deMolay wrote:This story reminds me of a story about a friend named Barry back in the 70's. Barry a fellow tradesman was out of work and was behind a couple of payments on his baby blue, Ford Galaxie convertible. The Finance Company sent over a "Slapper" to threaten Barry. Barry knocked him out, and kicked his ass down the stairs. The next day the manager of the collection company phoned Barry and offered him a job. http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/co ... 71885.html
Ainan wrote:Do you see why won't let us plebs have guns anymore?
EnergyUnlimited wrote:Well, those who have accumulated debt deserve exactly that, as long as debt is a genuine one.
americandream wrote:Some get bailed out though. I guess we can't have our masters being evicted by bailiffs, can we? Wouldn't look good.EnergyUnlimited wrote:Well, those who have accumulated debt deserve exactly that, as long as debt is a genuine one.
rangerone314 wrote:A far better means would be to tie them up and cover them with hundreds of leeches... would be an ironic death, killing human "leeches" with the real thing.
SeaGypsy wrote:Years ago, when mobile phones were very expensive, I bought one on a plan. ... I would rather live in a car or boat or friends garage or tent than in debt.
SeaGypsy wrote:AD/ I think you have your tongue in your cheek here but I will answer anyway.
Debt selling gave us derivatives, derivatives gave us the financial disaster. If I make a contract in good faith with my good respected friend, lets call him Barry and Barry decides to sell the contract to John (Who I hate and have no respect for and would never freely enter a contract with)/ the original contract is null and void. This is only my personal opinion and may well not match what the law says. In this case the law is an ass. If a person or entity is not making contracts in good faith, but with the intention of selling them on as bundled derivatives, they can go for a long walk off a short jetty. I don't care if I am legally wrong, I feel morally right and so far in life I have been able to stick to this principle without consequences; other than not being able to borrow money to buy a house, which I see as a stupid thing to do anyway.
Kristen wrote:I have a strong instinct that the the person borrowing money is meant to fail, so they can pursue more money. The only way out of this stampede is to detach yourself from the concept of "ownership"
americandream wrote:Yes, but these are all wet dreams whilst the scam continues unabated, with the indebted inconsequential being bailiffed instead. And targeting personalities doesn't do much as I'm sure there's a queue of candidates waiting to take their place.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests