And sad at the lack of substance and logical coherence.

my most recent fav
veta: people shouldnt buy houses on debt
me: i bet that the couple hundred thousand employees of the mortgage industry would think this is silly.
veta: I'm sure the stable/horse industry took a hard hit when cars were invented too.
me: irrelevant scope change.
veta: So by your logic we should keep all the news papers in business even though it's much easier to get your news through the internet these days?
me: I am trying to stick to your example of buying real estate outright, without the need for debt. that thought follows your logic not mine.

It's like trying to teach a toddler calculus. At some point you have to question your own intelligence for trying. lol

and you replied to me speaking philosophically about an economic system that didn't require you to go into debt to buy a home.

forgot to mention that bit aye das?

but you use real world examples to attempt to prove your philosophical point?

0632242545 wrote
at 10:30 PM, Sunday October 16, 2011 CDT
hyperbole shouldn't make the entire point of someone's stance void, and i think you realize that. That being said, institutions that take your money and invest it for their own profit should not be allowed to keep all the profit, they should be required to give you a portion of it - given that it was your capital. And if they lose that money their losses shouldn't be nationalized. It's my personal opinion that the above should be illegal and that we should reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act. In this way we can keep the greedy unscrupulous fucks of wall street away from main street's lifetime's savings. A bank that does not invest your money for its own profit may not be inherently unscrupulous and provides a useful service given the condition and intrinsic nature of our current fiscal and economic reality. That being said, I philosophically do not approve of the intrinsic necessity of usury or the way our banks' roles are currently established in the national and global economy.

verm's asked me to cite real world examples of this hypothetical, so I did. Just like how factories in the late 18th century were the beginnings of capitalism and the end of mercantilism.

we were speaking about a hypothetical future economic system which would allow people to buy homes without going into massive debt.

dc is right.

not all mortgages amount to massive debt. ...spoiler alert... Lots of people actually pay them off! it involves responsible lending and responsible buyers, who know the limitations of their income.

jurgen would you ban for the use of the n word?

thraxle would you have banned the avatar in the first post?

man that sucks when you cant get racist while raging about noob moves