One Woman Gets Revenge on Unrelenting Telemarketers
![Desk Phones <p>35% said these are disappearing</p>](https://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/sites/default/assets/styles/article_hero/public/slideshows/09262012_office_deskphone_slideshow.jpg?itok=uJe4qAUp)
We all hate telemarketers, just as much as we hate cable companies. Put them together and it’s a lethal combination. One woman got her revenge from both yesterday when a judge ordered Time Warner Cable to pay her $229,500 after the company harassed her with 153 computer-controlled “robocalls.”
Even after Texas resident Araceli King requested and then demanded that the company stop contacting her, she received 74 more calls from Time Warner in less than a year. The company was actually leaving messages for Luiz Perez, an individual who once had her same phone number. But even after she explained her identity to a company representative the calls kept coming and King filed the lawsuit. The calls began in the summer of 2013 and King filed her lawsuit in March 2014.
Related: 18 Companies Americans Hate Dealing with Most
U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled that Time Warner Cable violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, which stipulates that consumers can sue for $500 for every unwanted call received. The judge tripled the penalty to $1,500 in this case because of the enormous number of calls.
Time Warner Cable countered that since the company believed it was calling Perez, who had consented to the calls, it was not responsible to King under the Act.
According to a telemarketer, before the National Do Not Call Registry came into effect in 2004 as an amendment to the Act, more than 137 annual calls were directed – on average -- at a single individual.
And as we all know, they usually came at dinner time or early on a Saturday morning when all you wanted to do was sleep.
Chart of the Day: Boosting Corporate Tax Revenues
![](https://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/sites/default/assets/styles/article_hero/public/media/062117_cash_money.jpg?itok=8mt1I88f)
The leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination have all proposed increasing taxes on corporations, including raising income tax rates to levels ranging from 25% to 35%, up from the current 21% imposed by the Republican tax cuts in 2017. With Bernie Sanders leading the way at $3.9 trillion, here’s how much revenue the higher proposed corporate taxes, along with additional proposed surtaxes and reduced tax breaks, would generate over a decade, according to calculations by the right-leaning Tax Foundation, highlighted Wednesday by Bloomberg News.
Chart of the Day: Discretionary Spending Droops
![](https://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/sites/default/assets/styles/article_hero/public/chart-non-defense-discretionary-CBPP-02072020-580.png?itok=U1L_I8i9)
The federal government’s total non-defense discretionary spending – which covers everything from education and national parks to veterans’ medical care and low-income housing assistance – equals 3.2% of GDP in 2020, near historic lows going back to 1962, according to an analysis this week from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Chart of the Week: Trump Adds $4.7 Trillion in Debt
![](https://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/sites/default/assets/styles/article_hero/public/chart-Trump-debt-CRFB-0110202.png?itok=GsgN9F8k)
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated this week that President Trump has now signed legislation that will add a total of $4.7 trillion to the national debt between 2017 and 2029. Tax cuts and spending increases account for similar portions of the projected increase, though if the individual tax cuts in the 2017 Republican overhaul are extended beyond their current expiration date at the end of 2025, they would add another $1 trillion in debt through 2029.
Chart of the Day: The Long Decline in Interest Rates
![Wall Street slips, Dow posts biggest weekly loss of 2013 Wall Street slips, Dow posts biggest weekly loss of 2013](https://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/sites/default/assets/styles/article_hero/public/reuters/wpid-2013-08-17T013926Z_2_CBRE97F181J00_RTROPTP_2_US-MARKETS-STOCKS.jpg?itok=kHqoljCX)
Are interest rates destined to move higher, increasing the cost of private and public debt? While many experts believe that higher rates are all but inevitable, historian Paul Schmelzing argues that today’s low-interest environment is consistent with a long-term trend stretching back 600 years.
The chart “shows a clear historical downtrend, with rates falling about 1% every 60 years to near zero today,” says Bloomberg’s Aaron Brown. “Rates do tend to revert to a mean, but that mean seems to be declining.”
Chart of the Day: Drug Price Plans Compared
![](https://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/sites/default/assets/styles/article_hero/public/10-most-prescribed-drugs-in-america.jpg?itok=gKGGsEQR)
Lawmakers are considering three separate bills that are intended to reduce the cost of prescription drugs. Here’s an overview of the proposals, from a series of charts produced by the Kaiser Family Foundation this week. An interesting detail highlighted in another chart: 88% of voters – including 92% of Democrats and 85% of Republicans – want to give the government the power to negotiate prices with drug companies.