That's right, I'm doing a series of these. So consider the following points :
|Point #1 :|
A "Leading US banks have warned that they could start charging companies and consumers for deposits if the US Federal Reserve cuts the interest it pays on bank reserves."
A Are they trying to drive customers away or just playing 'mines bigger' with the FED?
B The latter. Customers schmustomers.
A Hmm they dont need depositors anymore? Could be...
B What would they need them for ? In socialism depositors are just a liability, they expect service. One billion collected from 1k people means you have to talk to 1k people. Would you want to talk to 1k people ?
A Good point.
Customeri As far as I can tell, the dissenters in this thread are either confused, exposed (i.e. shareholders), or bribed. There has been a lot of name calling, but there has not been one coherent argument as to why my bet should not be refunded.
MPOE-PR Because fuck you, that's why. What more do you need?
|Point #2 :|
Concerned Bystander I don't think you understand how policies work in court. A court would never uphold a policy that states "I have the right to steal your money," which is effectivly what BitBet's policy says.
Now, sing along and enunciate it like you mean it : government good, business bad ; black man good, white man bad ; government good, business bad ; female good, male bad ; government good, business bad ; four legs good, two legs bad ; government good, business bad ; drones good, warses bad ; government good, business bad ; rightses good, freedoms bad ; government good, business bad ; Keynes good, Hayek bad ; government good, business bad ; compliance good, rape bad ; government good, business bad ; government good, business bad ; etc good, etc bad.
It could go on for quite a while, this, but... don't you feel just a little derpy by now ?———