Ebay and shill bidding, finally someone is charged

On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 16:09:59 -0500, Russ D
wrote:

f Isn't this the whole point to free-trade, commerce, and
capitalism? Whoever can screw-over the other guy the best, wins? Until I
learn otherwise from a preponderance of examples in society I'll keep the
thieves' secret safe with me. It may come in handy the next time I'm
bidding on a really nice item.



To your initial question, the answer is an unequivocal NO. That is
not "the whole point" of "free-trade, commerce, and capitalism".

The fact that people exist who are willing to exploit weaknesses in a
system doesn't not mean that the system was designed with this in
mind.

You're merely exploiting the exploiters, which doesn't make you any
better than they are. Imho, a better solution is to identify all
exploiters and take action - this effectively fixes the weaknesses. It
doesn't have to be perfect, but if it significantly reduces the
success rate (i.e., the profitability) for the fraudsters, then it
will become less of an incentive for them.

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:21:30 -0400, jls wrote:


Okay, how about putting it this way: You're buying something stolen
from the back of someone's car. Does that make you feel better?
You're still exploiting the illegal behavior of someone, just as you
are on ebay.

Nope, I never bought ANYTHING that was stolen. I just happen to be able to
decipher who are the valid sellers from the con-artists. I bought from the
valid sellers. It's not my fault that all the valid seller's potential
customers were being strongly detracted by thieves.That's their problem,
not mine.

I sleep perfectly content at night knowing I played by everyone's rules,
even the thieves rules.

LOL!

Keep boo-hooing and twisting the facts to try to manipulate me all you
want. I'm not going to tell the simple way to determine the con-artists
from the valid sellers on e-bait. Well, unless you want to cough-up the $7
million price I've set for my own simple discovery that protects me from
bidding on con-artists' scams.

Have you thought about tugging on your mommy's apron strings and seeing if
you can get another cookie with your woeful tears? You might have better
luck at that.

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:21:30 -0400, jls wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:01:21 -0500, Russ D

Now that's capitalism.

It may be "capitalising" on someone else's illegal behavior, but it is
not the right way to pursue true "capitalism".

The WHOLE paradigm of "capitalism" is to personally benefit off of the
misfortunes of others. There is NO OTHER DEFINITION. Ask Oprah. Her whole
empire is founded on exploiting the misfortunes of others. As are the
incomes of EVERY LAST CEO ON THE PLANET.

Don't try to make capitalism out to be some altruistic goody-goody ****.
It's not going to happen no matter how much you want to psychotically
believe otherwise.

THAT'S REALITY.

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:52:01 -0500, Russ D
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:21:30 -0400, jls wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:01:21 -0500, Russ D

Now that's capitalism.

It may be "capitalising" on someone else's illegal behavior, but it is
not the right way to pursue true "capitalism".

The WHOLE paradigm of "capitalism" is to personally benefit off of the
misfortunes of others. There is NO OTHER DEFINITION.

Utter bull****. I suggest you actually read something.

Ask Oprah. Her whole
empire is founded on exploiting the misfortunes of others. As are the
incomes of EVERY LAST CEO ON THE PLANET.

Ah, okay, now I know you're just pulling my chain.

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:37:53 -0400, jls wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:52:01 -0500, Russ D
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:21:30 -0400, jls wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:01:21 -0500, Russ D

Now that's capitalism.

It may be "capitalising" on someone else's illegal behavior, but it is
not the right way to pursue true "capitalism".

The WHOLE paradigm of "capitalism" is to personally benefit off of the
misfortunes of others. There is NO OTHER DEFINITION.

Utter bull****. I suggest you actually read something.


The definitions in your books doesn't match the definition as it exists in
practice in the real world.

I suggest you actually experience real life and take those book-learned-
induced-ignorance blinders off.

"If I had read as many books as other men, I should have been as ignorant
as they are." - Thomas Hobbes

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:37:53 -0400, jls wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:52:01 -0500, Russ D
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:21:30 -0400, jls wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:01:21 -0500, Russ D

Now that's capitalism.

It may be "capitalising" on someone else's illegal behavior, but it is
not the right way to pursue true "capitalism".

The WHOLE paradigm of "capitalism" is to personally benefit off of the
misfortunes of others. There is NO OTHER DEFINITION.

Utter bull****. I suggest you actually read something.

Ask Oprah. Her whole
empire is founded on exploiting the misfortunes of others. As are the
incomes of EVERY LAST CEO ON THE PLANET.

Ah, okay, now I know you're just pulling my chain.

People who have the attitude Russ D shows are almost always people who
have had no success of their own and resent the success of others. By
portraying successful people as evil, they attempt to justify their
own failures as a mark of goodness.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:53:06 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:37:53 -0400, jls wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:52:01 -0500, Russ D
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:21:30 -0400, jls wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:01:21 -0500, Russ D

Now that's capitalism.

It may be "capitalising" on someone else's illegal behavior, but it is
not the right way to pursue true "capitalism".

The WHOLE paradigm of "capitalism" is to personally benefit off of the
misfortunes of others. There is NO OTHER DEFINITION.

Utter bull****. I suggest you actually read something.

Ask Oprah. Her whole
empire is founded on exploiting the misfortunes of others. As are the
incomes of EVERY LAST CEO ON THE PLANET.

Ah, okay, now I know you're just pulling my chain.

People who have the attitude Russ D shows are almost always people who
have had no success of their own and resent the success of others. By
portraying successful people as evil, they attempt to justify their
own failures as a mark of goodness.

Really? I retired at the age of 25 off of the money I made through the
arts. I am not a greedy person so I didn't want much per year for the rest
of my life, allowing me to pursue anything I damn well please for the rest
of my life.

But this is not about me and my source of income. It is about the TRUE
definition of capitalism. Oprah has built her whole foundation on
exploiting the misfortunes of others, from day one. That's all she's ever
done (just like all of those who subscribe to christianity always exploit
the misfortunes of others for their own personal gain, financial or
otherwise). Rarely, now that Oprah has made all that money from exploiting
the misfortunes of others, will she have a non-exploitive show, acting like
she's doing everyone a favor by doing so, but that's still rare. Those who
are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars as heads of The Red Cross gain
all their income off of the disasters in others' lives. The CEOs of
insurance companies all get paid off of the fears and hardships of others.
Every employee of every TV news show in the world gets paid by exploiting
any and all disasters in other's lives day by day. Bill Gates has built his
whole foundation on exploiting his theft of other's software.

I can cite thousands of examples of how this "capitalism", that you wish
was different, is not what you think it is. How does what you believe
disprove any of this?

I have also observed that those who exploit the misfortunes of others the
most for the own greatest personal gain, in the name of capitalism, are the
first and loudest to deny doing just that.

Me thinks thou dost protest too much.

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:53:06 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:37:53 -0400, jls wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:52:01 -0500, Russ D
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:21:30 -0400, jls wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:01:21 -0500, Russ D

Now that's capitalism.

It may be "capitalising" on someone else's illegal behavior, but it is
not the right way to pursue true "capitalism".

The WHOLE paradigm of "capitalism" is to personally benefit off of the
misfortunes of others. There is NO OTHER DEFINITION.

Utter bull****. I suggest you actually read something.

Ask Oprah. Her whole
empire is founded on exploiting the misfortunes of others. As are the
incomes of EVERY LAST CEO ON THE PLANET.

Ah, okay, now I know you're just pulling my chain.

People who have the attitude Russ D shows are almost always people who
have had no success of their own and resent the success of others. By
portraying successful people as evil, they attempt to justify their
own failures as a mark of goodness.

Really? I retired at the age of 25 off of the money I made through the
arts. I am not a greedy person so I didn't want much per year for the rest
of my life, allowing me to pursue anything I damn well please for the rest
of my life.

But this is not about me and my source of income. It is about the TRUE
definition of capitalism. Oprah has built her whole foundation on
exploiting the misfortunes of others, from day one. That's all she's ever
done (just like all of those who subscribe to christianity always exploit
the misfortunes of others for their own personal gain, financial or
otherwise). Rarely, now that Oprah has made all that money from exploiting
the misfortunes of others, will she have a non-exploitive show, acting like
she's doing everyone a favor by doing so, but that's still rare. Those who
are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars as heads of The Red Cross gain
all their income off of the disasters in others' lives. The CEOs of
insurance companies all get paid off of the fears and hardships of others.
Every employee of every TV news show in the world gets paid by exploiting
any and all disasters in other's lives day by day. Bill Gates has built his
whole foundation on exploiting his theft of other's software.

I can cite thousands of examples of how this "capitalism", that you wish
was different, is not what you think it is. How does what you believe
disprove any of this?

I have also observed that those who exploit the misfortunes of others the
most for the own greatest personal gain, in the name of capitalism, are the
first and loudest to deny doing just that.

Me thinks thou dost protest too much.


BTW: You might want to call up the CEO's of BP who claimed that taxpayers
were not going to have to pay one cent nor lose any of their livelihood for
their Gulf oil disaster. Now they're going to claim it as one giant tax
write-off. Because they can, and they'll get away with it. Benefiting off
of the misfortunes of others, misfortunes that THEY created for everyone
else, all in order to retain their wealth and gain even more. All the while
those capitalist shareholders will cheer them on so they can line their
pockets off of the destroyed lives of their neighbors along the coast.

Do you want more examples that prove capitalism is NOT what you think it
is?

Don't tell me that I don't know the real definition of capitalism in the
real world.

"Russ D" wrote in message
...


Really? I retired at the age of 25 off of the money I made through the
arts. I am not a greedy person so I didn't want much per year for the rest
of my life, allowing me to pursue anything I damn well please for the rest
of my life.


Really! Judging from the caliber of your postings, you haven't attained that
age in months.

--
Peter

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:14:56 -0500, Russ D
wrote:

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:53:06 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:37:53 -0400, jls wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:52:01 -0500, Russ D
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:21:30 -0400, jls wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:01:21 -0500, Russ D

Now that's capitalism.

It may be "capitalising" on someone else's illegal behavior, but it is
not the right way to pursue true "capitalism".

The WHOLE paradigm of "capitalism" is to personally benefit off of the
misfortunes of others. There is NO OTHER DEFINITION.

Utter bull****. I suggest you actually read something.

Ask Oprah. Her whole
empire is founded on exploiting the misfortunes of others. As are the
incomes of EVERY LAST CEO ON THE PLANET.

Ah, okay, now I know you're just pulling my chain.

People who have the attitude Russ D shows are almost always people who
have had no success of their own and resent the success of others. By
portraying successful people as evil, they attempt to justify their
own failures as a mark of goodness.

Really? I retired at the age of 25 off of the money I made through the
arts. I am not a greedy person so I didn't want much per year for the rest
of my life, allowing me to pursue anything I damn well please for the rest
of my life.

But this is not about me and my source of income.

Nor is it about fiction. Don't confuse real people with your
imaginary life.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida