There are now three untrustworthy parties who have personal information about me on file. The US government, the Canadian government, and U-Haul. The first two I don't mind because they at least pretend the data is confidential. But I just spent a half hour getting the third degree for trying to rent a storage bin. I had to give my Social Security number and the thumbprint. Mind you those folks were pretty slow because they got both pieces of information and both were fakes. I gave them Richard Nixon's Social Security number and you know the other trick.
Of course things like that don't exactly make my day. That's my daily gripe: the truth, and its many forms. I recognize two types of truth. One type for morons and another type for those of us left over.
[Author's note 2018: later, every piece of information I gave to U-Haul eventually was published on-line. The point I am making here is that long before the issues of identity theft and privacy came into play, I was already suspicious not of the information being collected, but it's potential for abuse. This was in the era when most people still thought nothing would come of what they were doing. I never rented from U-Haul again - especially once I learned they were blacklisting bad customers.
Okay, you might say, let them blacklist the bad ones. That's not my beef. My complaint is that the caliber of people who work for U-Haul are not likely the right kind to be passing judgment over who is good or bad. It was revealed years later that people who did not behave to the liking of U-Haul had trouble renting cars and hotel rooms. And that was NOT part of the deal.
Some say the blacklist was only a rumor. Maybe so, but there's nothing speculative about finding the information I gave them to rent a unit now published on-line. If they are shifty enough to do that, then as far as I'm concerned the rumor is real.]
[Author's note 2018: the following is not clear. The point I am making is to my family, the first response is the truth as they saw it. The second response is also the truth. The difference is the level of interference.]
Consider this scenario which is based on a true incident in my past. The phone rings and a stranger asks for me.
Truth #1: "He’s here, but he doesn't have that $20 he owes you, so he's hiding behind the woodpile. But I'll make sure I tell him you called, so he gets your message. People should pay their bills."
Truth #2: "Nothing. That's what you get from me, nothing. I'll have nothing to do with it because it's none of my business. What people owe you and whether they pay is also none of my business. But I'll tell you what is my business. This phone is not here for you to collect your debts, please don’t call again. Goodbye."
Now I know that's oversimplifying it but the point I'm making is that both versions are the gospel truth. The one which you pick is a telling comment on your character. I know people are supposed to keep promises, but unless I'm a direct party, whether they do or do not is absolutely none of my concern. Same goes for you.
I did ask the flunky at U-Haul (can you imagine spending your life behind the counter wearing a name tag?) what he needed with all this information. His reply was that it had something to do with answering any questions the police might ask. I said to him, "Don't you think if the police want information about me, they should be asking me, and not you?"
Apparently he never thought of it that way. Which puts him squarely in the moron category? The police and U-Haul, what a combination. We can't have people renting storage bins and motel rooms without creating a police record.
[Author's note: I make a very clear distinction that I mean promises between other people, and not contracts between other people. I will not get involved in promises between other people unless I was directly involved in the making of that promise. The difference between a promise and a contract is that the law will USUALLY not enforce a promise.]
Return Home
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
