Forums > Social Discussion > Protecting citizens from themselves.
Login/Join to ParticipateNYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
It was only a little news article that got me thinking about it this morning. Apparently, they raised the 'minimum payments on credit cards'. The rational was to make it more difficult for people to rack up huge credit debts and have them loom for years.
But it got me thinking:
What responsibility does a government have for protecting its citizens from themselves?
This is often a fundamental question which oversees many smaller arguements.
Cigarettes, seat belt laws, drugs, assisted suicide, unheathy food, disease prevention, education... the list goes on.
Granted MOST of these things have SOME implications on others (such as drunk driving, second hand smoke, loss of parents... or even my tax dollars paying for the ambulance to drive the guy who didn't wear a seatbelt to the hospital..)
I find a HUGE difference in philosophy between the UK and the US on this one on many different issues (drugs, guns, even spending tax dollars to advertize healty living...)
"Infringe upon civil rights to protect the public", or stick a warning label on it and "let the buyer beware"?
It was only a little news article that got me thinking about it this morning. Apparently, they raised the 'minimum payments on credit cards'. The rational was to make it more difficult for people to rack up huge credit debts and have them loom for years.
But it got me thinking:
What responsibility does a government have for protecting its citizens from themselves?
This is often a fundamental question which oversees many smaller arguements.
Cigarettes, seat belt laws, drugs, assisted suicide, unheathy food, disease prevention, education... the list goes on.
Granted MOST of these things have SOME implications on others (such as drunk driving, second hand smoke, loss of parents... or even my tax dollars paying for the ambulance to drive the guy who didn't wear a seatbelt to the hospital..)
I find a HUGE difference in philosophy between the UK and the US on this one on many different issues (drugs, guns, even spending tax dollars to advertize healty living...)
"Infringe upon civil rights to protect the public", or stick a warning label on it and "let the buyer beware"?
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
this is one restriction i agree with.
credit card companies are like legalised loan sharks and they deserve to have their strings tightened imo.
they are happy to ask for a stupidly small repayment each month and all the while, let you rack up thousands in debt.
when you get in trouble, if you're lucky you might get referred to a loan consolidation company before you get yourself into too much trouble.
of course you could say "just don't spend what you don't have" but its not that simple most of the time.
also, many assume that if their application for a loan/credit card is accepted then they must meet the requirements to safely borrow that money which is often a long way from the truth.
in the uk, we're going through a similar thing with storecards at the moment since they have apr's of around 30% in a lot of cases.
as for the wider debate, i'll not comment because it is a massive topic.
much of it comes down to the moral majority within the society and what people consider to be 'right' and 'wrong' in the grand scheme of things.
but i just read the illuminatus trilogy so i have some weird ideas about money systems, anarchy, and what an individual's liberties really are right now...
cole. x
this is one restriction i agree with.
credit card companies are like legalised loan sharks and they deserve to have their strings tightened imo.
they are happy to ask for a stupidly small repayment each month and all the while, let you rack up thousands in debt.
when you get in trouble, if you're lucky you might get referred to a loan consolidation company before you get yourself into too much trouble.
of course you could say "just don't spend what you don't have" but its not that simple most of the time.
also, many assume that if their application for a loan/credit card is accepted then they must meet the requirements to safely borrow that money which is often a long way from the truth.
in the uk, we're going through a similar thing with storecards at the moment since they have apr's of around 30% in a lot of cases.
as for the wider debate, i'll not comment because it is a massive topic.
much of it comes down to the moral majority within the society and what people consider to be 'right' and 'wrong' in the grand scheme of things.
but i just read the illuminatus trilogy so i have some weird ideas about money systems, anarchy, and what an individual's liberties really are right now...
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
GOLD Member
just lost .... evil init
2,474 posts
Location: Adelaide, Australia
just lost .... evil init
2,474 posts
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posted:
whatever happened to personal responsibility ?? when i lived in london my house mates could just speak english worked very low paying jobs yet they where able to pay rent/put food on the table/keep the electricity running and where still able to get wrecked every weekend. i currently get a little bit more than the dole from my scholarship and im able to live in one of the nicest suburbs in adelaide, eat well and travel oz while still managing to save.
"just don't spend what you don't have"
actually cole i think it is that simple, one thing ive noticed is that regardless of how much money ppl earn they never seem to have enough because once they reach that next income bracket they alter their lifestyle and are spending more living larger such that they are spending beyond their means and requiring more money.
surely if u trust the banks assessment of your borrowing ability and at the end of the first month you have a giant dept with huge interest thats a cue to curb your spending? if you cant manage your money dont get a credit card end of story, you cant spend it if you cant borrow it.
whatever happened to personal responsibility ?? when i lived in london my house mates could just speak english worked very low paying jobs yet they where able to pay rent/put food on the table/keep the electricity running and where still able to get wrecked every weekend. i currently get a little bit more than the dole from my scholarship and im able to live in one of the nicest suburbs in adelaide, eat well and travel oz while still managing to save.
"just don't spend what you don't have"
actually cole i think it is that simple, one thing ive noticed is that regardless of how much money ppl earn they never seem to have enough because once they reach that next income bracket they alter their lifestyle and are spending more living larger such that they are spending beyond their means and requiring more money.
surely if u trust the banks assessment of your borrowing ability and at the end of the first month you have a giant dept with huge interest thats a cue to curb your spending? if you cant manage your money dont get a credit card end of story, you cant spend it if you cant borrow it.
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourself, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous and talented? Who are you NOT to be?
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
I get the message after all but I don't understand why it's spelled like this...
However it's a governments duty to protect citicens from themselves and history has it proven that people are incapable of handling a credit card with a limit higher than they can work up for.
I think it's wrong to issue credit cards with high limits just because someone has a steady job and income... without this you have to have a min. deposit of $60.000 in the bank to get one.
what does that tell you?
As for the rest of the discussion IMO the education has to be modified to actually educate self responsibility! Our schooling system is not designed to this result! And I suspect the US is the same...
Maxime: obey what your teachers tell you and the one who's repeating the input best (like a machine) is having the best grades... that's so stupid... but serves the purpose...
Later one is prone to blindly follow the commercials and go on a shopping frenzy...
Besides I wonder: This seems to be a good new years resolution
Why did they wait till AFTER christmas???
Written by: NYC
Apparently, they raised the 'minimum payments on credit cards'. The rational was to make it more difficult for people to rack up huge credit debts and have them loom for years.
I get the message after all but I don't understand why it's spelled like this...
However it's a governments duty to protect citicens from themselves and history has it proven that people are incapable of handling a credit card with a limit higher than they can work up for.
I think it's wrong to issue credit cards with high limits just because someone has a steady job and income... without this you have to have a min. deposit of $60.000 in the bank to get one.
what does that tell you?As for the rest of the discussion IMO the education has to be modified to actually educate self responsibility! Our schooling system is not designed to this result! And I suspect the US is the same...
Maxime: obey what your teachers tell you and the one who's repeating the input best (like a machine) is having the best grades... that's so stupid... but serves the purpose...
Later one is prone to blindly follow the commercials and go on a shopping frenzy...
Besides I wonder: This seems to be a good new years resolution
Why did they wait till AFTER christmas??? the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
i agree with most of that ben but it seems most of the first world are not able to live within their means and are in debt in one way or another.
i think that if you are going to have regulated financial services that they should at the very least protect consumers from spiralling debts.
maybe that's just my idealist side shining through
it is easy to get into trouble with these lenders without spending a penny on the cards after some initial use: once a cardholder gets behind in payments, they then fall deeper into debt each month because of mounting interest and penalty fees.
granted, if you play your cards right (npi ), one can get on top of this type of debt by using consilidation loans or even simply by selecting cards carefully and using a 0% on purchase card or, if you have existing credit card debt, by regularly transferring your debt to another lender's 0% balance transfers card.
i believe the regulations say that the minimum payment should cover fees, interest and a nominal amount off of the loan.
i am very much on the 'stick a warning on it and let people make their own choices' side of the road and that kind of approach is still very much needed when it comes to credit cards in the usa i think.
but i think this is also a sensible regulation that prevents someone falling deeper into debt when they are not actually using further loan facilities.
cole. x
i agree with most of that ben but it seems most of the first world are not able to live within their means and are in debt in one way or another.
i think that if you are going to have regulated financial services that they should at the very least protect consumers from spiralling debts.
maybe that's just my idealist side shining through
it is easy to get into trouble with these lenders without spending a penny on the cards after some initial use: once a cardholder gets behind in payments, they then fall deeper into debt each month because of mounting interest and penalty fees.
granted, if you play your cards right (npi
), one can get on top of this type of debt by using consilidation loans or even simply by selecting cards carefully and using a 0% on purchase card or, if you have existing credit card debt, by regularly transferring your debt to another lender's 0% balance transfers card.i believe the regulations say that the minimum payment should cover fees, interest and a nominal amount off of the loan.
i am very much on the 'stick a warning on it and let people make their own choices' side of the road and that kind of approach is still very much needed when it comes to credit cards in the usa i think.
but i think this is also a sensible regulation that prevents someone falling deeper into debt when they are not actually using further loan facilities.
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
Well, for what it's worth, i've hit the trap. I paid off about 6 months of rent on my credit card, and now i'm almost covering the repayments. I'm strongly conidering leaving it at home from now on, and using it just for internet purchases (like i was supposed to in the first place).
I don't think higher compulsory repayments would help me much, but, i guess, it'd mean it would get paid off quicker. Would knowing i had higher repayments waiting for me have changed my mind? I don't think so.
If i really made a dedicated effort to clear it off, i'm sure i could get it done fairly quickly, but there'd be a large number of sacrifices involved there, and some of those i'm just not prepared to make.
Perhaps we need to shift away from the comforts rich way we're living?
Well, for what it's worth, i've hit the trap. I paid off about 6 months of rent on my credit card, and now i'm almost covering the repayments. I'm strongly conidering leaving it at home from now on, and using it just for internet purchases (like i was supposed to in the first place).
I don't think higher compulsory repayments would help me much, but, i guess, it'd mean it would get paid off quicker. Would knowing i had higher repayments waiting for me have changed my mind? I don't think so.
If i really made a dedicated effort to clear it off, i'm sure i could get it done fairly quickly, but there'd be a large number of sacrifices involved there, and some of those i'm just not prepared to make.
Perhaps we need to shift away from the comforts rich way we're living?
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
I'm totally confused. Is this a spelling question?
I absolutely refuse to jump to any conclusions until I understand what you mean.
Written by: FireTomWritten by: NYC
Apparently, they raised the 'minimum payments on credit cards'. The rational was to make it more difficult for people to rack up huge credit debts and have them loom for years.
I get the message after all but I don't understand why it's spelled like this...
I'm totally confused. Is this a spelling question?
I absolutely refuse to jump to any conclusions until I understand what you mean.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
Actually, I think this is one of the keys to happiness. I've never really stopped living the college life style. I remember growing up and having my mom tell me that if I wasn't a doctor I wouldn't make enough money to eat. When I did the math in college about how much I was actually spending on food and rent I realized that I was well below the poverty level and having a pretty damn good time anyway.
I always used to say that I'm happy with a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. But I stopped eating peanut butter since my cholesterol was high...
So now I'm happy with just jelly.
I live in a rich suburb and feel horrible for all of my students who's happiness is based on such superficial comforts that they may not be able to afford in the future.
Off topicish... but relevant. I should probably have a conversation with my little brother about credit card debt. He seems to be ripe for overspending.
Written by: ben-ja-men
"just don't spend what you don't have"
actually cole i think it is that simple, one thing ive noticed is that regardless of how much money ppl earn they never seem to have enough because once they reach that next income bracket they alter their lifestyle and are spending more living larger such that they are spending beyond their means and requiring more money.
Actually, I think this is one of the keys to happiness. I've never really stopped living the college life style. I remember growing up and having my mom tell me that if I wasn't a doctor I wouldn't make enough money to eat. When I did the math in college about how much I was actually spending on food and rent I realized that I was well below the poverty level and having a pretty damn good time anyway.
I always used to say that I'm happy with a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. But I stopped eating peanut butter since my cholesterol was high...
So now I'm happy with just jelly.
I live in a rich suburb and feel horrible for all of my students who's happiness is based on such superficial comforts that they may not be able to afford in the future.
Off topicish... but relevant. I should probably have a conversation with my little brother about credit card debt. He seems to be ripe for overspending.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
I'll take the risk and jump to the conclusion that Tom was alluding to the increased hardships that usually accompany an increase in monthly payments.
Which is really what credit card companies are all about, monthly payments. After you've filled out your credit card application, and read all the fine print, you'll come away with the understanding that the companies are only loaning you the money for a month and at the end of that month, they expect you to meet your obligation.
The problem is, a lot of people don't seem to care, or worse, treat the card as income.
One thing the companies won't tell you though, is just how much they love it when you get yourself into a debt that's practically unserviceable and default to the minimium monthly payment plan just to keep them from calling you. They make LOTS of money on interest that way, ( I'd sure like an investment return that approximates credit card interest )
@ Coleman, Have you read the fine print on those 0% cards? Usually it's only 0% for the first six months, maybe a balance transfer fee, and maybe a yearly charge just to have the card too.
@ MiG The thought of higher monthly payments might not have curbed your impulse buying but higher payments WILL force you to pay down the debt quicker and as a result, spend less overall in interest.
If you actually do the math, take your outstanding debt, and just calculate how long it will take to settle it making the minimum monthly payments, and then figure how much interest you'll have paid over that period,,,The answers may shock you.
Credits are totally a buyer beware product.
I'll take the risk and jump to the conclusion that Tom was alluding to the increased hardships that usually accompany an increase in monthly payments.
Which is really what credit card companies are all about, monthly payments. After you've filled out your credit card application, and read all the fine print, you'll come away with the understanding that the companies are only loaning you the money for a month and at the end of that month, they expect you to meet your obligation.
The problem is, a lot of people don't seem to care, or worse, treat the card as income.
One thing the companies won't tell you though, is just how much they love it when you get yourself into a debt that's practically unserviceable and default to the minimium monthly payment plan just to keep them from calling you. They make LOTS of money on interest that way, ( I'd sure like an investment return that approximates credit card interest )
@ Coleman, Have you read the fine print on those 0% cards? Usually it's only 0% for the first six months, maybe a balance transfer fee, and maybe a yearly charge just to have the card too.
@ MiG The thought of higher monthly payments might not have curbed your impulse buying but higher payments WILL force you to pay down the debt quicker and as a result, spend less overall in interest.
If you actually do the math, take your outstanding debt, and just calculate how long it will take to settle it making the minimum monthly payments, and then figure how much interest you'll have paid over that period,,,The answers may shock you.
Credits are totally a buyer beware product.
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
I have just sorted crippling debt.. long story but was unable to get out for ages even though I had on paper 5 x my debt in equity in my property.
My debt wasn't overly high but the repayments were bad. I had 2 credit cards (1 gone now) but when I was forced to change jobs my incoming funds matched my outgoing.... then the interest started to push outgoings higher.
I got into debt buying a house and furnishing it. now if I sell my house all my debts will be cleared along with an extra £30,000 in my pocket. I took a calculated debt risk (had most of my debts before i had to change jobs)
I have just sorted crippling debt.. long story but was unable to get out for ages even though I had on paper 5 x my debt in equity in my property.
My debt wasn't overly high but the repayments were bad. I had 2 credit cards (1 gone now) but when I was forced to change jobs my incoming funds matched my outgoing.... then the interest started to push outgoings higher.
I got into debt buying a house and furnishing it. now if I sell my house all my debts will be cleared along with an extra £30,000 in my pocket. I took a calculated debt risk (had most of my debts before i had to change jobs)
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Good question. IMO, much of the cause of these problems lies with the fact that so much of business in western society is geared towards fleecing the likes of those who are susceptible to it.
Store cards for example, to the likes of you and me, they're no doubt a blatent rip-off, and it's totally obvious.
For me it's because I'm very tuned in to watching out for these kinds of attempts at exploitation.
Yet, millions of others fall right into it- their upbringing (I'm talking here about the totality of their upbringing ie societies message as opposed to just what they learnt from their parents).
Marketing, blagging and bullshit are the bedrock of much of what passes for business in the west, and IMO, laws are necessary, and I'd like to see more legislation, and the closing down of the worst scammers.
In the UK for example, a big one is companies sending out literature informing you that you've won a guaranteed prize, and, unless you know the scam, it's pretty convincing. It's currently legal, but targets the elderly, the naive and the confused.
UK-ers have lost their life-savings with stuff like this, and it's legal.
I think it should be illegal, and the directors prosecuted.
Personal responsibilty is very good, and something I believe in strongly (like NYC, I've found that maintaining a 'student lifestyle' ie living on a low-income, but living well, is a good way to happiness).
I just don't take it to the 'Nietzean-Super-Man' level that you seem to Ben, and I recognise that, in our society, many are not so lucky as me, and lack the kind of insight that stops me falling into the same traps as them.
And, as someone with personal responsibility, it is also my right to decide what kind of society I wish to promote and support.
And, for me, that's a society which doesn't base its economy on raising victims, fleecing them, and then saying it was their fault.
Yes, I have personal responsibility, and part of that is down to my choices and my skill, but, equally, I've been blessed with the luck that was also necessary to achieve that.
----------------
Personal responsibility is a good thing, and I think it should be taught in schools- I think that part of education should be geared towards explaining to children how marketing practices work.
I think that practices which are basically used to persuade, decieve and compel (purchases) should be clearly exposed, so that children are made more aware of the traps set out by these businesses.
A side-effect of this would hopefully be that businesses themselves may see that their current practices are counter-productive, as people start to commit to spending their cash with businesses that focus on good products/services and honesty/integrity, rather than hiding behind the current 'small-print' and deliberately confusing language that shields them from legal action.
We live in a world where, to purchase something so simple, as a mobile phone rental deal, one has to do what amounts to degree-level research to avoid being scammed It's no surprise that many fall victim to credit card/store-card misuse.
Let's get the company directors get in on the 'personal-responsibility' thing as well ie if they use dodgy practices, they get sacked or go to jail
Written by: ben-ja-men
whatever happened to personal responsibility ?? when i lived in london my house mates could just speak english worked very low paying jobs yet they where able to pay rent/put food on the table/keep the electricity running and where still able to get wrecked every weekend. i currently get a little bit more than the dole from my scholarship and im able to live in one of the nicest suburbs in adelaide, eat well and travel oz while still managing to save.
Good question. IMO, much of the cause of these problems lies with the fact that so much of business in western society is geared towards fleecing the likes of those who are susceptible to it.
Store cards for example, to the likes of you and me, they're no doubt a blatent rip-off, and it's totally obvious.
For me it's because I'm very tuned in to watching out for these kinds of attempts at exploitation.
Yet, millions of others fall right into it- their upbringing (I'm talking here about the totality of their upbringing ie societies message as opposed to just what they learnt from their parents).
Marketing, blagging and bullshit are the bedrock of much of what passes for business in the west, and IMO, laws are necessary, and I'd like to see more legislation, and the closing down of the worst scammers.
In the UK for example, a big one is companies sending out literature informing you that you've won a guaranteed prize, and, unless you know the scam, it's pretty convincing. It's currently legal, but targets the elderly, the naive and the confused.
UK-ers have lost their life-savings with stuff like this, and it's legal.
I think it should be illegal, and the directors prosecuted.
Personal responsibilty is very good, and something I believe in strongly (like NYC, I've found that maintaining a 'student lifestyle' ie living on a low-income, but living well, is a good way to happiness).
I just don't take it to the 'Nietzean-Super-Man' level that you seem to Ben, and I recognise that, in our society, many are not so lucky as me, and lack the kind of insight that stops me falling into the same traps as them.
And, as someone with personal responsibility, it is also my right to decide what kind of society I wish to promote and support.
And, for me, that's a society which doesn't base its economy on raising victims, fleecing them, and then saying it was their fault.
Yes, I have personal responsibility, and part of that is down to my choices and my skill, but, equally, I've been blessed with the luck that was also necessary to achieve that.
----------------
Personal responsibility is a good thing, and I think it should be taught in schools- I think that part of education should be geared towards explaining to children how marketing practices work.
I think that practices which are basically used to persuade, decieve and compel (purchases) should be clearly exposed, so that children are made more aware of the traps set out by these businesses.
A side-effect of this would hopefully be that businesses themselves may see that their current practices are counter-productive, as people start to commit to spending their cash with businesses that focus on good products/services and honesty/integrity, rather than hiding behind the current 'small-print' and deliberately confusing language that shields them from legal action.
We live in a world where, to purchase something so simple, as a mobile phone rental deal, one has to do what amounts to degree-level research to avoid being scammed
It's no surprise that many fall victim to credit card/store-card misuse.Let's get the company directors get in on the 'personal-responsibility' thing as well ie if they use dodgy practices, they get sacked or go to jail
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
yep, very true.
the transfer fee is usually around £50 i think and there are a few offering 9 month interest-free periods now.
i found that this site is very handy for those interested in the balance transfer route out of debt
i think your point is that the lenders don't 'lose' here either and that is more than true - all it means is that the borrower doesn't lose quite as much money as they stand to by following a minimum repayment plan.
cole. x
Written by: stout
@ Coleman, Have you read the fine print on those 0% cards? Usually it's only 0% for the first six months, maybe a balance transfer fee, and maybe a yearly charge just to have the card too.
yep, very true.
the transfer fee is usually around £50 i think and there are a few offering 9 month interest-free periods now.
i found that this site is very handy for those interested in the balance transfer route out of debt
i think your point is that the lenders don't 'lose' here either and that is more than true - all it means is that the borrower doesn't lose quite as much money as they stand to by following a minimum repayment plan.
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
GOLD Member
just lost .... evil init
2,474 posts
Location: Adelaide, Australia
just lost .... evil init
2,474 posts
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posted:
i think its simply a question of values, if you "have to have it now" then your willing to pay the price, if your patient you can usually get a better deal, but its a question of if you can be bothered. if you dont value the money you have then you are willing to easily part with it for convience. i really doubt that anyone isnt aware of the huge interest rates that go with credit card payments, the trade off for the instant now makes it worthwhile to them.
i dont see a problem with someone providing a convinient service at an elevated price, its hardly like someone is placing a gun to their head and saying buy that jacket now rather than waiting three weeks so you have the money. do you object to plastic sealed pre made salads that are 4 times the price of the bits that go into it? theres an option of paying a premium for convenience.
'Nietzean-Super-Man' - google has failed me please elaborate
prepaid all the way no contract no fuss (sadly some degrees require an equal amount of effort but thats another topic)
Written by: onewheeldave
Store cards for example, to the likes of you and me, they're no doubt a blatent rip-off, and it's totally obvious.
For me it's because I'm very tuned in to watching out for these kinds of attempts at exploitation.
i think its simply a question of values, if you "have to have it now" then your willing to pay the price, if your patient you can usually get a better deal, but its a question of if you can be bothered. if you dont value the money you have then you are willing to easily part with it for convience. i really doubt that anyone isnt aware of the huge interest rates that go with credit card payments, the trade off for the instant now makes it worthwhile to them.
i dont see a problem with someone providing a convinient service at an elevated price, its hardly like someone is placing a gun to their head and saying buy that jacket now rather than waiting three weeks so you have the money. do you object to plastic sealed pre made salads that are 4 times the price of the bits that go into it? theres an option of paying a premium for convenience.
'Nietzean-Super-Man' - google has failed me please elaborate
Written by: onewheeldave
We live in a world where, to purchase something so simple, as a mobile phone rental deal, one has to do what amounts to degree-level research to avoid being scammed
prepaid all the way no contract no fuss
(sadly some degrees require an equal amount of effort but thats another topic) Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourself, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous and talented? Who are you NOT to be?
GOLD Member
master of disaster
3,354 posts
Location: New York, USA
master of disaster
3,354 posts
Location: New York, USA
Posted:
the spelling is Nietzsche's superman
along the lines of 'have to have it now' what also strikes me is the attitude that because something is on sale, it must be a good deal.
I was recently in a department store waiting to meet up with someone, and they had a shirt 40% off. Never mind that the shirt cost $195 to start, someone not seeing that would think, my god, 40% off, what a steal. As an aside, the fact that the store could CHARGE that much for the designer label in and of itself is very telling.
Or a buy one, get one half off. Or buy two, get a third free. If you only need one, then why get a second, third?
the spelling is Nietzsche's superman
along the lines of 'have to have it now' what also strikes me is the attitude that because something is on sale, it must be a good deal.
I was recently in a department store waiting to meet up with someone, and they had a shirt 40% off. Never mind that the shirt cost $195 to start, someone not seeing that would think, my god, 40% off, what a steal. As an aside, the fact that the store could CHARGE that much for the designer label in and of itself is very telling.
Or a buy one, get one half off. Or buy two, get a third free. If you only need one, then why get a second, third?
kyrian: I've felt your finger connect with me many times
lou kitten: sneaky little meatball..
ezz: please corrupt me more
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
My basic attitude to advertising is:
1: If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
2: Ignore the picture/sound completely. Read the little white writing that runs across the screen/on the bottom of the picture.
Using only these 2 methods, you'll see that you can safely ignore everything on TV and in Magazines.
Credit cards are stupid inventions. Stupid.
The only time I've ever bought an item of clothing (originally) costing over £100 was a pair of Ecco shoes. Originally £150, marked down to £60. £60 is a lot, but a reasonable amount to spend on shoes that will last years.
I don't know why people buy clothes costing that much money. I mean, why? Get "Worn" jeans for £140. Or you could just get a pair from Oxfam for £5 that look identical.
My basic attitude to advertising is:
1: If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
2: Ignore the picture/sound completely. Read the little white writing that runs across the screen/on the bottom of the picture.
Using only these 2 methods, you'll see that you can safely ignore everything on TV and in Magazines.
Credit cards are stupid inventions. Stupid.
The only time I've ever bought an item of clothing (originally) costing over £100 was a pair of Ecco shoes. Originally £150, marked down to £60. £60 is a lot, but a reasonable amount to spend on shoes that will last years.
I don't know why people buy clothes costing that much money. I mean, why? Get "Worn" jeans for £140. Or you could just get a pair from Oxfam for £5 that look identical.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Okay - you have to excuse me sometimes... english is my second language and I the appropriate translation of the context sprang into my mind just shortly ago...
...it actually means that the minimum payment that you have to receive from your job has to be higher in order to be legible for a creditcard... right?
Especially in this - but also in a few other cases I think the headline of the thread is not correct... as the government doesn't protect their citizens from themselves, but from getting seriously scammed from scruthless moneymakers...
In general we have been raised so to believe that the world is basically good
and that we can trust in this shiny side of mankind - which (especially in the "newamericancentury" or "age of aquarius") actually is not the case... 
Basically it's trickery on every corner we pass, strings attached to every catchy offer. NOTHING is really "free" - not even death! (it's on the cost of life ) and SALEs are all year round... just try those "free" offers on the internet...
Life becomes a great scam and living becomes VERY EXPENSIVE!!! Even if you'd have 2 million bucks on your account, you'll not be able to survive from the interest. The bank will cut their share (and yours) and stock markets will plummer, so in the end you wake up with nothing at hand - the bank always wins... "rien ne va plus"... This all is part of the "matrix"... 
In Germany there is actually a "new" concept. "We" found it unfair that as a company you can declare bankrupcy and get out of your debt and back into business at some point (after heavy government-funding)... whereas an individual cannot make the same step.
So "we" invented the individual bankrupcy plan (no idea if I put this in correct terms)...
Meaning that at some point you find yourself helplessly in the shitters with no reasonable timeline to get out of there AND if you have not made this up on purpose - you'll be legible to enter the plan, declare bankrupcy and find a way out...
Lawyers and/or organisations will file your declaration and there will be negotiations with your creditors.
You'll have a timeline of 7 years in which you have to lead an "honourable" life (meaning "to work and pay off" what you can)... I guess it's all above 1.500 euros (net) that you have to pay (depending on your legal status and no. of children)...
After these 7 years anything that is left over from your debt is waived...
So you could get back on track vs. being in the dumps for the rest of your life...
hum?
How's that sound? Is there anything in the "great country of the free" (i.e. best democracy on earth), or anywhere else on the planet?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay - you have to excuse me sometimes... english is my second language and I the appropriate translation of the context sprang into my mind just shortly ago...
...it actually means that the minimum payment that you have to receive from your job has to be higher in order to be legible for a creditcard... right?
Especially in this - but also in a few other cases I think the headline of the thread is not correct... as the government doesn't protect their citizens from themselves, but from getting seriously scammed from scruthless moneymakers...
In general we have been raised so to believe that the world is basically good
and that we can trust in this shiny side of mankind - which (especially in the "newamericancentury" or "age of aquarius") actually is not the case... Basically it's trickery on every corner we pass, strings attached to every catchy offer. NOTHING is really "free" - not even death! (it's on the cost of life
) and SALEs are all year round... just try those "free" offers on the internet... Life becomes a great scam and living becomes VERY EXPENSIVE!!! Even if you'd have 2 million bucks on your account, you'll not be able to survive from the interest. The bank will cut their share (and yours) and stock markets will plummer, so in the end you wake up with nothing at hand - the bank always wins... "rien ne va plus"... This all is part of the "matrix"...
In Germany there is actually a "new" concept. "We" found it unfair that as a company you can declare bankrupcy and get out of your debt and back into business at some point (after heavy government-funding)... whereas an individual cannot make the same step.
So "we" invented the individual bankrupcy plan (no idea if I put this in correct terms)...
Meaning that at some point you find yourself helplessly in the shitters with no reasonable timeline to get out of there AND if you have not made this up on purpose - you'll be legible to enter the plan, declare bankrupcy and find a way out...
Lawyers and/or organisations will file your declaration and there will be negotiations with your creditors.
You'll have a timeline of 7 years in which you have to lead an "honourable" life (meaning "to work and pay off" what you can)... I guess it's all above 1.500 euros (net) that you have to pay (depending on your legal status and no. of children)...
After these 7 years anything that is left over from your debt is waived...
So you could get back on track vs. being in the dumps for the rest of your life...
hum?How's that sound? Is there anything in the "great country of the free" (i.e. best democracy on earth), or anywhere else on the planet?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
If I understand what you're saying then you don't understand what I'm saying.
My original statement is that...
Previously, if you ran up $10000 credit card debt the company would let you pay just about the 20% interest every month and you'd be literally paying it back FOREVER.
The law has since changed to mandate that you must pay back more of the principle loan amount. So you'd pay 20% of the interest PLUS a decent chunk of the orignal $10000. This way there is a possiblity of you actually getting OUT of debt.
It sounds confusing and a bit counter intuitive but it makes sense for what the intent of the law is. This way, it'd be difficult to rack up $10000 debt, have a low monthly payment and then rack up MORE debt because you're not actually paying anything back.
Written by: FireTom
Okay - you have to excuse me sometimes... english is my second language and I the appropriate translation of the context sprang into my mind just shortly ago...
...it actually means that the minimum payment that you have to receive from your job has to be higher in order to be legible for a creditcard... right?
If I understand what you're saying then you don't understand what I'm saying.
My original statement is that...
Previously, if you ran up $10000 credit card debt the company would let you pay just about the 20% interest every month and you'd be literally paying it back FOREVER.
The law has since changed to mandate that you must pay back more of the principle loan amount. So you'd pay 20% of the interest PLUS a decent chunk of the orignal $10000. This way there is a possiblity of you actually getting OUT of debt.
It sounds confusing and a bit counter intuitive but it makes sense for what the intent of the law is. This way, it'd be difficult to rack up $10000 debt, have a low monthly payment and then rack up MORE debt because you're not actually paying anything back.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
SILVER Member
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
UnNatural Scientist - Currently working on a Breville-legged monkey
757 posts
Location: Bath Uni or Shrewsbury, UK
Posted:
Never trust a man rich in flax
Written by: coleman
but i just read the illuminatus trilogy so i have some weird ideas about money systems, anarchy, and what an individual's liberties really are right now...
Never trust a man rich in flax
Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can beat the world into submission.
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
--- hmm --- yes you're right --- didn't get it
NOW I'm not sure whether I got it this time - as to me it's kind of weird that you actually have to make a law for this...
It's called the "debt-trap" but the way you describe (the old one) seems totally out of reason... you know sometimes it's really hard for me to understand what's going on in the US legal system...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Being a saint doesn't exclude a nice garment and a beautiful house...
--- hmm --- yes you're right --- didn't get it
NOW I'm not sure whether I got it this time - as to me it's kind of weird that you actually have to make a law for this...
It's called the "debt-trap" but the way you describe (the old one) seems totally out of reason... you know sometimes it's really hard for me to understand what's going on in the US legal system...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Being a saint doesn't exclude a nice garment and a beautiful house...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
My view is this: for an INDIVIDUAL action the test must be whether the action is likely to cause DIRECT harm to a nameable third party.
So: Impaired driving can be said to cause direct harm/death to the potential victim of an accident as well as destroy/damage his property (his vehicle and clothing). However, sitting in your home and smoking a joint puts nobody in danger other than yourself.
Now, you might be able to make vague arguements about "cost to society" but there is no nameable third party or nameable injury caused by NYC's habit of chain-smoking spliffs in his own apartment. (KIDDING! NYC DOESN'T DO DRUGS! 
). The same is true of wearing a seatbelt.
It does get complex when it comes to, say, antibiotics. Self-administering antibiotics without proper supervision by a medical professional is more likely to breed resistant organisms than careful regulated use. But who is the specific third party? What about dumping motor oil down the drain?
Well the solution isn't to criminalize these acts, but to make them civil infractions (like traffic tickets), but perhaps with hefty fines. That way dumping motor oil doesn't give you a criminal record, but there's a strong incentive not to do so. If the government doesn't like something, there are ways to make it go away other than making it criminal. Imagine, for example, if the government suddenly banned the sale of tobacco or tobacco products...but left possession legal.
The other stipulation is protection of children. There do need to be laws regarding the safety of children. If children are given reduced rights and responsibilities by virtue of being unable to make good decisions then it stands to reason that the government should make such decisions for them. Therefore, for children I support mandatory seatbelt laws, bike helmet laws, etc.
My view is this: for an INDIVIDUAL action the test must be whether the action is likely to cause DIRECT harm to a nameable third party.
So: Impaired driving can be said to cause direct harm/death to the potential victim of an accident as well as destroy/damage his property (his vehicle and clothing). However, sitting in your home and smoking a joint puts nobody in danger other than yourself.
Now, you might be able to make vague arguements about "cost to society" but there is no nameable third party or nameable injury caused by NYC's habit of chain-smoking spliffs in his own apartment. (KIDDING! NYC DOESN'T DO DRUGS!
). The same is true of wearing a seatbelt.It does get complex when it comes to, say, antibiotics. Self-administering antibiotics without proper supervision by a medical professional is more likely to breed resistant organisms than careful regulated use. But who is the specific third party? What about dumping motor oil down the drain?
Well the solution isn't to criminalize these acts, but to make them civil infractions (like traffic tickets), but perhaps with hefty fines. That way dumping motor oil doesn't give you a criminal record, but there's a strong incentive not to do so. If the government doesn't like something, there are ways to make it go away other than making it criminal. Imagine, for example, if the government suddenly banned the sale of tobacco or tobacco products...but left possession legal.
The other stipulation is protection of children. There do need to be laws regarding the safety of children. If children are given reduced rights and responsibilities by virtue of being unable to make good decisions then it stands to reason that the government should make such decisions for them. Therefore, for children I support mandatory seatbelt laws, bike helmet laws, etc.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
So if it doesn't directly hurt a 3rd party, then it's OK?
No problem with selling cyanide pills at Wallmart as long as they're clearly labeled "For suicide purposes ONLY"?
So if it doesn't directly hurt a 3rd party, then it's OK?
No problem with selling cyanide pills at Wallmart as long as they're clearly labeled "For suicide purposes ONLY"?
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
NYC, I'd be all for selling cyanide pills at Wal-Mart. As long as people knew what would happen if you took them.
I mean, we sell other stuff that can kill you pretty quickly like...oh...rope.
NYC, I'd be all for selling cyanide pills at Wal-Mart. As long as people knew what would happen if you took them.
I mean, we sell other stuff that can kill you pretty quickly like...oh...rope.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Given the current high incidence of drink spiking, would you not be concerned how some may misuse cyanide pills?
What possible point is there in shops selling cyanide?
Given the current high incidence of drink spiking, would you not be concerned how some may misuse cyanide pills?
What possible point is there in shops selling cyanide?
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Now I don't pretend to know the motivations behind a drink spiker, in fact I find the whole thing kinda sad. BUT anybody who spike a drink with cyanide is guilty of premeditated murder and if murder is their goal, then the availability of cyanide pills for suicide purposes isn't going to affect their machinations at all.
@ Doc Lightning, If I recall correctly you didn't support physician assisted suicide over on another thread, and your last post said you support the sale of cyanide in Wal Mart. I'm thinking that if Wal Mart did sell cyanide pills, they'd be a prescription item because not that many people are extracting gold from ore in their back yards. Would you write such a prescription?
Now I don't pretend to know the motivations behind a drink spiker, in fact I find the whole thing kinda sad. BUT anybody who spike a drink with cyanide is guilty of premeditated murder and if murder is their goal, then the availability of cyanide pills for suicide purposes isn't going to affect their machinations at all.
@ Doc Lightning, If I recall correctly you didn't support physician assisted suicide over on another thread, and your last post said you support the sale of cyanide in Wal Mart. I'm thinking that if Wal Mart did sell cyanide pills, they'd be a prescription item because not that many people are extracting gold from ore in their back yards. Would you write such a prescription?
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
You have a point, of course. However, I'd be opposed to criminalizing possession of cyanide.
Written by: onewheeldave
Given the current high incidence of drink spiking, would you not be concerned how some may misuse cyanide pills?
What possible point is there in shops selling cyanide?
You have a point, of course. However, I'd be opposed to criminalizing possession of cyanide.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
The motivation is usually rape.
And you're right, anyone spiking a drink with cyanide is guilty of attempting premeditated murder; however, given that so many are happy to attempt pre-meditated rape, I see no reason to assume that some won't have qualms about murdering someone with cyanide.
------------
Looking at this from a different angle- recently in Sheffield we had a death from someone drinking a highly poisonous weedkiller that he mistook for a drink, as a council worker had contravened guidelines by pouring it into a plastic bottle.
This particular weed killer is fatal if swallowed- the victim went to hospital but there wasn't a thing they could do- several days later he was dead from massive organ failure.
The thing about extreme poison, is that it requires great care- it needs to be stored in containers that are clearly labeled as 'poisonous' and it needs to be kept out of the hands of random, untrained members of the public- not only to prevent them using it for malicious purposes, but because, even with no malicious intent, horrible accidents can happen.
Now I don't know how poisonous cyanide is (perhaps Mike can say?), but, in the case of extreme poisons like the weedkiller above, I do not want it in the hands of the public.
Sheffield council are currently considering whether it should even be in the hands of council employees, given the tragic death, and are considering switching to a weed killer that is less effective at killing weeds, but less poisonous to humans.
Can anyone who supports cyanide pills being sold in shops, explain to me why members of the public have any need whatsoever for cyanide?
(If the reason is suicide, then you should know that consuming cyanide, or indeed any substance currently available in the West, is not a good way to commit suicide).
Written by: stout
Now I don't pretend to know the motivations behind a drink spiker, in fact I find the whole thing kinda sad. BUT anybody who spike a drink with cyanide is guilty of premeditated murder and if murder is their goal, then the availability of cyanide pills for suicide purposes isn't going to affect their machinations at all.
The motivation is usually rape.
And you're right, anyone spiking a drink with cyanide is guilty of attempting premeditated murder; however, given that so many are happy to attempt pre-meditated rape, I see no reason to assume that some won't have qualms about murdering someone with cyanide.
------------
Looking at this from a different angle- recently in Sheffield we had a death from someone drinking a highly poisonous weedkiller that he mistook for a drink, as a council worker had contravened guidelines by pouring it into a plastic bottle.
This particular weed killer is fatal if swallowed- the victim went to hospital but there wasn't a thing they could do- several days later he was dead from massive organ failure.
The thing about extreme poison, is that it requires great care- it needs to be stored in containers that are clearly labeled as 'poisonous' and it needs to be kept out of the hands of random, untrained members of the public- not only to prevent them using it for malicious purposes, but because, even with no malicious intent, horrible accidents can happen.
Now I don't know how poisonous cyanide is (perhaps Mike can say?), but, in the case of extreme poisons like the weedkiller above, I do not want it in the hands of the public.
Sheffield council are currently considering whether it should even be in the hands of council employees, given the tragic death, and are considering switching to a weed killer that is less effective at killing weeds, but less poisonous to humans.
Can anyone who supports cyanide pills being sold in shops, explain to me why members of the public have any need whatsoever for cyanide?
(If the reason is suicide, then you should know that consuming cyanide, or indeed any substance currently available in the West, is not a good way to commit suicide).
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
I fail to understand the difficulty in suicide. Just find a building over 6 storeys tall.
I'd be against the sale of suicide assistants (like cyanide pills) because there would be little opportunity for reflection after a failed attempt. Often after a single attempt people are shocked into realising what they just did and don't repeat. I'm not sure that this gels with my previous statement, but hey...
I fail to understand the difficulty in suicide. Just find a building over 6 storeys tall.
I'd be against the sale of suicide assistants (like cyanide pills) because there would be little opportunity for reflection after a failed attempt. Often after a single attempt people are shocked into realising what they just did and don't repeat. I'm not sure that this gels with my previous statement, but hey...
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I might find it compatible with my morals and ethics to prescribe a potentially lethal medication and inform a patient that if taken in such-and-such a way that it will cause a painless death.
I would not, however, participate in the actual act.
Written by: stout
@ Doc Lightning, If I recall correctly you didn't support physician assisted suicide over on another thread, and your last post said you support the sale of cyanide in Wal Mart. I'm thinking that if Wal Mart did sell cyanide pills, they'd be a prescription item because not that many people are extracting gold from ore in their back yards. Would you write such a prescription?
I might find it compatible with my morals and ethics to prescribe a potentially lethal medication and inform a patient that if taken in such-and-such a way that it will cause a painless death.
I would not, however, participate in the actual act.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
I knew cyanide pills was a bad example.
Well, let's say that every Wallmart had one of those Dr. Kavorkian thingies. You'd really be OK with people signing a waver and then killing themselves?
I think there are many moments in people's lives where they'd hurt themselves if it was easy and accessable. It's certainly going to take more effort to hang one's self then just to drive to Wallmart.
I knew cyanide pills was a bad example.
Well, let's say that every Wallmart had one of those Dr. Kavorkian thingies. You'd really be OK with people signing a waver and then killing themselves?
I think there are many moments in people's lives where they'd hurt themselves if it was easy and accessable. It's certainly going to take more effort to hang one's self then just to drive to Wallmart.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
wouldn't it be easier to just drive your car off the bridge on the way to walmart?
or even just straight into walmart's car park barriers at 120mph.
you don't even have to bother queueing up in the shop then
sethis - your post reminded me of a great jam sketch where mr morris describes one man's slightly skewed suicide attempt.
he takes the approach of a large overdose of medication (i.e. eat lots and lots of pills), which gives you a good amount of time for reflection on what you are doing and lots of chance to change your mind, and he applies it to jumping off of a building, which doesn't give you much chance to go back one you've made the leap.
so rather than jumping off the 25th floor, he simply jumps off of the 1st floor, 25 times
cole. x
wouldn't it be easier to just drive your car off the bridge on the way to walmart?
or even just straight into walmart's car park barriers at 120mph.
you don't even have to bother queueing up in the shop then
sethis - your post reminded me of a great jam sketch where mr morris describes one man's slightly skewed suicide attempt.
he takes the approach of a large overdose of medication (i.e. eat lots and lots of pills), which gives you a good amount of time for reflection on what you are doing and lots of chance to change your mind, and he applies it to jumping off of a building, which doesn't give you much chance to go back one you've made the leap.
so rather than jumping off the 25th floor, he simply jumps off of the 1st floor, 25 times
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
at cole. Maybe that's the approach I'll take when I get sick of life! Eventually I'll have a cardiac arrest or something... I guess
at cole. Maybe that's the approach I'll take when I get sick of life! Eventually I'll have a cardiac arrest or something... I guess After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com