Romney a Lock - You Can Put it On the Board YESSSS!!

No, really, the only frustrating thing was this statement that flies in the face of our established economic and property rights. ... and the law:

I tried to respond patiently. But come on. If you can't understand why when someone lends money to a business in return for a financial obligation guaranteed by the company, if the company can't make good on the obligation, the person who lent money then has a claim to the assets of the company, then I am wasting my breath. The fact that you can't see why that legal financial claim would exist and employees of the company have NO SUCH legal stake for money they are NOT owed is breathtaking. Not chicken little. But little by way of reason.

 

Your whole post above bears NO relation to anything I said. Don't put words in my mouth and shift your goal posts so you can then editorialize about who you think I am or what you think I believe in your imaginative little skull.

If a company goes out of business because of defined benefit obligations they can't afford to pay -- and lord how many companies have found themselves in Chapter 11 under those very specific circumstances -- those owed the benefit certainly have a claim on whatever assets are left.

It's the nature of a negotiated OBLIGATION -- which multiple posts of yours showed you to believe are not binding in certain cases (your handpicked ideas of what is righteous and what isn't).

Your silly broad statement that I responded to? It was was exactly that. ... a silly broad statement that defied the concepts of economic rights, the actual law. ... and all reason.

 

I edited a failed magazine?

If you are going to try to out me (which is not allowed on this site), you might want to actually know about me and what I do.

Bzzzt.

And it's plagiarize, moron. Something I have never done.

 

I suppose I've done that. I read a lot about certain topics every day. I post about things I read. I sometimes paraphrase things. I'm not writing for attribution on a message board.

But get this. A few years ago, I started a thread on here about an editorial I had spent three or four weeks doing research for (I am a contributor -- who gets assigned research / gruntwork -- for an editorial board for a financial publication; one reason I read so much), because I thought it would make for an interesting discussion. And some jackass accused me of plagiarism when he saw the thread. I quietly sat by and watched everyone with a bug up their ass about me pile on. Even though I didn't plagiarize anything on the thread, least of all myself.

That one was difficult because I wanted to unload on some of the bigger assholes on here. I didn't.

One thing I have never had difficulty with is the rule about outing people. I have never tried to guess who Stitch is (I don't really think about him, except when I see his user name on here, and then I often don't think much of him) -- or anyone on here who hasn't given me an inkling that they want me to know.

Seems obsessive and loserish that he apparently tried to figure out my identity -- when he doesn't know me and I have never talked to him.

What is amazing is that given how many people do know who I am, and I have talked about what I do on the board more than once, that he doesn't know that my publishing-related business (which is only a portion of the work I do) is in custom publishing. The only magazine I have ever done that would have been a failure would be one where the check didn't clear. I've had to chase payment from clients, but I've never been stiffed.