Who was the biggest arsehole?

who was the biggest arsehole

you, you could have simply said no thanks or lied and said you'd already paid to avoid confrontation
2
15%
car driver, he was in the wrong and shouldn't have got abusive
1
8%
stander by, it was none of his business and he resorted to raising his voice and insults
0
No votes
you weren't an arsehole at all you could both have been fined heavily
1
8%
fuck the state fuck roads and fuck paying for car parking
3
23%
I think you were right but I'm voting you 'cos I want your dick
0
No votes
fuck off with your attention seeking poll, only Nuke should be allowed to make attention seeking polls, Nuke's polls are best polls.
6
46%
Even Hash gets more votes than your stupid poll
0
No votes
chicken fuckers the lot of you
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 13

User avatar
Montegriffo
Posts: 18715
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Montegriffo » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:20 am

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:06 am
Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:03 am
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:00 am


Me not giving money to you is not me stealing from you. I would actually have to take something from you.

The space was already paid for. The state might make that illegal, but the state calling something "stealing" does not make it actually stealing. Get real.
It wasn't. It wasn't even the same space.
He was trying to encourage me to steal from taxpayers.
Which part of ''minimum charge'' are you struggling to understand?

You paid for time in the parking garage. Was that time used up? No. The man asked if you'd transfer the time to him so he wouldn't have to pay and the time you paid for would not go to waste. The state made that illegal because they enjoy double charging for parking time (which arguably is actually stealing). You made the call to not violate the law.

What he asked you to do was illegal, but it wasn't stealing. Just because something is illegal does not make it immoral. Sometimes it's immoral to not violate an unjust law. In this case, it's meh. Whatever. Pat yourself on the back for not breaking the law, but don't pretend like the guy was asking you to do something morally wrong.
The alternatives to not allowing ticket transfers were charging honest people more money for their ticket, using funds from other council projects to cover the shortfall or even selling the car park to private contractors. That car park requires maintenance it is not free to run.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
Image

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Speaker to Animals » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:22 am

Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:20 am
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:06 am
Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:03 am


It wasn't. It wasn't even the same space.
He was trying to encourage me to steal from taxpayers.
Which part of ''minimum charge'' are you struggling to understand?

You paid for time in the parking garage. Was that time used up? No. The man asked if you'd transfer the time to him so he wouldn't have to pay and the time you paid for would not go to waste. The state made that illegal because they enjoy double charging for parking time (which arguably is actually stealing). You made the call to not violate the law.

What he asked you to do was illegal, but it wasn't stealing. Just because something is illegal does not make it immoral. Sometimes it's immoral to not violate an unjust law. In this case, it's meh. Whatever. Pat yourself on the back for not breaking the law, but don't pretend like the guy was asking you to do something morally wrong.
The alternatives to not allowing ticket transfers were charging honest people more money for their ticket, using funds from other council projects to cover the shortfall or even selling the car park to private contractors. That car park requires maintenance it is not free to run.
Uh.. no..

They were double charging for the same usage of the parking garage. They can raise or lower the rates all they want, and people will decide whether it is economically worth their money to park there.

The parking garage should charge the maximum rate it can get while keeping the garage mostly full. Charging less could be called stealing if I used your logic of "what about the library!?". Charging more would just result in lower revenue. Charging anything other than the efficient price would be stupid.

Double charging for the same time is dishonest, in my opinion, and arguably stealing, especially if those fuckers used tax dollars to build the fucking garage in the first place.

User avatar
Fife
Posts: 15157
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Fife » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:24 am

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:07 am
Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:05 am
Fife wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:01 am
"Good causes"
So now you hate council-funded libraries?
LOL

I am pretty sure he does hate them, along with roads.
I hate theft.

User avatar
Ex-California
Posts: 4116
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:37 pm

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Ex-California » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:37 am

Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:37 am
California wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:29 am
Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:27 am
I should have taken it from him and ripped it up. That way he wouldn't have been able to offer it to anyone else.
Neighbours don't steal from each other.
Why on earth would you have a problem with this?

Do you want to destroy used items that people resell as well?
If I offer to sell you a stolen bicycle cheaply am I being neighbourly?
Recycling is good, stealing from fellow taxpayers is not.

Then there's the fact I would be committing an offence liable to a fine over 80 times the cost of the ticket. This carpark is under camera surveillance and right next to a council building which includes the transport department. How do I know I'm not being set up?
Nothing's stolen. I presume the guy bought the ticket
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session

User avatar
Montegriffo
Posts: 18715
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Montegriffo » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:43 am

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:22 am
Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:20 am
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:06 am



You paid for time in the parking garage. Was that time used up? No. The man asked if you'd transfer the time to him so he wouldn't have to pay and the time you paid for would not go to waste. The state made that illegal because they enjoy double charging for parking time (which arguably is actually stealing). You made the call to not violate the law.

What he asked you to do was illegal, but it wasn't stealing. Just because something is illegal does not make it immoral. Sometimes it's immoral to not violate an unjust law. In this case, it's meh. Whatever. Pat yourself on the back for not breaking the law, but don't pretend like the guy was asking you to do something morally wrong.
The alternatives to not allowing ticket transfers were charging honest people more money for their ticket, using funds from other council projects to cover the shortfall or even selling the car park to private contractors. That car park requires maintenance it is not free to run.
Uh.. no..

They were double charging for the same usage of the parking garage. They can raise or lower the rates all they want, and people will decide whether it is economically worth their money to park there.

The parking garage should charge the maximum rate it can get while keeping the garage mostly full. Charging less could be called stealing if I used your logic of "what about the library!?". Charging more would just result in lower revenue. Charging anything other than the efficient price would be stupid.

Double charging for the same time is dishonest, in my opinion, and arguably stealing, especially if those fuckers used tax dollars to build the fucking garage in the first place.
The costs of a council car park reflect the costs of maintenance. I am still wearing away the tarmac and using the lights provided etc whether I dodge the minimum charge or not.
If council revenues were used to tarmac the car park in the first place then it is even more important that those costs are recovered by the users or everyone pays for it whether they use it or not.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
Image

User avatar
Montegriffo
Posts: 18715
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Montegriffo » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:45 am

California wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:37 am
Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:37 am
California wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:29 am

Why on earth would you have a problem with this?

Do you want to destroy used items that people resell as well?
If I offer to sell you a stolen bicycle cheaply am I being neighbourly?
Recycling is good, stealing from fellow taxpayers is not.

Then there's the fact I would be committing an offence liable to a fine over 80 times the cost of the ticket. This carpark is under camera surveillance and right next to a council building which includes the transport department. How do I know I'm not being set up?
Nothing's stolen. I presume the guy bought the ticket
He didn't buy it for me. He bought it for himself and tried to breach the contract he made with the council by transferring it to me.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
Image

User avatar
TheReal_ND
Posts: 26030
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by TheReal_ND » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:47 am


User avatar
Ex-California
Posts: 4116
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:37 pm

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Ex-California » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:49 am

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 8:33 am
You are just upset that illegal != immoral.

Lots of things are illegal but not immoral. Lots of things are legal by not moral.

Welcome to fallen state of Mankind, I guess.

You can have a demon tranny story time where kids are exposed to a pedophile in London. Totally legal. Giving the parking spot time you bought and paid for to another person.. illegal. /shrug.
This is a core problem. People think that things they don't like or think are immoral should be illegal, when the government shouldn't even get involved in the vast majority of issues
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session

User avatar
Ex-California
Posts: 4116
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:37 pm

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Ex-California » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:49 am

Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:45 am
California wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:37 am
Montegriffo wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:37 am


If I offer to sell you a stolen bicycle cheaply am I being neighbourly?
Recycling is good, stealing from fellow taxpayers is not.

Then there's the fact I would be committing an offence liable to a fine over 80 times the cost of the ticket. This carpark is under camera surveillance and right next to a council building which includes the transport department. How do I know I'm not being set up?
Nothing's stolen. I presume the guy bought the ticket
He didn't buy it for me. He bought it for himself and tried to breach the contract he made with the council by transferring it to me.
No, he bought an amount of time. It is up to him to do what he wants with the time he bought
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session

User avatar
Montegriffo
Posts: 18715
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am

Re: Who was the biggest arsehole?

Post by Montegriffo » Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:50 am

TheReal_ND wrote:
Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:47 am
''Buy a drink or fuck off loser.''
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
Image