Then they ignore it. I got cash well after 2013 for a copper water tank. He simply placed it on a large scale, then gave me cash. He didn't see my car and took no details.
OT: inconsiderate shoppers
Oct 29, 2018
453 Replies
Maybe that law is only in England?
Yes no matter what the law may say, the cash in hand economy is still alive and well. Brian
Best way to do things. 20% off car servicing for a start.
Steven Watkins wrote
I'm not stupid enough to pay anyone to service my car.
I don't tend to service my car, but when something needs replacing that I don't have the expertise or time to do, I pay a garage. A small local garage that doesn't pay VAT to the government (which didn't do the work so they don't deserve the money).
Yes, you actually are that stupid.
That's not servicing.
They had to pay for your 'education', stupid.
You have said in the past that you don't either. You specifically said you don't bother with oil changes.
I didn't mean servicing specifically, just things you pay a garage to do.
And that came from my parents' taxes. I wasn't paying tax at the time I was at school was I?
I do now once the engine sounded odd and that went away when I changed the oil and filter.
Nope, from the taxes everyone was paying at the time.
I do the same, I only fix things when there's a smell, noise, or bad performance.
It shouldn't have. Why should people with no children pay the same as those who do? Having a child is a choice.
I don't anymore with that engine because that could kill it.
With the golf, it didn't, but that was presumably because it did use quite a bit more oil.
Yes, they should have done a retrospective abortion.
Why should people who stay home have to pay the same as those that use the footpaths.
So is going out.
I guess with a newer car you're more careful, but you used to have quite an old one. Pointless to spend more money maintaining something than it's worth.
Unfortunately we have silly laws preventing abortions after so many months. It's insane that they consider an unborn baby to have rights.
They shouldn't.
So?
I bought that new too and its stupid to kill the engine in any car.
Wrong with a car engine.
Not with psychopaths.
You arent unborn, stupid.
Then set fire to yourself outside #10, again.
So you pay for the footpaths even when you don't use them.
There is a degree of unfairness. If I invent the car that runs on sea water I will be protected, somewhat, on my patent for 17 years. Rick Dees' grand kids will still be getting royalties on "Disco Duck" in
2050. For one thing, the copyright should die with the author and in any case it shouldn't last more than 20 years. The reality is in a digital world, these things may be obsolete anyway, at least in any practical sense. As long as you are recording from a "broadcast" and you are not selling or distributing the content, the Sony decision makes copies, for your own use, legal. In the 21st century I think that would include Pandora, Spotify or You Tube. In fact cable/satellite companies allow recording of anything they send you, using a machine they provide.
Then you have guys like Jimmy Buffett who brag that they spend about
15 minutes writing a song and they record live performances for their albums. He also used the cheapest cassettes around that went bad after playing a few times. These people also screwed themselves when they would put 8 s*it songs on an album along with the 2 you like. For years it was not about the intellectual property, it was about the little bits of plastic they recorded on. You could buy a song but if you little bit of plastic when bad, you had to buy the song again. In some cases they put the same song on multiple albums so you had to buy it over and over to get a new song. Now that the little bit of plastic is gone, suddenly they tell us it is all about buying the song.
The whole concept of a thing which doesn't physically exist costing money is crazy. Same goes for patents. Let's say you have an idea, how to make a widget function better. So you make 50,000 of them. I buy one and manage to make an identical one, but cheaper. Nobody buys yours anymore. That's tough on you. Your idea cannot be worth anything, it does not actually physically exist.
It does physically exist, I can move it around on my hard drive and even get real radical and move it to my phone etc too.
Even money doesn't physically exist anymore, stupid.
You'd steal it.
Nope, you, actually if the original is patented.
Must be why the banking system imploded in 2008
But for both of those things, the same holds true, if I take it from you so you no longer have it, I've stolen it. But if I copy it, you still have it.
No, let's say I paid for the one I took from you.
That's the problem with patenting, no competition. FFS they're even allowing patenting of human genes! And MacDonalds sued a Mrs Macdonald for using her own name in her own restaurant!
No, that's because they lent money to those who couldn't pay it back. I did the same to a woman once.
You still stole it if its copyrighted and it normally would be.
You never would, thief.
You are always free to invent a better one.
Yes, that is completely stupid.
That's not a patent, stupid.
Nope.
Must be why you imploded.
No, because the owner still possess it. Stealing is depriving someone of what they have, and they still have it. All I did was create another one identical to the original.
So you believe I never pay for anything? That would make me very rich indeed.
What if yours was the best possible? Why should nobody else be able to come up with the same idea?
There you go then.
They registered the name MacDonalds - same idea.
Yes, it's a well known fact it was due to bad debts.
Perhaps. Women are the root of all evil.
Join the Discussion
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Didn't find your answer?
Ask the community — no account required