Posted by ghio on May 24, 2009, 2:26 am
On May 24, 10:38am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> wrote:
> >On May 24, 12:40am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >> >On May 23, 2:32am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >I do get the cost back, many retailers are quite happy to discount for
> >cash.
> Again, not that I believe you have a debit card, but you're not
> getting the cost back any time you use one. Which means most every
> purchase not made in person. These days, if you can't shop out of your
> area, you're generally paying too much. That's particularly true for
> anyone who lives remote. As I mentioned, I have friends who are as
> limited in their options as you are. I already know how they suffer as
> a result, so there's no sense in your pretending that you're getting
> the best deal. Although I hope you keep trying.
I'm not very limited in options. Just another one of your fantasies.
> >> > I pay cash, either from my safe
> >> I take it that you believe that claiming to own a safe will somehow
> >> convince readers that 1kWh per day indicates something other than
> >> modest circumstances. But I suppose there could be other reasons you
> >> brought it up.... It's the repository of the crown jewels of the lost
> >> kingdom of ghio? You're announcing it so that criminals will know that
> >> burgling your place would be futile?
> >Actually the safe holds the guns as well as the amount of cash I
> >usually have on hand.
> All the smarter to announce it on Usenet, eh, ghinius? Of course,
> there was no downside if the safe was only mentioned for silly effect.
> But if you do have a safe with guns in it, and if I was your insurance
> company, I'd cancel your policy based on your announcement here being
> proof positive that you aren't mentally qualified to sign contracts.
> But then, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't have insurance at all,
> since some of those creditless friends I mentioned don't have any
> either.
Sure. If you think it can be opened, or even that it is really where I
keep my money then you are truly a simple soul.
> >> >or after taking the money out of the bank with my debit card.
> >> Not that I believe that you even have a debit card, but they are not
> >> cash. Either the merchant or the purchaser or both pay a fee for the
> >> convenience of debit cards.
> >It's cash when you get it out of the bank. And as I have pointed out,
> >many retailers are quite happy to discount for cash.
> Everybody knows that cash is king when it comes to negotiating. But
> debit cards are *not* cash, weasel.
Never said they were, I did say I used the debit card to access cash
from the bank.
> >> If you knew anything about truth then you wouldn't have anything to
> >> write about here.
> >Truth is truth, it does not require that you believe it, it is still
> >the truth.
> That may be the only true thing you've written here. But you've wasted
> a lot of time over the years failing to establish credibility in these
> newsgroups. It's obvious that you want it, and equally obvious that
> you're too much of a baby to do what it takes to earn it.
Ah yes, credibility, Tell us about your system, what it runs, how much
each item uses, how long each item is run for and how much your system
produces.
But then that is beyond your almost non existent skills.
> >>You've admitted that
> >> ***********
> >> "No matter what he spends on his credit card he is always careful to
> >> make the payment so he is not charged interest. This is as it should
> >> be for a smart consumer".
> >> ***********
> >> Which means that your entire premise is wrong, but as usual you can't
> >> bring yourself to admit the mistake.
> >The premise that you live a credit card lifestyle?
> The premise that "always" paying with cash, except when it's a debit
> card <snorf> is somehow best, or that any financial strategy that you
> aren't qualified to employ must have some hidden deficiency that we
> can only learn about through yet another transparently dickish ghinius
> parable.
As pointed out, my debit card is used to access cash from the bank.
> >> >I never said that there weren't lots of people who use credit cards
> >> >responsibly
> >> And yet you keep right on trying to blame credit cards for the
> >> failings of the weak of will and mind such as yourself.
> >No. Credit cards are a tool and as such are prone to "Accidents" as
> >with any tool. The difference being that the injury can cost you
> >everything you have.
> But you didn't lecture on the accidents possible with *any* tool. You
> chose to volunteer some wisdumb about credit cards specifically being
> the road to ruination, even though it's become increasingly clear that
> you don't have a clue about the subject. Not that anybody was
> surprised about that last part.
Credit cards certainly can be the road to ruination, even for those
who are very careful with the use of their cards.
> >> I choose not to live that way.
> I don't believe that you have much choice about your circumstances. I
> expect that you're living on a small disability pension, and that it
> chaps your ass that others have more options.
As pointed out several times now, you are not required to believe the
truth. Of course that does not make the truth untrue. While I could
probably qualify for a disability pension it would gall me to admit
that I am controlled by something I can over ride. When I had the
heart attack people said that my life was over. Life is only over when
you give up and die. This being the case I just went ahead and built
my house, qualified as a designer and installer of RAPS systems,
raised two kids, restored a classic bike and got a diploma and an
award for excellence from the Fellowship of Australian Writers.
> >>>I only said that you live a credit card
> >> >lifestyle which is true.
> >> Oh, so you've been trying to say that it's a good thing? LOL You've
> >> accused me of every kind of financial malfeasance your tiny weasel
> >> brain could think of.
> >No, again your interpretation is incorrect and self serving.
> Baloney. You're denying the undeniable again rather than admit that
> you spoke out of ignorance and spite.
Baloney. You're denying the undeniable again rather than admit that
you spoke out of ignorance and spite.
> >> >>But now you contradict yourself by calling me a "smart consumer".
> >> >No again. I tagged you as a born consumer which is the truth.
> >> You aren't capable of telling the difference been truth and trolley
> >> cars. The truth is that you returned to Usenet to kick another poster
> >> while he was down by lobbing some idiotic insults. But you ended up
> >> kicking yourself by revealing yet more areas in which you refuse to
> >> even attempt critical thinking. Same old same-old, which is whyhttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htmexists .
> >As I pointed out "The banks don't care about your problems" they will
> >take your house at the drop of a hat.
> So what? If we take your advice a step farther, we should rant about
> our cars if we get into trouble from driving drunk, or maybe stop
> using cars at all because we might get drunk some day. Despite all
> your ghinius arguments, you have yet to say why you blame credit
> cards, banks, or anything else for personal failings.
I don't "Blame" anyone. It's just business. You get into trouble for
any reason and the lenders just do what they do. They don't care what
your problems are, they just do business. If it costs you your house
because you broke your hip and couldn't work for three months, well,
hey, it's just business.
> > As I don't have any form of
> >credit with the bank and I own the house that I built outright, the
> >bank has no hold over my life.
> So what? I got to that point 3 houses ago, and a whole lot of my
> friends got there as well. How is that a reason to refuse 1.5% savings
> on purchases? Why is it an excuse for you to invent fault with those
> who are smarter with their money than you are?
So you would put what you own outright on a toss of the dice. Good for
you.
> >Do you get some sort of sexual gratification from the bank having you
> >by the short and curlies.
> No matter how many ill-conceived arguments you put forth, we can
> always count on you to escalate your piffle to ever more irrational
> levels. For a change, why not pick the winning side of a debate before
> you start yakking? Want to know how I do it? I just choose the side
> you're against, and it works every time.
Yes, it works all the time, which is why your rants get longer and
more fanciful with every post.
Statements of truth:
You did not build your house as claimed.
You did not design your system as claimed.
You are a fraud.
> Wayne
> Attention Googlebots: George Ghio Renegade writing (sic) Bealiba
Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on May 24, 2009, 3:25 pm
wrote:
>On May 24, 10:38 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On May 24, 12:40 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >On May 23, 2:32 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >I do get the cost back, many retailers are quite happy to discount for
>> >cash.
>>
>> Again, not that I believe you have a debit card, but you're not
>> getting the cost back any time you use one. Which means most every
>> purchase not made in person. These days, if you can't shop out of your
>> area, you're generally paying too much. That's particularly true for
>> anyone who lives remote. As I mentioned, I have friends who are as
>> limited in their options as you are. I already know how they suffer as
>> a result, so there's no sense in your pretending that you're getting
>> the best deal. Although I hope you keep trying.
>I'm not very limited in options. Just another one of your fantasies.
Oh sure, the world is the oyster of the nitwitted. When the phone
company found out you had no credit, you had the option of arguing
with them, putting up a deposit, or doing without. Same thing if you
want to shop around for a new insurance provider. And if you want true
parity with anyone who has a credit rating, you always have the option
of whistling in the wind.
>> >Actually the safe holds the guns as well as the amount of cash I
>> >usually have on hand.
>>
>> All the smarter to announce it on Usenet, eh, ghinius? Of course,
>> there was no downside if the safe was only mentioned for silly effect.
>> But if you do have a safe with guns in it, and if I was your insurance
>> company, I'd cancel your policy based on your announcement here being
>> proof positive that you aren't mentally qualified to sign contracts.
>> But then, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't have insurance at all,
>> since some of those creditless friends I mentioned don't have any
>> either.
>Sure. If you think it can be opened, or even that it is really where I
>keep my money then you are truly a simple soul.
Ah, so for any reader who took your word about having cash in a safe
as one of your infamous "truths", their reward is to be reminded that
it's foolish to believe a word you say about *anything*. And now we
have the new wisdumb "truth" that you have one of those safes that
can't be opened. Thieves never touch those. Pure ghinius!
>> Everybody knows that cash is king when it comes to negotiating. But
>> debit cards are *not* cash, weasel.
>Never said they were, I did say I used the debit card to access cash
>from the bank.
Pathetic. Ghio, May 15: "it took years of avoiding credit traps and
paying cash at all times."
When it was pointed out that cash-only can be severely limiting, all
of a sudden "cash at all times" includes debit cards.
>As pointed out several times now, you are not required to believe the
>truth. Of course that does not make the truth untrue. While I could
>probably qualify for a disability pension it would gall me to admit
>that I am controlled by something I can over ride. When I had the
>heart attack people said that my life was over. Life is only over when
>you give up and die. This being the case I just went ahead and built
>my house, qualified as a designer and installer of RAPS systems,
>raised two kids, restored a classic bike and got a diploma and an
>award for excellence from the Fellowship of Australian Writers.
I don't see any mention of a current job or income there amongst all
the BS, nor any explanation for where the grocery money came from
while you were going to riding to school on the magic ultra-high
mileage motorcycle. But then, I guess you only needed to work
occasionally, what with earning $80 an hour and selling "books" and
"sizings" on Usenet. It's weird though that you'd keep wasting money
on fossil fuel for decades rather than buying a proper power setup.
You could have one like mine in just 50 hours, which is a fraction of
the time you've spent here jawboning your reputation into the toilet.
Maybe readers need a course in weasel semantics to understand award
winning authors...
>You get into trouble for
>any reason and the lenders just do what they do. They don't care what
>your problems are, they just do business. If it costs you your house
>because you broke your hip and couldn't work for three months, well,
>hey, it's just business.
<sigh> That wouldn't be true in your case though, would it? At $80 an
hour, and with cash in the safe or somewhere else or whatever the
story of the day is, you could just pay off the monthly balance same
as always, right?
>> > As I don't have any form of
>> >credit with the bank and I own the house that I built outright, the
>> >bank has no hold over my life.
>>
>> So what? I got to that point 3 houses ago, and a whole lot of my
>> friends got there as well. How is that a reason to refuse 1.5% savings
>> on purchases? Why is it an excuse for you to invent fault with those
>> who are smarter with their money than you are?
>So you would put what you own outright on a toss of the dice. Good for
>you.
I swear, you must have a stash of straw men that you just pluck
blindly from when cornered. Did you ever think of writing something
along these lines: "OK, my opinions about credit cards are over the
top and I should have given more thought to the subject before
writing. I guess I have some homework to do, but I can't afford to
spend enough to earn any of those rewards you're talking about anyway.
If things change I'd be sure to look into it". No, of course not, you
always prefer blurting out a fresh round of ghioisms.
Wayne
Attention Googlebots: George Ghio Renegade writing (sic) Bealiba
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
Posted by ghio on May 25, 2009, 9:05 pm
On May 26, 1:45am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
There is nothing left to write about wayne. He is dead. He died in a
tragic toilet accident.
Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on May 26, 2009, 1:21 pm
wrote:
>On May 26, 1:45 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
>There is nothing left to write about wayne. He is dead.
If he's dead then you have the perfect opportunity to dispute all your
quotes on http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm without any
chance of further derision from him! So what's preventing you from
doing that?
***Top reasons weasel ghio still can't refute ridicule***
10. Keeping a low profile lest Nick Pine takes up poetry again.
9. Needs a bigger "workshop" for a project like that.
8. Prefers high-road of ankle-biting other posters.
7. Usenet head office refused request for $80 per hour payment.
6. Problem will solve itself once secret of 300k wire is mainstream.
5. Fortifying home against weasel burglars.
4. Got idea from politicians to "spend more time with family".
3. Working up to it by berating kangaroos for oversizing rear legs.
2. 20 year piffle-writing plan may still bear fruit.
1. Sold magazine rights to life story. Can't risk scotching deal as
the entire $.98 has already been spent on yesterday's propane.
Wayne
Attention Googlebots: George Ghio Renegade writing (sic) Bealiba
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
Posted by ghio on May 26, 2009, 11:17 pm
On May 26, 11:21pm, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> wrote:
> >On May 26, 1:45am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >There is nothing left to write about wayne. He is dead.
> If he's dead then you have the perfect opportunity to dispute all your
> quotes onhttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htmwithout any
> chance of further derision from him! So what's preventing you from
> doing that?
> ***Top reasons weasel ghio still can't refute ridicule***
> 10. Keeping a low profile lest Nick Pine takes up poetry again.
> 9. Needs a bigger "workshop" for a project like that.
> 8. Prefers high-road of ankle-biting other posters.
> 7. Usenet head office refused request for $80 per hour payment.
> 6. Problem will solve itself once secret of 300k wire is mainstream.
> 5. Fortifying home against weasel burglars.
> 4. Got idea from politicians to "spend more time with family".
> 3. Working up to it by berating kangaroos for oversizing rear legs.
> 2. 20 year piffle-writing plan may still bear fruit.
> 1. Sold magazine rights to life story. Can't risk scotching deal as
> the entire $.98 has already been spent on yesterday's propane.
> Wayne
> Attention Googlebots: George Ghio Renegade writing (sic) Bealibahttp://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm
It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick
society.
- Krishnamurti
> >On May 24, 12:40am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >> >On May 23, 2:32am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >I do get the cost back, many retailers are quite happy to discount for
> >cash.
> Again, not that I believe you have a debit card, but you're not
> getting the cost back any time you use one. Which means most every
> purchase not made in person. These days, if you can't shop out of your
> area, you're generally paying too much. That's particularly true for
> anyone who lives remote. As I mentioned, I have friends who are as
> limited in their options as you are. I already know how they suffer as
> a result, so there's no sense in your pretending that you're getting
> the best deal. Although I hope you keep trying.