<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_14_0035257</id>
	<title>BlueHippo Scam Collected $15M, Only Shipped One PC</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1258210740000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Turns out that those BlueHippo commercials advertising financing for computers and other electronics for anybody, regardless of credit, were <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/11/like-taking-candy-computers-from-a-baby-the-poor.ars">way more sleazy than you thought</a>. The FTC is bringing this fraud down, but not too soon. 'According to the FTC, the company's brazen business model continued without interruption after the 2008 settlement. "In fact, in the year following entry of this Court's Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for a Permanent Injunction, BlueHippo financed &mdash; at most &mdash; a single computer to the over 35,000 consumers who placed orders for computers that could be financed during the period,' <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0523092/091112bluehippomemo.PDF">the FTC told a court</a> (PDF) yesterday. In the meantime, the company took in a cool $15 million in payments from consumers, who don't appear to have received anything in return.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Turns out that those BlueHippo commercials advertising financing for computers and other electronics for anybody , regardless of credit , were way more sleazy than you thought .
The FTC is bringing this fraud down , but not too soon .
'According to the FTC , the company 's brazen business model continued without interruption after the 2008 settlement .
" In fact , in the year following entry of this Court 's Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for a Permanent Injunction , BlueHippo financed    at most    a single computer to the over 35,000 consumers who placed orders for computers that could be financed during the period, ' the FTC told a court ( PDF ) yesterday .
In the meantime , the company took in a cool $ 15 million in payments from consumers , who do n't appear to have received anything in return .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Turns out that those BlueHippo commercials advertising financing for computers and other electronics for anybody, regardless of credit, were way more sleazy than you thought.
The FTC is bringing this fraud down, but not too soon.
'According to the FTC, the company's brazen business model continued without interruption after the 2008 settlement.
"In fact, in the year following entry of this Court's Stipulated Final Judgment and Order for a Permanent Injunction, BlueHippo financed — at most — a single computer to the over 35,000 consumers who placed orders for computers that could be financed during the period,' the FTC told a court (PDF) yesterday.
In the meantime, the company took in a cool $15 million in payments from consumers, who don't appear to have received anything in return.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095166</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>Paco103</author>
	<datestamp>1258135380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um. . . . too good to be true?  Anyone ever calculate up what they give you for what your total payments would be?  It was several times what the items were worth, and if you're not going to get them until you're done paying the outrageous markup, why not just save up?  Seriously I thought these things were a scam before I even knew about them not shipping PC's.  It really just proves how bad some people are with their money (and contracts).  It's really just so much worse that the deal was already so heavily weighted against the consumer and it was *STILL* a scam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um .
. .
. too good to be true ?
Anyone ever calculate up what they give you for what your total payments would be ?
It was several times what the items were worth , and if you 're not going to get them until you 're done paying the outrageous markup , why not just save up ?
Seriously I thought these things were a scam before I even knew about them not shipping PC 's .
It really just proves how bad some people are with their money ( and contracts ) .
It 's really just so much worse that the deal was already so heavily weighted against the consumer and it was * STILL * a scam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um.
. .
. too good to be true?
Anyone ever calculate up what they give you for what your total payments would be?
It was several times what the items were worth, and if you're not going to get them until you're done paying the outrageous markup, why not just save up?
Seriously I thought these things were a scam before I even knew about them not shipping PC's.
It really just proves how bad some people are with their money (and contracts).
It's really just so much worse that the deal was already so heavily weighted against the consumer and it was *STILL* a scam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095282</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>copponex</author>
	<datestamp>1258137240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We've effectively gone from a system that we could opt out of (for the most part) into one where the government forces you to give it up till you bleed. Tell me how much better things are again?</p></div><p>I see your point, but the idea you're missing is that much of technology moves from a luxury to a necessity very quickly. Ten years ago you could compete in the job market with no computer skills, and that's no longer the case. Shorter patent lifespans would allow companies to profit from good research, but not set back an entire society to profit a single corporation. Imagine if GE came out with a solar panel that was dirt cheap to manufacture, but charged 400 times more than it cost to make. China, India, and Russia could reverse engineer the product, and then we'd be competing with international companies that pay far less for electricity.</p><p>Furthermore, you have zero input on the actions of corporations who provide these necessary luxuries, like oil, electricity, information infrastructure, and so on. At some point, you have to assign a third party with more power to keep them in check, or we'll all be living in company towns, shopping at company stores, which isn't a hell of a lot better than soviet communism.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've effectively gone from a system that we could opt out of ( for the most part ) into one where the government forces you to give it up till you bleed .
Tell me how much better things are again ? I see your point , but the idea you 're missing is that much of technology moves from a luxury to a necessity very quickly .
Ten years ago you could compete in the job market with no computer skills , and that 's no longer the case .
Shorter patent lifespans would allow companies to profit from good research , but not set back an entire society to profit a single corporation .
Imagine if GE came out with a solar panel that was dirt cheap to manufacture , but charged 400 times more than it cost to make .
China , India , and Russia could reverse engineer the product , and then we 'd be competing with international companies that pay far less for electricity.Furthermore , you have zero input on the actions of corporations who provide these necessary luxuries , like oil , electricity , information infrastructure , and so on .
At some point , you have to assign a third party with more power to keep them in check , or we 'll all be living in company towns , shopping at company stores , which is n't a hell of a lot better than soviet communism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've effectively gone from a system that we could opt out of (for the most part) into one where the government forces you to give it up till you bleed.
Tell me how much better things are again?I see your point, but the idea you're missing is that much of technology moves from a luxury to a necessity very quickly.
Ten years ago you could compete in the job market with no computer skills, and that's no longer the case.
Shorter patent lifespans would allow companies to profit from good research, but not set back an entire society to profit a single corporation.
Imagine if GE came out with a solar panel that was dirt cheap to manufacture, but charged 400 times more than it cost to make.
China, India, and Russia could reverse engineer the product, and then we'd be competing with international companies that pay far less for electricity.Furthermore, you have zero input on the actions of corporations who provide these necessary luxuries, like oil, electricity, information infrastructure, and so on.
At some point, you have to assign a third party with more power to keep them in check, or we'll all be living in company towns, shopping at company stores, which isn't a hell of a lot better than soviet communism.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30099798</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258229400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, someone stole money from someone else.  Clearly the free market is broken and we need to pass some more laws and change the system!  Did you know they don't have theft and fraud in Socialist countries?  It's TRUE!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , someone stole money from someone else .
Clearly the free market is broken and we need to pass some more laws and change the system !
Did you know they do n't have theft and fraud in Socialist countries ?
It 's TRUE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, someone stole money from someone else.
Clearly the free market is broken and we need to pass some more laws and change the system!
Did you know they don't have theft and fraud in Socialist countries?
It's TRUE!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095400</id>
	<title>Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot - Over?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258139040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only do I not know what "those BlueHippo commercials advertising financing for computers and other electronics for anybody, regardless of credit" are, I don't know why such would be "News for Nerds, Stuff That Matters".</p><p>WTF?</p><p>Anyone? Anyone?</p><p>Gosh, I'm SO happy I'm a Slashdot subscriber.</p><p>Not really.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only do I not know what " those BlueHippo commercials advertising financing for computers and other electronics for anybody , regardless of credit " are , I do n't know why such would be " News for Nerds , Stuff That Matters " .WTF ? Anyone ?
Anyone ? Gosh , I 'm SO happy I 'm a Slashdot subscriber.Not really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only do I not know what "those BlueHippo commercials advertising financing for computers and other electronics for anybody, regardless of credit" are, I don't know why such would be "News for Nerds, Stuff That Matters".WTF?Anyone?
Anyone?Gosh, I'm SO happy I'm a Slashdot subscriber.Not really.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094996</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258132740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your post was going well, but I do not know why you decided to blame the lawyers in the end. Class action lawyers are usually the only people these scammers are afraid of. Government agencies are slow and it is rather rare that they actually go out of their way to chase scams. It is great that the FTC decided to go after those bluehippo people, but this is a very rare occurrence.</p><p>Usually when companies try to do something dodgy towards ordinary consumers they are mostly worried about the class action lawyers. Because there are lawyers out there that do nothing but look out for scams so that they can get their payday. Sure it usually ends up that the lawyers get a lot of the money and the scammed customers get a small check in the mail. But even if the lawyers get all the money they still take alot of money from the scammers and thus punish them, and that is actually a benefit to society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your post was going well , but I do not know why you decided to blame the lawyers in the end .
Class action lawyers are usually the only people these scammers are afraid of .
Government agencies are slow and it is rather rare that they actually go out of their way to chase scams .
It is great that the FTC decided to go after those bluehippo people , but this is a very rare occurrence.Usually when companies try to do something dodgy towards ordinary consumers they are mostly worried about the class action lawyers .
Because there are lawyers out there that do nothing but look out for scams so that they can get their payday .
Sure it usually ends up that the lawyers get a lot of the money and the scammed customers get a small check in the mail .
But even if the lawyers get all the money they still take alot of money from the scammers and thus punish them , and that is actually a benefit to society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your post was going well, but I do not know why you decided to blame the lawyers in the end.
Class action lawyers are usually the only people these scammers are afraid of.
Government agencies are slow and it is rather rare that they actually go out of their way to chase scams.
It is great that the FTC decided to go after those bluehippo people, but this is a very rare occurrence.Usually when companies try to do something dodgy towards ordinary consumers they are mostly worried about the class action lawyers.
Because there are lawyers out there that do nothing but look out for scams so that they can get their payday.
Sure it usually ends up that the lawyers get a lot of the money and the scammed customers get a small check in the mail.
But even if the lawyers get all the money they still take alot of money from the scammers and thus punish them, and that is actually a benefit to society.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30112652</id>
	<title>Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers?</title>
	<author>ffflala</author>
	<datestamp>1258401900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do not believe that Excel ever went bankrupt. After several years $1 billion/year revenue, their founder and CEO retired, Excel was bought by another company (Shaklee, another MLM giant), and ultimately the brand was retired.</p><p>As for the point that big money is a necessary ingredient for a class action lawsuit: true, but blatant fraud such as in this case allows for piercing the corporate veil and going after the personal assets and future earnings of the officers of a company.</p><p>And while biglaw might not take on a class action suit where the depths of the pockets is questionable, a smaller firm might find great publicity value to gain from such a suit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do not believe that Excel ever went bankrupt .
After several years $ 1 billion/year revenue , their founder and CEO retired , Excel was bought by another company ( Shaklee , another MLM giant ) , and ultimately the brand was retired.As for the point that big money is a necessary ingredient for a class action lawsuit : true , but blatant fraud such as in this case allows for piercing the corporate veil and going after the personal assets and future earnings of the officers of a company.And while biglaw might not take on a class action suit where the depths of the pockets is questionable , a smaller firm might find great publicity value to gain from such a suit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do not believe that Excel ever went bankrupt.
After several years $1 billion/year revenue, their founder and CEO retired, Excel was bought by another company (Shaklee, another MLM giant), and ultimately the brand was retired.As for the point that big money is a necessary ingredient for a class action lawsuit: true, but blatant fraud such as in this case allows for piercing the corporate veil and going after the personal assets and future earnings of the officers of a company.And while biglaw might not take on a class action suit where the depths of the pockets is questionable, a smaller firm might find great publicity value to gain from such a suit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096010</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258194180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like a perfect Darl McBride business plan to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like a perfect Darl McBride business plan to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like a perfect Darl McBride business plan to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095026</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1258133220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because if anyone of your customers or competitors is a bigger fat cat than you, the FTC will get you? ^^</p><p>I mean its not as if they got away with it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because if anyone of your customers or competitors is a bigger fat cat than you , the FTC will get you ?
^ ^ I mean its not as if they got away with it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because if anyone of your customers or competitors is a bigger fat cat than you, the FTC will get you?
^^I mean its not as if they got away with it...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095184</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258135860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I remember watching their commercials and going to their website to check it out. The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc. until after you mail off the last payment!</p><p>I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.</p><p>The lesson here folks: if it's too good to be true then it probably is.</p></div><p>I will send these 35,000 an ebook on how to not get taken by scams.  For the one time low low price of $10.00. $350,000 humm Sounds nice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember watching their commercials and going to their website to check it out .
The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc .
until after you mail off the last payment ! I thought to myself , who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime , but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.The lesson here folks : if it 's too good to be true then it probably is.I will send these 35,000 an ebook on how to not get taken by scams .
For the one time low low price of $ 10.00 .
$ 350,000 humm Sounds nice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember watching their commercials and going to their website to check it out.
The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc.
until after you mail off the last payment!I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.The lesson here folks: if it's too good to be true then it probably is.I will send these 35,000 an ebook on how to not get taken by scams.
For the one time low low price of $10.00.
$350,000 humm Sounds nice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094856</id>
	<title>Forget the White Elephant...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258130880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude! You got a BlueHippoed!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude !
You got a BlueHippoed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude!
You got a BlueHippoed!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095848</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258190520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>where as if people had their pension with Enron they would be safer right? at least you're guaranteed that the US govt will be there when you retire.</p><p>That's the way it works. where I live I would rather pay my taxes to the government and only deal with companies if and when I need to.<br>Would you rather have 0\% tax, but be dependent on all the Wall St crooks for your medical/pension/insurance needs?</p><p>The difference between govt and private pension/medical/insurance is that the govt only needs to break even rather than pay for the CEOs gold plated toilet seat on his pink yacht.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>where as if people had their pension with Enron they would be safer right ?
at least you 're guaranteed that the US govt will be there when you retire.That 's the way it works .
where I live I would rather pay my taxes to the government and only deal with companies if and when I need to.Would you rather have 0 \ % tax , but be dependent on all the Wall St crooks for your medical/pension/insurance needs ? The difference between govt and private pension/medical/insurance is that the govt only needs to break even rather than pay for the CEOs gold plated toilet seat on his pink yacht .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>where as if people had their pension with Enron they would be safer right?
at least you're guaranteed that the US govt will be there when you retire.That's the way it works.
where I live I would rather pay my taxes to the government and only deal with companies if and when I need to.Would you rather have 0\% tax, but be dependent on all the Wall St crooks for your medical/pension/insurance needs?The difference between govt and private pension/medical/insurance is that the govt only needs to break even rather than pay for the CEOs gold plated toilet seat on his pink yacht.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30100842</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>jtownatpunk.net</author>
	<datestamp>1258193820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, the article never actually states that anyone made the required payments without receiving a computer.  There was some sort of scammy cancellation policy but did anyone actually put the $99-124 down then make the next 13 payments of $36-88 and THEN fail to receive a computer?  Or did they do the downpayment, a couple of recurring payments, then stop sending money?</p><p>I have absolutely no problem believing that only one person was brain-dead enough to follow through long enough to receive a computer.  I mean you had to already pay them MORE than the cost of a computer before you ever got a computer and then they have to KEEP PAYING MORE MONEY.  It would make more sense to just put $50-100 in the cookie jar every month for 6 months then go buy a much better computer.  And then not have to pay any more money.  You'd get it just as fast for less money.  Even if you're already in for a hundred dollar downpayment and have to pay another hundred bucks to cancel, it would STILL be better to admit you were a dumbass, pay the penalty, then just start saving money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , the article never actually states that anyone made the required payments without receiving a computer .
There was some sort of scammy cancellation policy but did anyone actually put the $ 99-124 down then make the next 13 payments of $ 36-88 and THEN fail to receive a computer ?
Or did they do the downpayment , a couple of recurring payments , then stop sending money ? I have absolutely no problem believing that only one person was brain-dead enough to follow through long enough to receive a computer .
I mean you had to already pay them MORE than the cost of a computer before you ever got a computer and then they have to KEEP PAYING MORE MONEY .
It would make more sense to just put $ 50-100 in the cookie jar every month for 6 months then go buy a much better computer .
And then not have to pay any more money .
You 'd get it just as fast for less money .
Even if you 're already in for a hundred dollar downpayment and have to pay another hundred bucks to cancel , it would STILL be better to admit you were a dumbass , pay the penalty , then just start saving money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, the article never actually states that anyone made the required payments without receiving a computer.
There was some sort of scammy cancellation policy but did anyone actually put the $99-124 down then make the next 13 payments of $36-88 and THEN fail to receive a computer?
Or did they do the downpayment, a couple of recurring payments, then stop sending money?I have absolutely no problem believing that only one person was brain-dead enough to follow through long enough to receive a computer.
I mean you had to already pay them MORE than the cost of a computer before you ever got a computer and then they have to KEEP PAYING MORE MONEY.
It would make more sense to just put $50-100 in the cookie jar every month for 6 months then go buy a much better computer.
And then not have to pay any more money.
You'd get it just as fast for less money.
Even if you're already in for a hundred dollar downpayment and have to pay another hundred bucks to cancel, it would STILL be better to admit you were a dumbass, pay the penalty, then just start saving money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094832</id>
	<title>Failed step 3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258130760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Scam idiots<br>2. Collect millions<br>3. Flee the country with your millions. Looks like China is about the only livable country without an extradition treaty to the US. Hong Kong sounds very nice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Scam idiots2 .
Collect millions3 .
Flee the country with your millions .
Looks like China is about the only livable country without an extradition treaty to the US .
Hong Kong sounds very nice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Scam idiots2.
Collect millions3.
Flee the country with your millions.
Looks like China is about the only livable country without an extradition treaty to the US.
Hong Kong sounds very nice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258132860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So I see that Gates and Buffet said recently that the economy is picking back up and all is well and there is no reason for anyone to be worried and the free market is perfect.</p><p>But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.</p></div></blockquote><p>The elderly are doing the same thing to workers right now through Social Security and Medicare.</p><p>We're promised future product (retirement money and health care) if we make payments up front. And it's unlikely the state will be able to deliver since they've already spent the money.</p><p>Sound familiar?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So I see that Gates and Buffet said recently that the economy is picking back up and all is well and there is no reason for anyone to be worried and the free market is perfect.But how can it be perfect if the we can not protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.The elderly are doing the same thing to workers right now through Social Security and Medicare.We 're promised future product ( retirement money and health care ) if we make payments up front .
And it 's unlikely the state will be able to deliver since they 've already spent the money.Sound familiar ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I see that Gates and Buffet said recently that the economy is picking back up and all is well and there is no reason for anyone to be worried and the free market is perfect.But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.The elderly are doing the same thing to workers right now through Social Security and Medicare.We're promised future product (retirement money and health care) if we make payments up front.
And it's unlikely the state will be able to deliver since they've already spent the money.Sound familiar?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</id>
	<title>Shocking!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258128360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember watching their commercials and going to their website to check it out. The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc. until after you mail off the last payment!</p><p>I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.</p><p>The lesson here folks: if it's too good to be true then it probably is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember watching their commercials and going to their website to check it out .
The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc .
until after you mail off the last payment ! I thought to myself , who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime , but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.The lesson here folks : if it 's too good to be true then it probably is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember watching their commercials and going to their website to check it out.
The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc.
until after you mail off the last payment!I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.The lesson here folks: if it's too good to be true then it probably is.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</id>
	<title>Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258129440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So I see that Gates and Buffet said recently that the economy is picking back up and all is well and there is no reason for anyone to be worried and the free market is perfect.
<p>
But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.  If $1 gets spent by ACORN in a questionable manner, an act of congress is immediately enacted,but when those not so well off are robbed, we can't even make the criminal parties stop, much less put them in jail.
</p><p>
Or look at Verizon.  They are stealing from their customers in $1.99 increments.  And don't tell me it is not stealing.  If you went to store and got charged for everything you put in your shopping cart before you checked out and left the store, and the store refused to refund you money if you did not actually want the merchandise, I am sure the cops would be called.
</p><p>
Of course Billg loves the free market. If a contractor installs unlicensed versions of MS Office on a clients computer, that contractor can earn a million dollars bounty forreporting the company, and then the BSA has every right to put the company out of business with exorbitant and irrational penalties.  But if MS steals software, they can just blame it on a contractor and then apologize.
</p><p>
People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I see that Gates and Buffet said recently that the economy is picking back up and all is well and there is no reason for anyone to be worried and the free market is perfect .
But how can it be perfect if the we can not protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money .
If $ 1 gets spent by ACORN in a questionable manner , an act of congress is immediately enacted,but when those not so well off are robbed , we ca n't even make the criminal parties stop , much less put them in jail .
Or look at Verizon .
They are stealing from their customers in $ 1.99 increments .
And do n't tell me it is not stealing .
If you went to store and got charged for everything you put in your shopping cart before you checked out and left the store , and the store refused to refund you money if you did not actually want the merchandise , I am sure the cops would be called .
Of course Billg loves the free market .
If a contractor installs unlicensed versions of MS Office on a clients computer , that contractor can earn a million dollars bounty forreporting the company , and then the BSA has every right to put the company out of business with exorbitant and irrational penalties .
But if MS steals software , they can just blame it on a contractor and then apologize .
People are decrying the direction of the US , but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite , a change was and is necessary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I see that Gates and Buffet said recently that the economy is picking back up and all is well and there is no reason for anyone to be worried and the free market is perfect.
But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.
If $1 gets spent by ACORN in a questionable manner, an act of congress is immediately enacted,but when those not so well off are robbed, we can't even make the criminal parties stop, much less put them in jail.
Or look at Verizon.
They are stealing from their customers in $1.99 increments.
And don't tell me it is not stealing.
If you went to store and got charged for everything you put in your shopping cart before you checked out and left the store, and the store refused to refund you money if you did not actually want the merchandise, I am sure the cops would be called.
Of course Billg loves the free market.
If a contractor installs unlicensed versions of MS Office on a clients computer, that contractor can earn a million dollars bounty forreporting the company, and then the BSA has every right to put the company out of business with exorbitant and irrational penalties.
But if MS steals software, they can just blame it on a contractor and then apologize.
People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095716</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1258231500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.</p></div><p>As PT Barnum once said, "the fool and his money are soon parted". This notion that the government has to step in and protect people from themselves is completely misguided; it treats everyone like grown up children who cannot take responsibility for their own choices. Do you want to live in the real world and be treated like an adult? If your answer is yes, you have to be willing to let people make their own decisions, no matter how stupid, and own their failures. That is what it means to be an independent adult.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>If $1 gets spent by ACORN in a questionable manner, an act of congress is immediately enacted,but when those not so well off are robbed, we can't even make the criminal parties stop, much less put them in jail.</p></div><p>Personally, I was glad to see ACORN go. They were a criminal gang of election fraudsters and two-bit street hustlers who were out of their league and got what was coming to them. Did they honestly believe that they wouldn't be infiltrated and exposed? Their operational security was a joke and they paid the price. Good riddance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But how can it be perfect if the we can not protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.As PT Barnum once said , " the fool and his money are soon parted " .
This notion that the government has to step in and protect people from themselves is completely misguided ; it treats everyone like grown up children who can not take responsibility for their own choices .
Do you want to live in the real world and be treated like an adult ?
If your answer is yes , you have to be willing to let people make their own decisions , no matter how stupid , and own their failures .
That is what it means to be an independent adult.If $ 1 gets spent by ACORN in a questionable manner , an act of congress is immediately enacted,but when those not so well off are robbed , we ca n't even make the criminal parties stop , much less put them in jail.Personally , I was glad to see ACORN go .
They were a criminal gang of election fraudsters and two-bit street hustlers who were out of their league and got what was coming to them .
Did they honestly believe that they would n't be infiltrated and exposed ?
Their operational security was a joke and they paid the price .
Good riddance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.As PT Barnum once said, "the fool and his money are soon parted".
This notion that the government has to step in and protect people from themselves is completely misguided; it treats everyone like grown up children who cannot take responsibility for their own choices.
Do you want to live in the real world and be treated like an adult?
If your answer is yes, you have to be willing to let people make their own decisions, no matter how stupid, and own their failures.
That is what it means to be an independent adult.If $1 gets spent by ACORN in a questionable manner, an act of congress is immediately enacted,but when those not so well off are robbed, we can't even make the criminal parties stop, much less put them in jail.Personally, I was glad to see ACORN go.
They were a criminal gang of election fraudsters and two-bit street hustlers who were out of their league and got what was coming to them.
Did they honestly believe that they wouldn't be infiltrated and exposed?
Their operational security was a joke and they paid the price.
Good riddance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097422</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>Waffle Iron</author>
	<datestamp>1258213500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So it's like social security?</p></div><p>Not completely. Social Security provides an important benefit right now: It greatly reduces the risk that your mother-in-law will be moving in with you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So it 's like social security ? Not completely .
Social Security provides an important benefit right now : It greatly reduces the risk that your mother-in-law will be moving in with you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it's like social security?Not completely.
Social Security provides an important benefit right now: It greatly reduces the risk that your mother-in-law will be moving in with you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095584</id>
	<title>Apparently, Peter Potomus was running this scam...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258229160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...even while he was working for Sebben &amp; Sebben.</p><p>And he even had the utter gall to appear AS the corporate symbol, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...even while he was working for Sebben &amp; Sebben.And he even had the utter gall to appear AS the corporate symbol , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...even while he was working for Sebben &amp; Sebben.And he even had the utter gall to appear AS the corporate symbol, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094684</id>
	<title>Winning gold at the scam olympics</title>
	<author>ZackSchil</author>
	<datestamp>1258129020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just went there and clicked a purchase button that said I needed to log in, but my SSN would do just fine to log in.</p><p>This is a pretty great scam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just went there and clicked a purchase button that said I needed to log in , but my SSN would do just fine to log in.This is a pretty great scam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just went there and clicked a purchase button that said I needed to log in, but my SSN would do just fine to log in.This is a pretty great scam.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096266</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258199280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.</i></p><p>Ah, it's the invisible hand at work.</p><p><i>People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.</i></p><p>The bailouts are the latest big theft by the elite -- how are things changing at all?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But how can it be perfect if the we can not protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.Ah , it 's the invisible hand at work.People are decrying the direction of the US , but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite , a change was and is necessary.The bailouts are the latest big theft by the elite -- how are things changing at all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.Ah, it's the invisible hand at work.People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.The bailouts are the latest big theft by the elite -- how are things changing at all?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782</id>
	<title>Immoral people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258130100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can never make enough laws to keep people like this from exploiting others.</p><p>It would never occur to those of us who have been raised with an inkling of an idea of good and evil to treat others in such a despicable manner.</p><p>It has nothing to do with free market.  It is an issue of ethics and values.</p><p>Without the adoption of some standard of right and good within the individual heart, there is no hope of restraining people from similar scams.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can never make enough laws to keep people like this from exploiting others.It would never occur to those of us who have been raised with an inkling of an idea of good and evil to treat others in such a despicable manner.It has nothing to do with free market .
It is an issue of ethics and values.Without the adoption of some standard of right and good within the individual heart , there is no hope of restraining people from similar scams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can never make enough laws to keep people like this from exploiting others.It would never occur to those of us who have been raised with an inkling of an idea of good and evil to treat others in such a despicable manner.It has nothing to do with free market.
It is an issue of ethics and values.Without the adoption of some standard of right and good within the individual heart, there is no hope of restraining people from similar scams.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30133822</id>
	<title>Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258449060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Blue Rhino makes and recycles Propane gas tanks.  I use their propane tanks for my grill and have been nothing but happy with them.  Because of Blue Rhino and companies like them, propane tank exchange is possible and available at gas stations and home improvement stores everywhere.  Please do not lump them in with the totally unrelated company:  Blue Hippo.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Blue Rhino makes and recycles Propane gas tanks .
I use their propane tanks for my grill and have been nothing but happy with them .
Because of Blue Rhino and companies like them , propane tank exchange is possible and available at gas stations and home improvement stores everywhere .
Please do not lump them in with the totally unrelated company : Blue Hippo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Blue Rhino makes and recycles Propane gas tanks.
I use their propane tanks for my grill and have been nothing but happy with them.
Because of Blue Rhino and companies like them, propane tank exchange is possible and available at gas stations and home improvement stores everywhere.
Please do not lump them in with the totally unrelated company:  Blue Hippo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30102038</id>
	<title>Re:If you thought SS was bad...</title>
	<author>vxvxvxvx</author>
	<datestamp>1258202580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The health care system is entirely different. Social security is structured like MLM. You pay people based on those at lower levels paying in. Like MLM, it's sustainability is entirely based on an increasing number of people paying in. With reproduction rates falling in developed countries (the environment can't sustain the old population growth anyway) the system will fail, because there won't be enough paying in. If you think of it as a retirement account where you put money in through your working life to retire on at old age, it actually has a negative interest rate for today's young workers. That's like putting $100 into a savings account today so that you can have $75 in 10 years. You'd be better off sticking the cash in your mattress.</p><p>The health care thing is nothing like that. It's not structured like MLM. It's sustainability is not an issue. As far as employers dropping coverage, there's little motivation. Say they pay $35,000 for the average worker per year including health insurance. If the government forced them to stop providing insurance and forced you to buy a $10,000 family plan, you're simply moving the expense from the company to the individual. It would then cost the company only $25,000 for the average worker if they held all else equal. So they could increase salary by $10,000 and remain at the same cost as they were before, $35,000 per employee. The only thing that could screw people would be the employers, and they're equally capable of screwing people today. In reality, under the health care bills today it would encourage employers to carry coverage and penalize them for not doing so. But your standard Fox News analysis is going to try to scare you into believing the health care bill equals communism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The health care system is entirely different .
Social security is structured like MLM .
You pay people based on those at lower levels paying in .
Like MLM , it 's sustainability is entirely based on an increasing number of people paying in .
With reproduction rates falling in developed countries ( the environment ca n't sustain the old population growth anyway ) the system will fail , because there wo n't be enough paying in .
If you think of it as a retirement account where you put money in through your working life to retire on at old age , it actually has a negative interest rate for today 's young workers .
That 's like putting $ 100 into a savings account today so that you can have $ 75 in 10 years .
You 'd be better off sticking the cash in your mattress.The health care thing is nothing like that .
It 's not structured like MLM .
It 's sustainability is not an issue .
As far as employers dropping coverage , there 's little motivation .
Say they pay $ 35,000 for the average worker per year including health insurance .
If the government forced them to stop providing insurance and forced you to buy a $ 10,000 family plan , you 're simply moving the expense from the company to the individual .
It would then cost the company only $ 25,000 for the average worker if they held all else equal .
So they could increase salary by $ 10,000 and remain at the same cost as they were before , $ 35,000 per employee .
The only thing that could screw people would be the employers , and they 're equally capable of screwing people today .
In reality , under the health care bills today it would encourage employers to carry coverage and penalize them for not doing so .
But your standard Fox News analysis is going to try to scare you into believing the health care bill equals communism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The health care system is entirely different.
Social security is structured like MLM.
You pay people based on those at lower levels paying in.
Like MLM, it's sustainability is entirely based on an increasing number of people paying in.
With reproduction rates falling in developed countries (the environment can't sustain the old population growth anyway) the system will fail, because there won't be enough paying in.
If you think of it as a retirement account where you put money in through your working life to retire on at old age, it actually has a negative interest rate for today's young workers.
That's like putting $100 into a savings account today so that you can have $75 in 10 years.
You'd be better off sticking the cash in your mattress.The health care thing is nothing like that.
It's not structured like MLM.
It's sustainability is not an issue.
As far as employers dropping coverage, there's little motivation.
Say they pay $35,000 for the average worker per year including health insurance.
If the government forced them to stop providing insurance and forced you to buy a $10,000 family plan, you're simply moving the expense from the company to the individual.
It would then cost the company only $25,000 for the average worker if they held all else equal.
So they could increase salary by $10,000 and remain at the same cost as they were before, $35,000 per employee.
The only thing that could screw people would be the employers, and they're equally capable of screwing people today.
In reality, under the health care bills today it would encourage employers to carry coverage and penalize them for not doing so.
But your standard Fox News analysis is going to try to scare you into believing the health care bill equals communism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30103492</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>eihab</author>
	<datestamp>1258217700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Um. . . . too good to be true? Anyone ever calculate up what they give you for what your total payments would be?</p></div><p>I agree, it was clearly over-priced as well. The "too good to be true" part I was referring to was the:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>"No money down, no credit check! You, YES YOU, can get a computer TODAY for the low monthly payment of $x!!"</p></div><p>... commercials that they ran all the time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um .
. .
. too good to be true ?
Anyone ever calculate up what they give you for what your total payments would be ? I agree , it was clearly over-priced as well .
The " too good to be true " part I was referring to was the : " No money down , no credit check !
You , YES YOU , can get a computer TODAY for the low monthly payment of $ x ! ! " .. .
commercials that they ran all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um.
. .
. too good to be true?
Anyone ever calculate up what they give you for what your total payments would be?I agree, it was clearly over-priced as well.
The "too good to be true" part I was referring to was the:"No money down, no credit check!
You, YES YOU, can get a computer TODAY for the low monthly payment of $x!!"...
commercials that they ran all the time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095664</id>
	<title>Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers?</title>
	<author>ffflala</author>
	<datestamp>1258230420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Milli Vanilli: they settled a class action lawsuit.</p><p>A more recent example is the class action lawsuit brought against auto dealerships for refusing to disclose hidden points the added to financing charges. "Those few percentage points of interest that dealers add on for themselves - without telling the customer - is called "dealer reserve," and it can add thousands of dollars to the cost of buying a car."  <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/01/60minutes/main609870.shtml" title="cbsnews.com">http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/01/60minutes/main609870.shtml</a> [cbsnews.com]</p><p>Excluding scams from operating businesses seems to me an inaccurate distinction -- an operating business can be a scam. Just look at magnetic arthritis bracelets, or The Secret.</p><p>My favorite is Excel Communications -- a wildly successful business that managed to beat Microsoft to become the youngest operating billion-dollar-annual company in history. Their MLM scheme was practically indistinguishable from any gifting club pyramid scheme. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excel\_Communications" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excel\_Communications</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>I do not know of any class action lawsuits against them, but believe there were a number of actions brought against them by state consumer agencies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Milli Vanilli : they settled a class action lawsuit.A more recent example is the class action lawsuit brought against auto dealerships for refusing to disclose hidden points the added to financing charges .
" Those few percentage points of interest that dealers add on for themselves - without telling the customer - is called " dealer reserve , " and it can add thousands of dollars to the cost of buying a car .
" http : //www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/01/60minutes/main609870.shtml [ cbsnews.com ] Excluding scams from operating businesses seems to me an inaccurate distinction -- an operating business can be a scam .
Just look at magnetic arthritis bracelets , or The Secret.My favorite is Excel Communications -- a wildly successful business that managed to beat Microsoft to become the youngest operating billion-dollar-annual company in history .
Their MLM scheme was practically indistinguishable from any gifting club pyramid scheme .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excel \ _Communications [ wikipedia.org ] I do not know of any class action lawsuits against them , but believe there were a number of actions brought against them by state consumer agencies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Milli Vanilli: they settled a class action lawsuit.A more recent example is the class action lawsuit brought against auto dealerships for refusing to disclose hidden points the added to financing charges.
"Those few percentage points of interest that dealers add on for themselves - without telling the customer - is called "dealer reserve," and it can add thousands of dollars to the cost of buying a car.
"  http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/01/60minutes/main609870.shtml [cbsnews.com]Excluding scams from operating businesses seems to me an inaccurate distinction -- an operating business can be a scam.
Just look at magnetic arthritis bracelets, or The Secret.My favorite is Excel Communications -- a wildly successful business that managed to beat Microsoft to become the youngest operating billion-dollar-annual company in history.
Their MLM scheme was practically indistinguishable from any gifting club pyramid scheme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excel\_Communications [wikipedia.org]I do not know of any class action lawsuits against them, but believe there were a number of actions brought against them by state consumer agencies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095004</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>Stan92057</author>
	<datestamp>1258132800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some people are truly desperate to fix/get credit so they take chances with places like this one. Its not an excuse for poor judgment,but everything that is done has a reason,good or bad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some people are truly desperate to fix/get credit so they take chances with places like this one .
Its not an excuse for poor judgment,but everything that is done has a reason,good or bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some people are truly desperate to fix/get credit so they take chances with places like this one.
Its not an excuse for poor judgment,but everything that is done has a reason,good or bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095018</id>
	<title>Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually...</title>
	<author>Edmund Blackadder</author>
	<datestamp>1258133160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes they may have been able to clear good margins if they had an efficient operation. But of course companies like that are rarely efficient, because a thief usually does not know how to do anything well other than stealing.</p><p>Also, outfits like these are usually high pressure sales operations which means they have to pay their salespeople a lot of money per sale.</p><p>But in any event, I suspect they were planning on shipping the computers some time but they just did not get around to it because they were too lazy, and having too much fun making money to actually spend any money on computers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes they may have been able to clear good margins if they had an efficient operation .
But of course companies like that are rarely efficient , because a thief usually does not know how to do anything well other than stealing.Also , outfits like these are usually high pressure sales operations which means they have to pay their salespeople a lot of money per sale.But in any event , I suspect they were planning on shipping the computers some time but they just did not get around to it because they were too lazy , and having too much fun making money to actually spend any money on computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes they may have been able to clear good margins if they had an efficient operation.
But of course companies like that are rarely efficient, because a thief usually does not know how to do anything well other than stealing.Also, outfits like these are usually high pressure sales operations which means they have to pay their salespeople a lot of money per sale.But in any event, I suspect they were planning on shipping the computers some time but they just did not get around to it because they were too lazy, and having too much fun making money to actually spend any money on computers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094656</id>
	<title>Childhood Memories</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258128660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hungry hungry hippos!!!  I loved that game!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hungry hungry hippos ! ! !
I loved that game !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hungry hungry hippos!!!
I loved that game!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094956</id>
	<title>And more ways to protect yourself</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258132320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With the job market being what it is these days, there are plenty of nasty job scams too, that aim to get free work or gather personal info for shady purposes. I'm still getting spam after applying to a Toronto internet marketing company in June.<br>A few things to watch for: A company hiring for essentially the same thing every week or two is worth a careful look before you leap.  (I have a certain 'thoughtful' media company in Edmonton in mind.)<br>Perhaps a few enterprising souls could check government databases or ride the wayback machine to see who the 'responsible' individuals were before the days of infamy and post the info on an appropriate scam monitoring site or two?  Perhaps a court decision or official finding of some kind that could be posted as a simple, but effective, statement of fact?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the job market being what it is these days , there are plenty of nasty job scams too , that aim to get free work or gather personal info for shady purposes .
I 'm still getting spam after applying to a Toronto internet marketing company in June.A few things to watch for : A company hiring for essentially the same thing every week or two is worth a careful look before you leap .
( I have a certain 'thoughtful ' media company in Edmonton in mind .
) Perhaps a few enterprising souls could check government databases or ride the wayback machine to see who the 'responsible ' individuals were before the days of infamy and post the info on an appropriate scam monitoring site or two ?
Perhaps a court decision or official finding of some kind that could be posted as a simple , but effective , statement of fact ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the job market being what it is these days, there are plenty of nasty job scams too, that aim to get free work or gather personal info for shady purposes.
I'm still getting spam after applying to a Toronto internet marketing company in June.A few things to watch for: A company hiring for essentially the same thing every week or two is worth a careful look before you leap.
(I have a certain 'thoughtful' media company in Edmonton in mind.
)Perhaps a few enterprising souls could check government databases or ride the wayback machine to see who the 'responsible' individuals were before the days of infamy and post the info on an appropriate scam monitoring site or two?
Perhaps a court decision or official finding of some kind that could be posted as a simple, but effective, statement of fact?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30100494</id>
	<title>Re:Winning gold at the scam olympics</title>
	<author>GravityStar</author>
	<datestamp>1258190940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My brain hurts. Must find beer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My brain hurts .
Must find beer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My brain hurts.
Must find beer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094684</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094722</id>
	<title>if they shipped only one PC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258129440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How did they get 35,000 people to agree over the choice of a Windows desktop theme?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How did they get 35,000 people to agree over the choice of a Windows desktop theme ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did they get 35,000 people to agree over the choice of a Windows desktop theme?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094646</id>
	<title>Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo"</title>
	<author>NoYob</author>
	<datestamp>1258128600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about naming the asshole or assholes behind it? So that way, if we see those lying thieves we'll know to run. Many times, these guys close up shop and just start all over again with a different business entity.<p>How many would invest with Bernie Madoff if he somehow miraculously got out of prison - regardless of the name of his company?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about naming the asshole or assholes behind it ?
So that way , if we see those lying thieves we 'll know to run .
Many times , these guys close up shop and just start all over again with a different business entity.How many would invest with Bernie Madoff if he somehow miraculously got out of prison - regardless of the name of his company ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about naming the asshole or assholes behind it?
So that way, if we see those lying thieves we'll know to run.
Many times, these guys close up shop and just start all over again with a different business entity.How many would invest with Bernie Madoff if he somehow miraculously got out of prison - regardless of the name of his company?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095056</id>
	<title>No one can protect...</title>
	<author>Hasai</author>
	<datestamp>1258133820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...the Sucker.</p><p>Somewhere, P. T. Barnum is laughing at you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...the Sucker.Somewhere , P. T. Barnum is laughing at you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the Sucker.Somewhere, P. T. Barnum is laughing at you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096044</id>
	<title>Re:Immoral people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258194660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your are a dumb fuck. By your "logic", there should be no laws punishing murder, because people will c0ontinue to kill no matter what the law says. I hope that someone shoots in a driveby and no one is ever charged,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your are a dumb fuck .
By your " logic " , there should be no laws punishing murder , because people will c0ontinue to kill no matter what the law says .
I hope that someone shoots in a driveby and no one is ever charged,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your are a dumb fuck.
By your "logic", there should be no laws punishing murder, because people will c0ontinue to kill no matter what the law says.
I hope that someone shoots in a driveby and no one is ever charged,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096230</id>
	<title>Re:Failed step 3</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1258198620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>1. Scam idiots</i>
<p>
Except it's actually "scam the poor".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Scam idiots Except it 's actually " scam the poor " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Scam idiots

Except it's actually "scam the poor".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095236</id>
	<title>Class Action Laywers and Scammers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258136640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorry, I don't believe it. Scammers don't run a solvent enterprise that a class-action lawyer would approach. The lawyer wants money, the scam is a scam, not an operating business, and doesn't hang around with money for a lawyer to recover.<p>
Do you have any good examples?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , I do n't believe it .
Scammers do n't run a solvent enterprise that a class-action lawyer would approach .
The lawyer wants money , the scam is a scam , not an operating business , and does n't hang around with money for a lawyer to recover .
Do you have any good examples ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, I don't believe it.
Scammers don't run a solvent enterprise that a class-action lawyer would approach.
The lawyer wants money, the scam is a scam, not an operating business, and doesn't hang around with money for a lawyer to recover.
Do you have any good examples?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30100862</id>
	<title>BlueHippo==BoostCred.com, LLC?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258193940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, I got and ad for BlueHippo in my weekend paper, so I called to see who answers when the FTC goes after you.  Whoever answered denied being any part of BlueHippo.  They claim to be BoostCredit.com, LLC.  They could not explain how I got them after calling BlueHippo's number.  The deal they offered did not even approach attractive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , I got and ad for BlueHippo in my weekend paper , so I called to see who answers when the FTC goes after you .
Whoever answered denied being any part of BlueHippo .
They claim to be BoostCredit.com , LLC .
They could not explain how I got them after calling BlueHippo 's number .
The deal they offered did not even approach attractive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, I got and ad for BlueHippo in my weekend paper, so I called to see who answers when the FTC goes after you.
Whoever answered denied being any part of BlueHippo.
They claim to be BoostCredit.com, LLC.
They could not explain how I got them after calling BlueHippo's number.
The deal they offered did not even approach attractive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096870</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258208880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did you guys read the FAQ on the BlueHippo web page ?<br>No small print, clearly states -several times- that you pay first in monthly increments over a year, then they ship.<br>How is that different from a lay away plan a KMart ?<br>If you can't be bothered reading the FAQ, don't complain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did you guys read the FAQ on the BlueHippo web page ? No small print , clearly states -several times- that you pay first in monthly increments over a year , then they ship.How is that different from a lay away plan a KMart ? If you ca n't be bothered reading the FAQ , do n't complain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did you guys read the FAQ on the BlueHippo web page ?No small print, clearly states -several times- that you pay first in monthly increments over a year, then they ship.How is that different from a lay away plan a KMart ?If you can't be bothered reading the FAQ, don't complain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094852</id>
	<title>Even their logo was stolen</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1258130820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Compare BlueHippo's logo to Demby Wishingwell from Playskool's <i>Weebles</i> videos and toys. <a href="http://pineight.com/mw/index.php?title=Image:BlueHippo\_vs\_Demby.jpg" title="pineight.com">Is it coincidental?</a> [pineight.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Compare BlueHippo 's logo to Demby Wishingwell from Playskool 's Weebles videos and toys .
Is it coincidental ?
[ pineight.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compare BlueHippo's logo to Demby Wishingwell from Playskool's Weebles videos and toys.
Is it coincidental?
[pineight.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097906</id>
	<title>Re:Class Action Example</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258217760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Scams always result in cash and assets to seize. Otherwise, they wouldn't be scams. An operating business that has no money is a bankruptcy, not a scam.</p><p>For example, Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme has assets to liquidate. He has a New York condo, art pieces, and other valuables, as well as cash. The U.S . Govt. will take that and give partial restitution to "shareholders".</p><p>Lawyers can seize assets in a civil courts as well. Class-action suits against criminal defendants are even preferred.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Scams always result in cash and assets to seize .
Otherwise , they would n't be scams .
An operating business that has no money is a bankruptcy , not a scam.For example , Bernie Madoff 's Ponzi scheme has assets to liquidate .
He has a New York condo , art pieces , and other valuables , as well as cash .
The U.S .
Govt. will take that and give partial restitution to " shareholders " .Lawyers can seize assets in a civil courts as well .
Class-action suits against criminal defendants are even preferred .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Scams always result in cash and assets to seize.
Otherwise, they wouldn't be scams.
An operating business that has no money is a bankruptcy, not a scam.For example, Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme has assets to liquidate.
He has a New York condo, art pieces, and other valuables, as well as cash.
The U.S .
Govt. will take that and give partial restitution to "shareholders".Lawyers can seize assets in a civil courts as well.
Class-action suits against criminal defendants are even preferred.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095302</id>
	<title>Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258137480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No it isn't rational to expect you get away with it, it is just how scammers work. Part of it is many of them actually talk themselves in to believing that everything they do is ok. They aren't entirely rational, in that they are the kind of person who can't feel empathy for anyone else. Thus if it enriches them, they see it as ok.</p><p>Also greed can override the few functioning brain cells many people have. So they get greedy and try to take more and more, even though there's no real reason to and in doing so they are likely to lose everything. I mean look at the Enron execs. You are talking about people who already had enough money to have pretty much anything they wanted, and yet decided they had to have more and thus stole it.</p><p>Finally, some people just seem to refuse to be legit for whatever reason, even if it is a better idea. There was a guy here locally that was arrested for steaming change out of newspaper machines. Now while this was a few years ago, it still wasn't like a bunch of people bought from these. They'd get a few bucks at most. Also it took a good deal of effort to get in, they are sturdy metal boxes. Cops said he literally would have made more working a minimum wage job or being a panhandler. However for whatever reason, he'd convinced himself this was a good idea.</p><p>There's just no explaining some people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No it is n't rational to expect you get away with it , it is just how scammers work .
Part of it is many of them actually talk themselves in to believing that everything they do is ok. They are n't entirely rational , in that they are the kind of person who ca n't feel empathy for anyone else .
Thus if it enriches them , they see it as ok.Also greed can override the few functioning brain cells many people have .
So they get greedy and try to take more and more , even though there 's no real reason to and in doing so they are likely to lose everything .
I mean look at the Enron execs .
You are talking about people who already had enough money to have pretty much anything they wanted , and yet decided they had to have more and thus stole it.Finally , some people just seem to refuse to be legit for whatever reason , even if it is a better idea .
There was a guy here locally that was arrested for steaming change out of newspaper machines .
Now while this was a few years ago , it still was n't like a bunch of people bought from these .
They 'd get a few bucks at most .
Also it took a good deal of effort to get in , they are sturdy metal boxes .
Cops said he literally would have made more working a minimum wage job or being a panhandler .
However for whatever reason , he 'd convinced himself this was a good idea.There 's just no explaining some people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it isn't rational to expect you get away with it, it is just how scammers work.
Part of it is many of them actually talk themselves in to believing that everything they do is ok. They aren't entirely rational, in that they are the kind of person who can't feel empathy for anyone else.
Thus if it enriches them, they see it as ok.Also greed can override the few functioning brain cells many people have.
So they get greedy and try to take more and more, even though there's no real reason to and in doing so they are likely to lose everything.
I mean look at the Enron execs.
You are talking about people who already had enough money to have pretty much anything they wanted, and yet decided they had to have more and thus stole it.Finally, some people just seem to refuse to be legit for whatever reason, even if it is a better idea.
There was a guy here locally that was arrested for steaming change out of newspaper machines.
Now while this was a few years ago, it still wasn't like a bunch of people bought from these.
They'd get a few bucks at most.
Also it took a good deal of effort to get in, they are sturdy metal boxes.
Cops said he literally would have made more working a minimum wage job or being a panhandler.
However for whatever reason, he'd convinced himself this was a good idea.There's just no explaining some people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096444</id>
	<title>If you thought SS was bad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258202400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you thought SS was old people stealing from young people, wait until the current government passes health care reform.</p><p>That scam is the same, only worse, since today, 90\% of people are covered by their employers, now the government will force you to buy about $5-10K of insurance a year (like a tax, but worse, since it is a direct payment from you to some private company) so that you can cover a relatively tiny number of people.</p><p>Only it will get worse, since most employers will quickly drop their coverage and tell you to buy your own.  They'll give you a modest one time payment to cover about 1/2 the first year's payment and then they're out of the business, forcing the government to cover what will now be a gap in coverage.</p><p>You'll end up spending about 20\% of your income in the end to pay the insurance companies, and if you don't, you'll be fined by the government.</p><p>The BlueHippo this is small potatoes by comparison to what your government is going to do to you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you thought SS was old people stealing from young people , wait until the current government passes health care reform.That scam is the same , only worse , since today , 90 \ % of people are covered by their employers , now the government will force you to buy about $ 5-10K of insurance a year ( like a tax , but worse , since it is a direct payment from you to some private company ) so that you can cover a relatively tiny number of people.Only it will get worse , since most employers will quickly drop their coverage and tell you to buy your own .
They 'll give you a modest one time payment to cover about 1/2 the first year 's payment and then they 're out of the business , forcing the government to cover what will now be a gap in coverage.You 'll end up spending about 20 \ % of your income in the end to pay the insurance companies , and if you do n't , you 'll be fined by the government.The BlueHippo this is small potatoes by comparison to what your government is going to do to you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you thought SS was old people stealing from young people, wait until the current government passes health care reform.That scam is the same, only worse, since today, 90\% of people are covered by their employers, now the government will force you to buy about $5-10K of insurance a year (like a tax, but worse, since it is a direct payment from you to some private company) so that you can cover a relatively tiny number of people.Only it will get worse, since most employers will quickly drop their coverage and tell you to buy your own.
They'll give you a modest one time payment to cover about 1/2 the first year's payment and then they're out of the business, forcing the government to cover what will now be a gap in coverage.You'll end up spending about 20\% of your income in the end to pay the insurance companies, and if you don't, you'll be fined by the government.The BlueHippo this is small potatoes by comparison to what your government is going to do to you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095088</id>
	<title>Re:Immoral people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258134300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>well, at least they didn't pirate music, because that is the WORST type of criminal</htmltext>
<tokenext>well , at least they did n't pirate music , because that is the WORST type of criminal</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, at least they didn't pirate music, because that is the WORST type of criminal</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094690</id>
	<title>I'd do it!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258129140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't mind ripping off niggers, spics and fags. What else would they spend their money on? Drugs?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't mind ripping off niggers , spics and fags .
What else would they spend their money on ?
Drugs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't mind ripping off niggers, spics and fags.
What else would they spend their money on?
Drugs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094720</id>
	<title>Re:I'm fairly surprised, actually...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258129440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Why would somebody do that? Is enforcement so weak that getting away with it is a rational expectation?</p></div></blockquote><p> Yes.  Bernard Madoff being a fantastic example of this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would somebody do that ?
Is enforcement so weak that getting away with it is a rational expectation ?
Yes. Bernard Madoff being a fantastic example of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would somebody do that?
Is enforcement so weak that getting away with it is a rational expectation?
Yes.  Bernard Madoff being a fantastic example of this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30099514</id>
	<title>Re:Immoral people</title>
	<author>formfeed</author>
	<datestamp>1258227840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed, but laws and business regulations can make a difference. Do they try to prevent this or do they (even inadvertently) set up an environment that helps these kind of people?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed , but laws and business regulations can make a difference .
Do they try to prevent this or do they ( even inadvertently ) set up an environment that helps these kind of people ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed, but laws and business regulations can make a difference.
Do they try to prevent this or do they (even inadvertently) set up an environment that helps these kind of people?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095128</id>
	<title>Hey Libtards</title>
	<author>blackpaw</author>
	<datestamp>1258134840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a microcosm of your unregulated "free market" in action.</p><p>Now back to your corner and masturbating to Ayn Rand audio books.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a microcosm of your unregulated " free market " in action.Now back to your corner and masturbating to Ayn Rand audio books .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a microcosm of your unregulated "free market" in action.Now back to your corner and masturbating to Ayn Rand audio books.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095078</id>
	<title>Re:Immoral people</title>
	<author>Machtyn</author>
	<datestamp>1258134240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Policemen and laws can never replace customs, traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we&rsquo;ve become." -Walter Williams, &ldquo;Laws Are a Poor Substitute for Common Decency, Moral Values,&rdquo; Deseret News, Apr. 29, 2009, A15</p></div></blockquote><p>

Your statement reminded me of this quote.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Policemen and laws can never replace customs , traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior .
At best , the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society .
Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we    ve become .
" -Walter Williams ,    Laws Are a Poor Substitute for Common Decency , Moral Values ,    Deseret News , Apr .
29 , 2009 , A15 Your statement reminded me of this quote .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Policemen and laws can never replace customs, traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior.
At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society.
Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we’ve become.
" -Walter Williams, “Laws Are a Poor Substitute for Common Decency, Moral Values,” Deseret News, Apr.
29, 2009, A15

Your statement reminded me of this quote.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094920</id>
	<title>The guy isn't new in this business</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258131600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just like in VINCENT HUMPHRIES's story in <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07\_21/b4035001.htm" title="businessweek.com" rel="nofollow">Business Week</a> [businessweek.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just like in VINCENT HUMPHRIES 's story in Business Week [ businessweek.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just like in VINCENT HUMPHRIES's story in Business Week [businessweek.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094644</id>
	<title>I'm fairly surprised, actually...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1258128600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not surprised that BlueHippo are a bunch of worthless subhumans; but that they would be <i>so</i> audacious about it.<br> <br>

Had they actually shipped a few thousand bottom-of-range refurb Compaqs or whatever, which are pretty damn cheap by the pallet load, they never would have attracted fire from the FTC. The way that their "business" was structured(at least back when I checked their website when I first heard about them), they should have been able to clear fairly impressive margins on the backs of the poor and clueless even without cheating. And, if they had avoided legally actionable fraud, they presumably would still be operating today.<br> <br>

Why would somebody do that? Is enforcement so weak that getting away with it is a rational expectation?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not surprised that BlueHippo are a bunch of worthless subhumans ; but that they would be so audacious about it .
Had they actually shipped a few thousand bottom-of-range refurb Compaqs or whatever , which are pretty damn cheap by the pallet load , they never would have attracted fire from the FTC .
The way that their " business " was structured ( at least back when I checked their website when I first heard about them ) , they should have been able to clear fairly impressive margins on the backs of the poor and clueless even without cheating .
And , if they had avoided legally actionable fraud , they presumably would still be operating today .
Why would somebody do that ?
Is enforcement so weak that getting away with it is a rational expectation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not surprised that BlueHippo are a bunch of worthless subhumans; but that they would be so audacious about it.
Had they actually shipped a few thousand bottom-of-range refurb Compaqs or whatever, which are pretty damn cheap by the pallet load, they never would have attracted fire from the FTC.
The way that their "business" was structured(at least back when I checked their website when I first heard about them), they should have been able to clear fairly impressive margins on the backs of the poor and clueless even without cheating.
And, if they had avoided legally actionable fraud, they presumably would still be operating today.
Why would somebody do that?
Is enforcement so weak that getting away with it is a rational expectation?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095156</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258135200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.</i></p><p>lets see...</p><p>Their website says...</p><p><i>To login to your account simply enter your social security number and password (often your mother's maiden name) to the right.</i></p><p>I'm not from the US but is your SSN really something you should be using as a login?</p><p>From their faq...</p><p><i>We use SSL to encrypt your data (like most reputable sites).</i></p><p>Hmmm so your login is used to encrypt your data.. clever</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought to myself , who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime , but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.lets see...Their website says...To login to your account simply enter your social security number and password ( often your mother 's maiden name ) to the right.I 'm not from the US but is your SSN really something you should be using as a login ? From their faq...We use SSL to encrypt your data ( like most reputable sites ) .Hmmm so your login is used to encrypt your data.. clever</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought to myself, who in their right mind would even consider giving this company a dime, but apparently there were 35,000 such individuals.lets see...Their website says...To login to your account simply enter your social security number and password (often your mother's maiden name) to the right.I'm not from the US but is your SSN really something you should be using as a login?From their faq...We use SSL to encrypt your data (like most reputable sites).Hmmm so your login is used to encrypt your data.. clever</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094828</id>
	<title>Didn't receive anything in return?</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1258130700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>In the meantime, the company took in a cool $15 million in payments from consumers, who don't appear to have received anything in return.</i></p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Well, they received a lot of advertising, didn't they?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the meantime , the company took in a cool $ 15 million in payments from consumers , who do n't appear to have received anything in return .
      Well , they received a lot of advertising , did n't they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the meantime, the company took in a cool $15 million in payments from consumers, who don't appear to have received anything in return.
      Well, they received a lot of advertising, didn't they?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094962</id>
	<title>What law would you pass to stop a lawbreaker?</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1258132380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.</i></p><p>The free market is not perfect.</p><p>But how on earth would you stop someone like this in an un-free market?  Remember they are quite willing from the outset to break any law.  If all the laws you pass men nothing to them, how have you helped except make it harder for honest people to run a business, who then quit leaving more room open for scams?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But how can it be perfect if the we can not protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.The free market is not perfect.But how on earth would you stop someone like this in an un-free market ?
Remember they are quite willing from the outset to break any law .
If all the laws you pass men nothing to them , how have you helped except make it harder for honest people to run a business , who then quit leaving more room open for scams ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But how can it be perfect if the we cannot protect those who need protection most from those who would steal their money.The free market is not perfect.But how on earth would you stop someone like this in an un-free market?
Remember they are quite willing from the outset to break any law.
If all the laws you pass men nothing to them, how have you helped except make it harder for honest people to run a business, who then quit leaving more room open for scams?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098032</id>
	<title>Re:What law would you pass to stop a lawbreaker?</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1258218960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>how on earth would you stop someone like this in an un-free market? Remember they are quite willing from the outset to break any law.</p></div><p>You could pass laws that guide the lawful away from the lawbreakers.  Punish victims and the victims will shy away from the criminals.  Of course, this is unconscionable behavior for a government, which is why we'll get it in our lifetimes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>how on earth would you stop someone like this in an un-free market ?
Remember they are quite willing from the outset to break any law.You could pass laws that guide the lawful away from the lawbreakers .
Punish victims and the victims will shy away from the criminals .
Of course , this is unconscionable behavior for a government , which is why we 'll get it in our lifetimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how on earth would you stop someone like this in an un-free market?
Remember they are quite willing from the outset to break any law.You could pass laws that guide the lawful away from the lawbreakers.
Punish victims and the victims will shy away from the criminals.
Of course, this is unconscionable behavior for a government, which is why we'll get it in our lifetimes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095398</id>
	<title>Their phone number still works</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258138980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just called it and got through to someone calling themselves Danny Archer.  They did not provide a company name in their greetings instead asking immediately for my first name.</p><p>If they're shut down they need to be shut down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just called it and got through to someone calling themselves Danny Archer .
They did not provide a company name in their greetings instead asking immediately for my first name.If they 're shut down they need to be shut down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just called it and got through to someone calling themselves Danny Archer.
They did not provide a company name in their greetings instead asking immediately for my first name.If they're shut down they need to be shut down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095476</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>michaelhood</author>
	<datestamp>1258140480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc. until after you mail off the last payment!</p></div><p>So it's like social security?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc .
until after you mail off the last payment ! So it 's like social security ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fine print clearly stated that you will not receive their computer printer/combo/etc.
until after you mail off the last payment!So it's like social security?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30102082</id>
	<title>Re:Their phone number still works</title>
	<author>SeNtM</author>
	<datestamp>1258202880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I called (800-747-4260), they said it was "Boost Credit" doing service for BlueHippo.<br>Most agents that work in call-centers are anware of the companies illegal activities.  I say flood their phone-system with calls informing their agents that it is a scam.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I called ( 800-747-4260 ) , they said it was " Boost Credit " doing service for BlueHippo.Most agents that work in call-centers are anware of the companies illegal activities .
I say flood their phone-system with calls informing their agents that it is a scam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I called (800-747-4260), they said it was "Boost Credit" doing service for BlueHippo.Most agents that work in call-centers are anware of the companies illegal activities.
I say flood their phone-system with calls informing their agents that it is a scam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094666</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1258128780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
They were so massively overpriced...  I wonder how many of the 35,000 actually sent in all the payments?
</p><p>
Also, if they were shutdown... I wonder why their site,   http:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>//www. bluehippo<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.com/default.asp

still works...
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They were so massively overpriced... I wonder how many of the 35,000 actually sent in all the payments ?
Also , if they were shutdown... I wonder why their site , http : //www .
bluehippo .com/default.asp still works.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
They were so massively overpriced...  I wonder how many of the 35,000 actually sent in all the payments?
Also, if they were shutdown... I wonder why their site,   http: //www.
bluehippo .com/default.asp

still works...
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095350</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258138380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is the point being made about the free market system, you can sign up with verizon in good faith and then subsequently realize you don't like a particular business practice.  Once you realize that they are cheating you, poisoning drinking water, or suffocating babies it is too late and you are stuck in a contract with no way out except to give them more money. Only after this will you be able to boycott them, the problem is how much damage they cause in the process, before people catch on.  Face it, a phone is a necessity in our economy, whether it be land locked or not. Try conducting a job search without one, you'll never know if you got hired.  When you are poor a phone call is cheaper than gas used driving around to check on job applications.  Pay phones are dinosaurs that most people cannot locate when hard pressed, and they cost more than a nickel these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is the point being made about the free market system , you can sign up with verizon in good faith and then subsequently realize you do n't like a particular business practice .
Once you realize that they are cheating you , poisoning drinking water , or suffocating babies it is too late and you are stuck in a contract with no way out except to give them more money .
Only after this will you be able to boycott them , the problem is how much damage they cause in the process , before people catch on .
Face it , a phone is a necessity in our economy , whether it be land locked or not .
Try conducting a job search without one , you 'll never know if you got hired .
When you are poor a phone call is cheaper than gas used driving around to check on job applications .
Pay phones are dinosaurs that most people can not locate when hard pressed , and they cost more than a nickel these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is the point being made about the free market system, you can sign up with verizon in good faith and then subsequently realize you don't like a particular business practice.
Once you realize that they are cheating you, poisoning drinking water, or suffocating babies it is too late and you are stuck in a contract with no way out except to give them more money.
Only after this will you be able to boycott them, the problem is how much damage they cause in the process, before people catch on.
Face it, a phone is a necessity in our economy, whether it be land locked or not.
Try conducting a job search without one, you'll never know if you got hired.
When you are poor a phone call is cheaper than gas used driving around to check on job applications.
Pay phones are dinosaurs that most people cannot locate when hard pressed, and they cost more than a nickel these days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094960</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30106692</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>LackThereof</author>
	<datestamp>1258309500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to the linked PDF from the FTC, about 2,500 of the 35,000 made enough payments to get a computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the linked PDF from the FTC , about 2,500 of the 35,000 made enough payments to get a computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the linked PDF from the FTC, about 2,500 of the 35,000 made enough payments to get a computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095102</id>
	<title>The pitchman</title>
	<author>SKiRgE</author>
	<datestamp>1258134540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but who here cringed every single time he said the word labtop instead of laptop?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but who here cringed every single time he said the word labtop instead of laptop ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but who here cringed every single time he said the word labtop instead of laptop?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096028</id>
	<title>Re:What law would you pass to stop a lawbreaker?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258194480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Decimation would help.</p><p>i) The US is an empire.<br>ii) Rome was an empire.<br>iii) Rome used decimation.<br>iv) Profit!</p><p>Ooops no ???? stage, my bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Decimation would help.i ) The US is an empire.ii ) Rome was an empire.iii ) Rome used decimation.iv ) Profit ! Ooops no ? ? ? ?
stage , my bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Decimation would help.i) The US is an empire.ii) Rome was an empire.iii) Rome used decimation.iv) Profit!Ooops no ????
stage, my bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094962</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097912</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258217820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is this financing if you pay up front before receiving the product? Unbelievable that so many people would fall for this. And the FTC seems to be afraid of shutting down this obvious scam.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is this financing if you pay up front before receiving the product ?
Unbelievable that so many people would fall for this .
And the FTC seems to be afraid of shutting down this obvious scam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is this financing if you pay up front before receiving the product?
Unbelievable that so many people would fall for this.
And the FTC seems to be afraid of shutting down this obvious scam.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095808</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258189860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Verizon has competitors.  I know of one (T-mobile) who doesn't even rip me off.  There are probably others.
</p><p>
Every time people talk about Verizon, I shrug.  Just look at the dollar amounts.  You don't even need to know that they're evil, in order to know that you will lose if you have anything to do with them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Verizon has competitors .
I know of one ( T-mobile ) who does n't even rip me off .
There are probably others .
Every time people talk about Verizon , I shrug .
Just look at the dollar amounts .
You do n't even need to know that they 're evil , in order to know that you will lose if you have anything to do with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Verizon has competitors.
I know of one (T-mobile) who doesn't even rip me off.
There are probably others.
Every time people talk about Verizon, I shrug.
Just look at the dollar amounts.
You don't even need to know that they're evil, in order to know that you will lose if you have anything to do with them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096634</id>
	<title>Re:Shocking!</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1258205340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>why not just save up?</p></div> </blockquote><p>I seem to remember my grandpa mentioning things like that. He also told me that in the old days if something broke you'd fix it.</p><p>He was full of crazy notions like that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>why not just save up ?
I seem to remember my grandpa mentioning things like that .
He also told me that in the old days if something broke you 'd fix it.He was full of crazy notions like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why not just save up?
I seem to remember my grandpa mentioning things like that.
He also told me that in the old days if something broke you'd fix it.He was full of crazy notions like that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095166</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094960</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258132320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.</i> <br> <br>Are you trying to say that what has happened recently isn't theft by the elite? If you are you seriously need to wake up. Instead of Verizon taking from their customers with little scams and contract foolery we now have big brother telling us that it doesn't matter if we like it or not; he's going to take from you regardless of position.<br> <br>We've effectively gone from a system that we could opt out of (for the most part) into one where the government forces you to give it up till you bleed. Tell me how much better things are again?<br> <br>Your problem with the free market is that you don't seem to know the difference between a luxury and a necessity. If you don't like Verizon's business practices boycott them. No one was twisting your arm. Now you have no choice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People are decrying the direction of the US , but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite , a change was and is necessary .
Are you trying to say that what has happened recently is n't theft by the elite ?
If you are you seriously need to wake up .
Instead of Verizon taking from their customers with little scams and contract foolery we now have big brother telling us that it does n't matter if we like it or not ; he 's going to take from you regardless of position .
We 've effectively gone from a system that we could opt out of ( for the most part ) into one where the government forces you to give it up till you bleed .
Tell me how much better things are again ?
Your problem with the free market is that you do n't seem to know the difference between a luxury and a necessity .
If you do n't like Verizon 's business practices boycott them .
No one was twisting your arm .
Now you have no choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.
Are you trying to say that what has happened recently isn't theft by the elite?
If you are you seriously need to wake up.
Instead of Verizon taking from their customers with little scams and contract foolery we now have big brother telling us that it doesn't matter if we like it or not; he's going to take from you regardless of position.
We've effectively gone from a system that we could opt out of (for the most part) into one where the government forces you to give it up till you bleed.
Tell me how much better things are again?
Your problem with the free market is that you don't seem to know the difference between a luxury and a necessity.
If you don't like Verizon's business practices boycott them.
No one was twisting your arm.
Now you have no choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097098</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>east coast</author>
	<datestamp>1258210860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I see your point, but the idea you're missing is that much of technology moves from a luxury to a necessity very quickly.</i> <br> <br>Nothing is certain but death and taxes. And the part of my post you missed is that we no longer have a choice. Maybe one hundred million own a cell phone with a choice to switch or to boycott. Now the "elite" that the OP was bitching on about have a direct tap into the tax flow of this country. What do you really think the stimulus is? And both parties subscribe to the idea that stimulus money to corporations works. You no longer even have a valid choice between dumb and dumber!!!<br> <br> <i>Furthermore, you have zero input on the actions of corporations who provide these necessary luxuries, like oil, electricity, information infrastructure, and so on. At some point, you have to assign a third party with more power to keep them in check, or we'll all be living in company towns, shopping at company stores, which isn't a hell of a lot better than soviet communism.</i> <br> <br>Uh, guy, we've already passed that stage with the federal government already taking your tax money and deciding what corporation is worthy of it. And in return the corporations are beholden to the government. Can't you see what's going on here?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see your point , but the idea you 're missing is that much of technology moves from a luxury to a necessity very quickly .
Nothing is certain but death and taxes .
And the part of my post you missed is that we no longer have a choice .
Maybe one hundred million own a cell phone with a choice to switch or to boycott .
Now the " elite " that the OP was bitching on about have a direct tap into the tax flow of this country .
What do you really think the stimulus is ?
And both parties subscribe to the idea that stimulus money to corporations works .
You no longer even have a valid choice between dumb and dumber ! ! !
Furthermore , you have zero input on the actions of corporations who provide these necessary luxuries , like oil , electricity , information infrastructure , and so on .
At some point , you have to assign a third party with more power to keep them in check , or we 'll all be living in company towns , shopping at company stores , which is n't a hell of a lot better than soviet communism .
Uh , guy , we 've already passed that stage with the federal government already taking your tax money and deciding what corporation is worthy of it .
And in return the corporations are beholden to the government .
Ca n't you see what 's going on here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see your point, but the idea you're missing is that much of technology moves from a luxury to a necessity very quickly.
Nothing is certain but death and taxes.
And the part of my post you missed is that we no longer have a choice.
Maybe one hundred million own a cell phone with a choice to switch or to boycott.
Now the "elite" that the OP was bitching on about have a direct tap into the tax flow of this country.
What do you really think the stimulus is?
And both parties subscribe to the idea that stimulus money to corporations works.
You no longer even have a valid choice between dumb and dumber!!!
Furthermore, you have zero input on the actions of corporations who provide these necessary luxuries, like oil, electricity, information infrastructure, and so on.
At some point, you have to assign a third party with more power to keep them in check, or we'll all be living in company towns, shopping at company stores, which isn't a hell of a lot better than soviet communism.
Uh, guy, we've already passed that stage with the federal government already taking your tax money and deciding what corporation is worthy of it.
And in return the corporations are beholden to the government.
Can't you see what's going on here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606</id>
	<title>Why bother?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258128000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why bother running a successful business with a plan when you can run a fake business and get the hell out of Dodge when it starts coming down around you?  The customers, of course, will want their money back, but will probably get a 15\% off your next purchase coupon, good until yesterday, while the lawyers will get a few million to settle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why bother running a successful business with a plan when you can run a fake business and get the hell out of Dodge when it starts coming down around you ?
The customers , of course , will want their money back , but will probably get a 15 \ % off your next purchase coupon , good until yesterday , while the lawyers will get a few million to settle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why bother running a successful business with a plan when you can run a fake business and get the hell out of Dodge when it starts coming down around you?
The customers, of course, will want their money back, but will probably get a 15\% off your next purchase coupon, good until yesterday, while the lawyers will get a few million to settle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098272</id>
	<title>Re:Class Action Laywers and Scammers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258220220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>All of your examples where there was an actual class action suit are about companies that actually delivered products. Blue Rhino is a level of scam beyond these companies - their intent seems to have been to take money and not deliver anything. The point being that they have disbursed money which is now beyond collection through a class action suit. The Excell example is illuminating - nobody brought class action against them <i>because</i> they were bankrupt. Class action requires a large enough source of money to attract the attorney.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of your examples where there was an actual class action suit are about companies that actually delivered products .
Blue Rhino is a level of scam beyond these companies - their intent seems to have been to take money and not deliver anything .
The point being that they have disbursed money which is now beyond collection through a class action suit .
The Excell example is illuminating - nobody brought class action against them because they were bankrupt .
Class action requires a large enough source of money to attract the attorney .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of your examples where there was an actual class action suit are about companies that actually delivered products.
Blue Rhino is a level of scam beyond these companies - their intent seems to have been to take money and not deliver anything.
The point being that they have disbursed money which is now beyond collection through a class action suit.
The Excell example is illuminating - nobody brought class action against them because they were bankrupt.
Class action requires a large enough source of money to attract the attorney.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095784</id>
	<title>Re:Why bother?</title>
	<author>Renraku</author>
	<datestamp>1258189500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the end, the consumers will not get all of their money back, even if the company is sued into oblivion.  What will happen is lawyers will get the largest share, with a small sum going back to the actual consumers.</p><p>Maybe not even in cash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the end , the consumers will not get all of their money back , even if the company is sued into oblivion .
What will happen is lawyers will get the largest share , with a small sum going back to the actual consumers.Maybe not even in cash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the end, the consumers will not get all of their money back, even if the company is sued into oblivion.
What will happen is lawyers will get the largest share, with a small sum going back to the actual consumers.Maybe not even in cash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094704</id>
	<title>Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258129260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just like with Madoff.  I wonder, WTF was the "exit strategy"?  Since the FTC has shut them down.  I assume more than 1 person sent that final payment.  It's a house of cards.  When you build it.  Don't you think about getting out before it collapses?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just like with Madoff .
I wonder , WTF was the " exit strategy " ?
Since the FTC has shut them down .
I assume more than 1 person sent that final payment .
It 's a house of cards .
When you build it .
Do n't you think about getting out before it collapses ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just like with Madoff.
I wonder, WTF was the "exit strategy"?
Since the FTC has shut them down.
I assume more than 1 person sent that final payment.
It's a house of cards.
When you build it.
Don't you think about getting out before it collapses?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095098</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1258134480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.</p></div><p>Anyone over the age of 25 who decries the direction of the US isn't referring to the horizontal direction, but the vertical.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People are decrying the direction of the US , but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite , a change was and is necessary.Anyone over the age of 25 who decries the direction of the US is n't referring to the horizontal direction , but the vertical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People are decrying the direction of the US, but I think after the past several years of pretty constant theft of tax dollars and personal property by the elite, a change was and is necessary.Anyone over the age of 25 who decries the direction of the US isn't referring to the horizontal direction, but the vertical.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095250</id>
	<title>The Wrath of the Almighty Bunghole?</title>
	<author>Pezbian</author>
	<datestamp>1258136760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looks like we have a good test target for one of those tungsten rod gravity projectile satellites.</p><p>I got the terms of yer settlement right here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like we have a good test target for one of those tungsten rod gravity projectile satellites.I got the terms of yer settlement right here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like we have a good test target for one of those tungsten rod gravity projectile satellites.I got the terms of yer settlement right here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095340</id>
	<title>and so what?</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1258138200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>your criticism is only valid if complete enforcement was ever a goal anyone ever considered practical</p><p>law enforcement is just a maintenance function of civilization:</p><p>1. it never ends<br>2. it can never possibly be done to completion</p><p>and the realization of either truth isn't discouraging or disenheartening. it's just the way it is</p><p>people with a moral compass and people who will screw little old ladies out of their hard earned cash are both reborn in every generation anew, in a sort of statistical stasis. its an eternal state, and we must continually pursue and punish wrongdoers, forever, job permanently incomplete</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>your criticism is only valid if complete enforcement was ever a goal anyone ever considered practicallaw enforcement is just a maintenance function of civilization : 1. it never ends2 .
it can never possibly be done to completionand the realization of either truth is n't discouraging or disenheartening .
it 's just the way it ispeople with a moral compass and people who will screw little old ladies out of their hard earned cash are both reborn in every generation anew , in a sort of statistical stasis .
its an eternal state , and we must continually pursue and punish wrongdoers , forever , job permanently incomplete</tokentext>
<sentencetext>your criticism is only valid if complete enforcement was ever a goal anyone ever considered practicallaw enforcement is just a maintenance function of civilization:1. it never ends2.
it can never possibly be done to completionand the realization of either truth isn't discouraging or disenheartening.
it's just the way it ispeople with a moral compass and people who will screw little old ladies out of their hard earned cash are both reborn in every generation anew, in a sort of statistical stasis.
its an eternal state, and we must continually pursue and punish wrongdoers, forever, job permanently incomplete</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098262</id>
	<title>Re:Instead of referring to just "Blue Hippo"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258220160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about going after the TV station or cable provider that ran the ads?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about going after the TV station or cable provider that ran the ads ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about going after the TV station or cable provider that ran the ads?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30108192</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>phorm</author>
	<datestamp>1258318680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Of course Billg loves the free market. If a contractor installs unlicensed versions of MS Office on a clients computer, that contractor can earn a million dollars bounty forreporting the company, and then the BSA has every right to put the company out of business with exorbitant and irrational penalties. But if MS steals software, they can just blame it on a contractor and then apologize.</i></p><p>Actually one of the conditions of filing the BSA report (or at least the snitch rewards part, which is more or less the incentive behind them) is that you cannot be the one who installed the software, unless it was under orders from somebody else who could be held responsible.I found a bunch of info on that when the last "what to do if my company is using unlicensed software" question came up on slash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course Billg loves the free market .
If a contractor installs unlicensed versions of MS Office on a clients computer , that contractor can earn a million dollars bounty forreporting the company , and then the BSA has every right to put the company out of business with exorbitant and irrational penalties .
But if MS steals software , they can just blame it on a contractor and then apologize.Actually one of the conditions of filing the BSA report ( or at least the snitch rewards part , which is more or less the incentive behind them ) is that you can not be the one who installed the software , unless it was under orders from somebody else who could be held responsible.I found a bunch of info on that when the last " what to do if my company is using unlicensed software " question came up on slash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course Billg loves the free market.
If a contractor installs unlicensed versions of MS Office on a clients computer, that contractor can earn a million dollars bounty forreporting the company, and then the BSA has every right to put the company out of business with exorbitant and irrational penalties.
But if MS steals software, they can just blame it on a contractor and then apologize.Actually one of the conditions of filing the BSA report (or at least the snitch rewards part, which is more or less the incentive behind them) is that you cannot be the one who installed the software, unless it was under orders from somebody else who could be held responsible.I found a bunch of info on that when the last "what to do if my company is using unlicensed software" question came up on slash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094730</id>
	<title>hahah call the number</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258129500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>call the bull hipo number in the story. it took them under 15secs to ask for my bank info and close the deal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>call the bull hipo number in the story .
it took them under 15secs to ask for my bank info and close the deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>call the bull hipo number in the story.
it took them under 15secs to ask for my bank info and close the deal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097364</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258213020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The elderly are doing the same thing to workers right now through Social Security and Medicare.</p><p>We're promised future product (retirement money and health care) if we make payments up front. And it's unlikely the state will be able to deliver since they've already spent the money.</p></div></blockquote><p>It is impractical to 'save' wealth on the scale necessary for Social Security or Medicare.
</p><p>Certainly you can save <i>money</i>, but money is not wealth, and so when you spend those green pieces of paper later, the current workers must then cough up the wealth via inflation.
</p><p>The Social Security program does not go through those motions because they would accomplish nothing.  A stack of money sitting in a warehouse does not produce any wealth; green pieces of paper themselves do not generate wheat or oil or gold or land.  So money comes in the front door of the Social Security office and then out the back door, faciliting a quick flow of wealth from worker to retiree.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The elderly are doing the same thing to workers right now through Social Security and Medicare.We 're promised future product ( retirement money and health care ) if we make payments up front .
And it 's unlikely the state will be able to deliver since they 've already spent the money.It is impractical to 'save ' wealth on the scale necessary for Social Security or Medicare .
Certainly you can save money , but money is not wealth , and so when you spend those green pieces of paper later , the current workers must then cough up the wealth via inflation .
The Social Security program does not go through those motions because they would accomplish nothing .
A stack of money sitting in a warehouse does not produce any wealth ; green pieces of paper themselves do not generate wheat or oil or gold or land .
So money comes in the front door of the Social Security office and then out the back door , faciliting a quick flow of wealth from worker to retiree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The elderly are doing the same thing to workers right now through Social Security and Medicare.We're promised future product (retirement money and health care) if we make payments up front.
And it's unlikely the state will be able to deliver since they've already spent the money.It is impractical to 'save' wealth on the scale necessary for Social Security or Medicare.
Certainly you can save money, but money is not wealth, and so when you spend those green pieces of paper later, the current workers must then cough up the wealth via inflation.
The Social Security program does not go through those motions because they would accomplish nothing.
A stack of money sitting in a warehouse does not produce any wealth; green pieces of paper themselves do not generate wheat or oil or gold or land.
So money comes in the front door of the Social Security office and then out the back door, faciliting a quick flow of wealth from worker to retiree.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095008</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258132860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't have any idea why you think the free market is going to protect the weak and stupid.  The entire concept of the free market is to fleece the weak and stupid.  Welcome to reality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have any idea why you think the free market is going to protect the weak and stupid .
The entire concept of the free market is to fleece the weak and stupid .
Welcome to reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have any idea why you think the free market is going to protect the weak and stupid.
The entire concept of the free market is to fleece the weak and stupid.
Welcome to reality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096216</id>
	<title>Re:Is this the free market?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258198140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the mess was the government borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund.</p><p>Kind of like a landlord "borrowing" rent money to pay their own private bills, eventually hitting a point where they're out of money, and your power gets shut off. (In the situation where electricity is part of your monthly rent.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the mess was the government borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund.Kind of like a landlord " borrowing " rent money to pay their own private bills , eventually hitting a point where they 're out of money , and your power gets shut off .
( In the situation where electricity is part of your monthly rent .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the mess was the government borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund.Kind of like a landlord "borrowing" rent money to pay their own private bills, eventually hitting a point where they're out of money, and your power gets shut off.
(In the situation where electricity is part of your monthly rent.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30100842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30112652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30100494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30102082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095088
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30102038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30099798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30108192
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30106692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30133822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30103492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095184
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095302
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30099514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_14_0035257_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094962
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096028
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094960
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095282
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095808
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097098
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095006
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096444
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30102038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096216
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30108192
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30099798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095584
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30102082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30100862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30100842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30106692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095476
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095166
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096634
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30103492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30099514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094996
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095784
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095236
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30097906
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095664
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30098272
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30112652
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30133822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30095026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30096230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_14_0035257.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30094684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_14_0035257.30100494
</commentlist>
</conversation>
