saw an unknown charge of $5.19 from NCIC. I asked my husband - he had no clue what it was, either. So I called the 800 number listed, and was answered by a woman. I tried to explain that we didn't know what the charge was - she insisted she needed a card # in order to look up the charge. If we don't know what the charge is for, how would we know what card was used? =\
At that point, I handed the phone over to my husband, because her accent was hard for me to decipher, and he suddenly remembered that he had used a pay phone on Wednesday to call me [we were meeting at the store after he got off work; he was there at 3.. our daughter doesn't get home from school til 3:20.. how he expected me to be there at 3, I have no idea]. He didn't have any change on him, so he used his debit card.
Sooo.. for a 30-second local phone call which should have been $.50 (if he had had change) the charge was $5.19. Ripoff much? And not only that, but he said she sounded pretty smug about there being a 'service charge' whenever you use a credit card.
[He needs to get a cell phone. XP]
I was shopping at one of those Super Targets, and I had a healthy cartful of food and sundry; I wasn't in any particular hurry, the store was open for another two hours, and when I had come in, it was slow-ish, but four people were running registers.
As I was heading back to the registers with my purchases, it appeared that two of the four had closed, and one of the only two remaining was an express lane (10/12/20 items or less, whatever their policy is). Obviously, with my cartload, I opted for the other cashier...
...who decided to close after ringing up the customer in line ahead of me, and shrugging at me and motioning vaguely to the other register.
Well, I really had no problem with this, seeing as there was no one in line for the Express Lane...but when I got over there, the girl looked at my cart, rolled her eyes, and told me, "This is the *Express* Lane. You have too many items. You'll have to go to another register."
I stood there gaping, and she just stared at me.
"The other registers are all closed," was all I managed to blurt out.
She eventually realized the TRUTH of my words (she couldn't be bothered to turn around and look for herself - I had to convince her of the fact!) and rang me up with much sighing and complaining about how irresponsible her coworkers were.
I'm so glad there are no Targets where I live now; I won't be going back for a while.
This is a generalized bad-service for Americans, and is not specific to me. Be forewarned!
This is a suck on part of the FDA. It is their guidelines that make it impossible for men who have sex with men "even once, since 1977", and women who have slept with said men, to donate blood.
This is crappy not only for people who want to donate but can't, but also for every American (and visitor!) who might someday need a blood transfusion - and that is a large segment of the population. The Red Cross is continuously sending me emails about shortages of blood. It might help those shortages, even just a little bit, if more people were eligible to donate.
This rule might have made more sense statistically many decades ago when HIV was largely confined to gay communities, but it makes much less sense now. I know gay men are still more likely to have HIV than the rest of the population, but much less so than before, and after all, they test ALL the blood for HIV before it gets pumped into someone else.
It just really bothers me that a person who has had unprotected sex with a LOT of partners and has never been tested for HIV can still donate, while a man in a monogamous gay relationship who has tested negative can't.
But perhaps there's a side of the story that I'm not aware of. Anyone have more information about this?