quote:

You are the one talking about universal cell phone coverage. Neither Synergy nor I have suggested it.

quote:

The reason that citizens seek for the government to stand up for them against the corporation that has broken its contract is because that is governments job...It is why we hire them.

quote:

That would be exactly what you are doing by taking Synergy's position about lack of coverage in Los Angeles county and trying to make it a universal coverage question.

quote:

So it would appear that you consider historical facts less important than your opinion.

quote:

Synergy works in Los Angeles county,one of the most densely populated areas in the U.S. Just because you wish to imply that that means universal coverage does not make it so.

quote:

The corporations do it all the time. If you read the last paragraph of most contracts it will most often state that the company retains the right to change any and all aspects of the contract pretty much at will. If you do not like it you are free to terminate your service.

quote:

I do not know why. I have stated that position on numerous occasions.
Perhaps it is your ideological filter that keeps you from believing what I say. Why don't you go back over my post and see if you can find someplace where I say otherwise.

quote:

My post does not imply bigotry. It simply ask the question "do you believe that all poor people live in trailer parks and speak with a drawl?"

quote:

What does being a "hick" have to do with being poor?

quote:

Perhaps you might want to label it as such next time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

You are the one talking about universal cell phone coverage. Neither Synergy nor I have suggested it.

You’re nit-picking. Be it as it may, I believe it was Philosophy who first used the term and it continued on from there. Nobody made a snit about it before now. If we are not talking about universal Cellular coverage, what were we talking about?  Sinergy was upset that he couldn’t service in certain areas and wanted government regulation to solve the problem. I’m pretty sure he didn’t mean "solve my problem and just mine."
If you are responding to philosophy's post then you should respond to philosophy's post.
When you respond to my post you should respond to what I post...that would seem to be the logical course of action.

quote:

The reason that citizens seek for the government to stand up for them against the corporation that has broken its contract is because that is governments job...It is why we hire them.

Yes, but it is the courts job, not the legislatures.
So the citizen with limited time and financial resources should gird his/her loins and do battle with a corportation...so much for the level playing field you so often seek.
How about the government just pull the license from corporations who fail to live up to their contractual obligations for a monopoly?  Further the government might also revoke the corporate charter and expose the board of directors of the corporation to personal liability.

quote:

That would be exactly what you are doing by taking Synergy's position about lack of coverage in Los Angeles county and trying to make it a universal coverage question.

I’ve already answered that but I will add that it was really a pro or anti-government regulation question.
As I have stated previously it is a question of a corporation that holds a government sanctioned monopoly being held accountable for its failure to fulfill the contract.  Surely you are not against being responsible for your actions or lack there of?
This is not a contract between the corporation and the client I am talking about but the contract between the corporation and the government.  "You get a monopoly to do this business if you do xyz...failure to do xyz gets you sanctions from the sanctioning body"

quote:

So it would appear that you consider historical facts less important than your opinion.

Who’s historical facts? Yours?
Historical facts belong to no one...that is why they are called "historical facts" not my opinion.

quote:

Synergy works in Los Angeles county,one of the most densely populated areas in the U.S. Just because you wish to imply that that means universal coverage does not make it so.

This is a dead horse. It is an attempt at deflection... from what though, I’m not really sure.

quote:

The corporations do it all the time. If you read the last paragraph of most contracts it will most often state that the company retains the right to change any and all aspects of the contract pretty much at will. If you do not like it you are free to terminate your service.

Sounds fair to me. Business has to remain flexible (another argument against excessive regulation) in order to keep up with changing market conditions. If you don’t like the contract in the first place, you don’t have to sign it.
Since we are talking about government sanctioned monopolies that makes your statement more than a bit silly.

quote:

I do not know why. I have stated that position on numerous occasions.
Perhaps it is your ideological filter that keeps you from believing what I say. Why don't you go back over my post and see if you can find someplace where I say otherwise.

Back in the "Republican Morality" thread, you accused the uber rich of sloth. You know, I never did get an answer to my question – what dollar amount divides the uber rich from the rich. All that aside it seems clear that you have a prejudice against wealthy people. Prejudice is prejudice and it is simply wrong.
It would appear that your ideological filter is working overtime.
I have said time and time again that my bitch is with those who use their wealth to create an uneven playing field and/or to avoid paying their taxes.


Unless it is against socialists because there all dumb asses anyway.

Now that was humor, with an ironic and self deprecating twist. Don’t get your long johns bunched up between your butt cheeks over it (to use a little Hick lingo).

quote:

My post does not imply bigotry. It simply ask the question "do you believe that all poor people live in trailer parks and speak with a drawl?"

And why would you ask such a question (other than for purposes of deflection)? If I had said yes, what would your response have been?
A simple yes or no and you would have found out.  Instead you dance the two step.

quote:

What does being a "hick" have to do with being poor?

Being poor is one of the defining characteristics of being a Hick. Not all poor people are Hicks but all Hicks are poor. Have you ever seen a Hick driving a BMW? I should note that by poor I do not mean destitute and starving. Another important characteristic of Hicks is that they are rural (there are city slickers but there are no city hickers)  

Hicks grow – and shoot – much of their own food.
Well by this definition I guess I too am a hick.  Webster defines hick as an awkward,unsophisticated person.  Not necessarily someone who lives in a rural environment nor one who is poor.
Perhaps one of the reasons we disagree is that we may not share the same vocabulary.


One clarification is needed though. I really shouldn’t say I am half Hick but rather was raised half Hick. Growing up, I spent my summers in Cuba, surrounded by Hicks and playing with Hick children – jumping in the hay loft, skinny dippin’ in the ponds, catching craw-daddies and salamanders in the creeks, and definitely picking up some of the jargon and a bit of the accent.
I am curious as to how you managed to travel to Cuba during your childhood.


Did you know that there really is such a thing as opossum pie?
Yes I do...but I have never had it rather I have always had it cooked as you would rabbit or chicken.  The old tough ones either stewed or baked and the young tender ones fried or bar-b-que.

quote:

Perhaps you might want to label it as such next time.

It would seem so.

quote:

If you are responding to philosophy's post then you should respond to philosophy's post.
When you respond to my post you should respond to what I post...that would seem to be the logical course of action.

quote:

So the citizen with limited time and financial resources should gird his/her loins and do battle with a corportation...so much for the level playing field you so often seek.

quote:

How about the government just pull the license from corporations who fail to live up to their contractual obligations for a monopoly? Further the government might also revoke the corporate charter and expose the board of directors of the corporation to personal liability.

As I have stated previously it is a question of a corporation that holds a government sanctioned monopoly being held accountable for its failure to fulfill the contract. Surely you are not against being responsible for your actions or lack there of?
This is not a contract between the corporation and the client I am talking about but the contract between the corporation and the government. "You get a monopoly to do this business if you do xyz...failure to do xyz gets you sanctions from the sanctioning body"

quote:

Historical facts belong to no one...that is why they are called "historical facts" not my opinion.

quote:

Since we are talking about government sanctioned monopolies that makes your statement more than a bit silly.

quote:

It would appear that your ideological filter is working overtime.
I have said time and time again that my bitch is with those who use their wealth to create an uneven playing field and/or to avoid paying their taxes.

quote:

A simple yes or no and you would have found out. Instead you dance the two step.

quote:

Well by this definition I guess I too am a hick. Webster defines hick as an awkward,unsophisticated person. Not necessarily someone who lives in a rural environment nor one who is poor.
Perhaps one of the reasons we disagree is that we may not share the same vocabulary.

quote:

I am curious as to how you managed to travel to Cuba during your childhood.

quote:

Yes I do...but I have never had it rather I have always had it cooked as you would rabbit or chicken. The old tough ones either stewed or baked and the young tender ones fried or bar-b-que.