Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: An example of how stupid we are and what we tolerate... [View all]Orrex
(67,149 posts)115. So, not having a phone is exactly the same as dying of thirst?
Your analogies are questionable, but here goes:
You mean all those folks who signed those bogus mortgages should just deal with it?
A contract based on fraud is not a contract.
Fraud prevents mutual agreement to a contract because one party intentionally deceives another as to the nature and the consequences of a contract. It is the willful misrepresentation or concealment of a material fact of a contract, and it is designed to persuade another to enter into that contract. If a special relation-ship exists, such as that of attorney and client, nondisclosure of a material fact is fraud. Many courts have held that mere silence concerning a material fact did not constitute fraud, but the emerging trend is to find a duty to disclose and, therefore, deliberate concealment of a material fact gives rise to an action for fraud.
More here.
What about the folks in Detroit who can't afford the water and getting it shut off....should they have read the contract they signed when they moved in the house?
Strictly speaking, I haven't read that the contracts in those cases are inherently invalid. That is, the mere stipulation that service will be terminated for non-payment does not, in itself, invalidate the contract. It may very well be that mitigating circumstances cause an agency higher than the utility company to step in on the customers' behalf, and personally I think it's shitty that one's water can be turned off at all, but what's the realistic alternative, in your wise view? I've had my own water turned off for non-payment; could I have called upon you to beat down the door of my water company?
You clutch at your pearls and wail about my lack of compassion, but that's simply a ridiculous display of emotionalism. Unless the lack of cheap, reliable cellphone service will result in death in four or five days, comparisons to forcible water shut-off are preposterous. Likewise, your comparison of a fraudulent contract to a non-fraudulent contract is pointless.
Do you feel better, having gotten that off of your chest? Or are you going to scold me again?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
126 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The question is about the behavior of the 312 million chickens, and why, with so many, they
jtuck004
Jun 2014
#83
All of what you say is true, but it is also true that any area that doesn't now have reception
truedelphi
Jun 2014
#95
No, I didnt...actually it is a great example, given how EXTREMELY necessary it is
randys1
Jun 2014
#20
You pay taxes for roads, if you don't use the roads in any given month do you get your taxes back?
PoliticAverse
Jun 2014
#19
Yup, as frustrated as I get here i do know most people are decent and well meaning
randys1
Jun 2014
#61
Nah, you create not for profit entities and you do it with intelligent liberals
randys1
Jun 2014
#36
i think it's a fallacy that good people perform well and bad people perform poorly
geek tragedy
Jun 2014
#45
Huh? Nah, cons are assholes, liberals are not. A liberal can be an asshole in some
randys1
Jun 2014
#49
It doesnt require a greedy asshole to create a highly functional operation like a water system
randys1
Jun 2014
#52
that's where I am, and really for me it's a matter mostly of who does it better,
geek tragedy
Jun 2014
#68
"...And you knew who you werree thennn, goils were goils and men were men!"
Warren DeMontague
Jun 2014
#116
I included water and oil and fuel and internet access, if i didnt include water it was
randys1
Jun 2014
#30
I don't support nationalization of water, but water should be a local public resourse.
FSogol
Jun 2014
#89
I'm happy with my $7/month tracfone and don't want to be forced to subsidize people with iphones.
JVS
Jun 2014
#28
Your disagreement makes sense, but when we nationalize everything you wont have
randys1
Jun 2014
#34
Get a tracfone, use it for emergencies, and get off the phone as much as possible.
MADem
Jun 2014
#55
Well, I was paying the Japanese, the English, the Italians, everyone BUT the damn Americans!
MADem
Jun 2014
#108
It costs money to deliver water to a residence. Cities and towns have a "Water Department" for a
MADem
Jun 2014
#113
If you can't get your ass up and go to social services and get some assistance, or
MADem
Jun 2014
#120
Stop being obtuse--it's not cute, it makes you look like you're goading and baiting.
MADem
Jun 2014
#122
Cell phone service is the way it is because it is something close to a monopoly.
alarimer
Jun 2014
#69
Power and water should be provided by the state. Things like cell phone service, I'm not sure. n/t
nomorenomore08
Jun 2014
#79
That's why I suggested things like cell phone and cable TV service shouldn't be nationalized.
nomorenomore08
Jun 2014
#91
Me too. A life without frozen dairy treats wouldn't be much of a life, for me personally. n/t
nomorenomore08
Jun 2014
#93
you must live in a metropolitan area where more than one provider has excellent coverage
randys1
Jun 2014
#98
You can choose another company. Simple solution. No one forces you to use Verizon. n-t
Logical
Jun 2014
#106