 | | Re: Poor Target....
|
|
(...) ? Sure they did-- they didn't mean to mark it down by such a percentage, hence they're losing money. IE for each Slave I they sell at $24.99 they loose about $25.00. Not *REALLY* since (more likely) more are being sold than otherwise would, (...) (22 years ago, 23-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: The Eternal Nuke Debate? (was: Re: First entry in "predict the responses!")
|
|
(...) I guess I am just trying to give some perspective to the "us vs. them" mentality that seems to pervade these discussions -- and I insist that there is no "us" and also no "them." Human being are capable of atrocity if pushed to a point beyond (...) (22 years ago, 23-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poor Target....
|
|
(...) Huh? Target didn't lose anything---they were clearly willing to sell the sets as advertised. However, the original post clearly indicates *fraud*, in that: Two Slave Is were purchased at Target, at a cost of $50 (MSRP $100 for both). Those (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.market.theory)
|
| |
| | Re: First entry in "predict the responses!"
|
|
(...) John--which Arab governments are based on religion? In fact the most secular government in the region is Saddam Hussein's Iraq-- which is why he was our proxy against the Islamic theocratic Republic of Iran. Now, that *is* a religious (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Returning stuff to Comp USA
|
|
(...) Yeah. Suz, no offense, but you have no future in .debate if you're going to be coherent. Sheesh. ;) Actually, I've kept silent in the debate, because I'm of two minds-- yes, it's fraudulent, but in fact they've anticipated it and still do not (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The Eternal Nuke Debate? (was: Re: First entry in "predict the responses!")
|
|
(...) This is the accepted wisdom, and no doubt that was a big part of the justification. But I don't think it was the only reason. (...) An interesting sidebar: Another point that's often been brought up is the less morally but far more (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poor Target....
|
|
(...) Y'know, I almost think it might depend on the manager-- After all, they'll let you return items without receipts (for store credit only, of course), which implies that they already know FULL WELL that customers can return things from other (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: First entry in "predict the responses!"
|
|
(...) No, there was a rational reason for dropping those-- to end the war, and prevent even *more* widespread killing. And it worked. That is not to say that that call was a no-brainer. It was an agonizing decision to make, and truthfully, the (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: First entry in "predict the responses!"
|
|
(...) You mean like dropping bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima? No argument. -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Returning stuff to Comp USA
|
|
(...) Y'know, this is the kind of post that really ticks me off! It's well-reasoned, supported by anecdotal evidence and interesting marketing theory, and stated in a focused and concise manner. What is this statement doing in debate!!! -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: First entry in "predict the responses!"
|
|
(...) Not my spin. That is *totally* putting the situation WAY out of context. As I mentioned before, I kind of question the motives of people who would put *so* much importance upon this minor problem (in the context of all of the problems on earth (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Returning stuff to Comp USA
|
|
Hi folks! uh, I'm kinda new here.. (in fact, I think this is my first non-follow-up post to o.t.d) I'm not at all interested in debating anything with anyone. BUT, as far as I noticed, no one mentioned something that, I think, puts a little (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: First entry in "predict the responses!"
|
|
(...) Look at it this way. Perhaps what he is trying to point out is that a government based upon a religion *is* irrational. I am all for the separation of church and state as I'm sure you are as well-- the Arabs terrorists and Arab state (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: First entry in "predict the responses!"
|
|
Go, Baby, Go!!! Talk about ethnocentric views -- could that author have had more ready judgments about other people and their way of life? And talk about your straw man arguments: Arafat at the head of a Palestinian state as the desired goal? (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poor Target....
|
|
Before I start, I want to say, I respect you greatly, Tim... (...) I was out of line here. I've had one of those months. Plus, on top of that, I've been putting the finishing touches on a persuasive essay about Afghanistan being the next Vietnam, a (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: First entry in "predict the responses!"
|
|
(...) I thought that the entire article was written with a cynnical 'tongue in cheek' method. I don't think the author is racist, but rather looking at the "facts" as he sees them and saying that' "Hey, you've had just as much opportunity thru the (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: First entry in "predict the responses!"
|
|
(...) <snip> I have to say I started by reading the conclusion first. This line caught my eye: “Being Arabs, they are incapable of constructing a rational polity, so their future is probably hopeless whatever happens.” As I am not aware of any (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Peace in the Mid-East?
|
|
(...) That does not really answer my question. Your point, even if true, does not justify Israel’s actions in any way. Does it? (...) To be honest, I have no idea. (...) I can't agree with that view. (...) Peace on Israel's terms? Barak went to the (...) (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poor Target....
|
|
As you wish, my master (with deep, pious bow). My mirror doesn't have a moral meter on it...can I get one installed or do I need a new mirror? -Matt . (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poor Target....
|
|
Hey guys (and ladies), I have an idea...let's all do lunch some time. C'mon it'll be fun! My treat. -Matt . (22 years ago, 22-May-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
