|
What is this Sky TV hack?
"Brian Gaff" wrote in message ... Could I respectfully ask that folk do not use dollar signs for the first letter in in the word sky. I hear dolarky here. But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$ instead of MS for Microsoft. Z |
What is this Sky TV hack?
Zimmy wrote:
: But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended : to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$ instead : of MS for Microsoft. It is infantile and never was funny! I immediately ignore any posts from anyone using it! |
What is this Sky TV hack?
In message , Zimmy
writes "Brian Gaff" wrote in message .. . Could I respectfully ask that folk do not use dollar signs for the first letter in in the word sky. I hear dolarky here. But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$ instead of MS for Microsoft. Z Well, considering that for the last thirty years the public have voted for rampant Capitalism (free market economy), it's not exactly a secret is it? -- Ian |
What is this Sky TV hack?
"Ian" wrote in message ... In message , Zimmy writes "Brian Gaff" wrote in message . .. Could I respectfully ask that folk do not use dollar signs for the first letter in in the word sky. I hear dolarky here. But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$ instead of MS for Microsoft. Z Well, considering that for the last thirty years the public have voted for rampant Capitalism (free market economy), it's not exactly a secret is it? My only point is that conveys a slightly different meaning. I don't care whether using the statement is right or wrong. Z |
What is this Sky TV hack?
On 2009-10-07, Zimmy wrote:
"Ian" wrote in message ... In message , Zimmy writes But it is different from just saying Sky, it is derogatory and is intended to convey they are just interested in making a lot of money like M$ instead of MS for Microsoft. Well, considering that for the last thirty years the public have voted for rampant Capitalism (free market economy), it's not exactly a secret is it? My only point is that conveys a slightly different meaning. I don't care whether using the statement is right or wrong. I don't think Brian is saying it is right or wrong either, merely that it's hard to understand through a screen reader... -- David Taylor |
What is this Sky TV hack?
Roger R wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message ... It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property of ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes of great big firms like Sky. Some believe sentences are about 'sending a message', others believe they are for punishing wrong doers. Which is right? As this case was about swindling a commercial organisation the purpose of the sentence was to send a strong message to protect corporate wealth. Protecting business is thought much more important than protecting individuals because the whole economic success of the nation depends on commercial activity whereas it doesn't matter to the nations economy if a few ordinary people are wiped out. Putting business first is this governments mantra. Its the same short sighted attitude that led to the dilution of the Sale of Goods act and that leads to poor quality products and services. Gov't want to make it easy to run a business, give more credit etc. when actually I believe the opposite is the right thing to do. What we need is good products and services not lots a crap businesses. Making it easy to run a business is what is making them weak, it needs to be made harder, less credit and more regulation. They forget that the businesses are there to support society not the other way round. They have very simplistic view of things, easy credit/less regulation = economic expansion. -- Tony |
What is this Sky TV hack?
In message , Tony
writes Roger R wrote: "Bill Wright" wrote in message ... It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property of ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes of great big firms like Sky. Some believe sentences are about 'sending a message', others believe they are for punishing wrong doers. Which is right? As this case was about swindling a commercial organisation the purpose of the sentence was to send a strong message to protect corporate wealth. Protecting business is thought much more important than protecting individuals because the whole economic success of the nation depends on commercial activity whereas it doesn't matter to the nations economy if a few ordinary people are wiped out. Putting business first is this governments mantra. Its the same short sighted attitude that led to the dilution of the Sale of Goods act and that leads to poor quality products and services. Gov't want to make it easy to run a business, give more credit etc. when actually I believe the opposite is the right thing to do. What we need is good products and services not lots a crap businesses. Making it easy to run a business is what is making them weak, it needs to be made harder, less credit and more regulation. They forget that the businesses are there to support society not the other way round. They have very simplistic view of things, easy credit/less regulation = economic expansion. -- Tony Unfortunately, since manufacturing diminished, there's been a surge in business ownership. We now have too many businesses competing for the public's expendable income. Too many snouts in the trough, many of them parasitic. DTV is a good example. -- Ian |
What is this Sky TV hack?
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 13:08:15 +0100, Tony wrote:
They forget that the businesses are there to support society not the other way round. Not in capitalist societies. The purpose of a business is to increase the wealth of those who have invested capital in the business. Anything else that the business produces is just a bi-product of that fundamental purpose. |
What is this Sky TV hack?
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 02:23:32 -0700, 2Bdecided wrote:
"Mr Bennett said it was estimated that over six months Cairns had made up to £5,000 in sales and subscriptions." So less than the minimum wage then? And how much is it costing the tax payers to keep Mr Cairs confined and fed for the duration of his sentence. Furthermore, is not his time within a correctional institution likely to lead to him becoming even more associated with the business models of the wrong type of people? |
What is this Sky TV hack?
"Roger R" wrote in message ... "Bill Wright" wrote in message ... It says a lot about British justice that this bloke when to jail when people commit violent assaut or burglary and get off with community service. It's about time the safety of the individual and the property of ordinary people were regarded as being as important as the fortunes of great big firms like Sky. Some believe sentences are about 'sending a message', others believe they are for punishing wrong doers. Which is right? As this case was about swindling a commercial organisation the purpose of the sentence was to send a strong message to protect corporate wealth. Protecting business is thought much more important than protecting individuals because the whole economic success of the nation depends on commercial activity whereas it doesn't matter to the nations economy if a few ordinary people are wiped out. Putting business first is this governments mantra. Roger R critcher said......................... it's every governments mantra, no more so int his government as any other. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:37 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com