Dell sued for "bait and switch" and false promises

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Christopher Muto wrote:
> shoosh, that went way over your head!
> yes you indeed said that did not have "the time or inclination to attempt
> explaining it" and i said you are right beacause even with all the time and
> inclination in the world it would be impossible for anyone to explain the
> presidents plan since he dosen't have one (sounds similar to the bush iraq
> exit stradegy by the by).
> for someone that lacks time or inclination you seem to have lots of both for
> your vapid posts.

Touche, excellent point!
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Irene wrote:
> Chris, honey, you are way out of your league.

Irene is giving in - "honey" is a sure tipoff.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Dogface wrote:
> You've clearly lost it, just like the rest of your leftist Democrat whiners.

The above certainly cements your position as a rightwingnut, Dogturd.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Ben Myers wrote:
> The arrogance here is so thick I need a chainsaw to cut through it... Ben Myers

Not to mention the BS - be sure to wear your old shoes.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Irene wrote:
> By the way, the money that my husband and I made in the markets that you
> don't think are good enough for Social Security

You've completely, and willfully, IMHO, missed the point of my posts.
Where did you dredge up the notion of "good enough" for SS, one of this
week's talking points straight from Rush's anal aperture?

> is currently being counted
> with an "M" after it And several multiples at that.

Yeah, right, babe, and I'm getting 120% overall on my investments.

This is Usenet, anyone can post anything.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Leythos wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:08:45 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>
>>well those bush federal tax cuts only went to the very rich, and you may
>>have noticed that since they went into effect that your local city, state,
>>and property taxes have been increased to cover the lack of federal funds at
>>the local level. another bush weapon of mass distraction! the irony is the
>>people that feel they were good for them as individuals and the country.
>
>
> Middle class workers and the non-working poor don't create jobs, when was
> the last time you saw a person on Welfare or a factory worker create 5 new
> jobs in the community?

In the Bush economy *no one* is creating jobs (GWB - first president
since H Hoover to have a net loss of jobs for an entire term), so much
for the stimulation from the tax cuts.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Irene wrote:
> Then your memory is failing.

Typical rightard, she's in step and the rest of the world is out.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

i can't find any articles on the web that speak about this accusation that
you have made repeatedly about president johnson. please site some if you
can. thanks.

"Irene" <girlsrule@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7JFZd.5561$x24.5495@fe04.lga...
> A. If you read my post, I didn't say it was part of the "Federal Budget"
> prior to 1980.
>
> I said LBJ found a way to "raid" it to finance part of his "Great Society"
> and that is true. It appears we are quibbling over the word "raid". Think
> back to the legislation that was passed by LBJ.
>
>
> "dg1261" <dg1261nojunk@cs.com> wrote in message
> news:1110881169.828203.268880@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Irene wrote:
>>> I think you may have forgotten something. The "raid" actually
>>> began with LBJ in order to finance his "Great Society". That
>>> is when the diversion really began. All Reagan did was use it
>>> for different purposes than LBJ.
>>
>> Let me repeat: the Social Security Trust Fund was not part of the
>> Federal Budget until the early 1980's. It's hard to raid from a fund
>> you have no control over. LBJ may have been raiding from elsewhere,
>> but it wasn't the SS Trust Fund. I didn't just read about this
>> somewhere, I was there.
>>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

>Irene is giving in - "honey" is a sure tipoff.

I think not. When most women get to the point of saying "honey" in such
discusions, it would seem to me they are loading their big guns and will
certainly come back with more ammunition. I note she also repeated the
"honey" in another post. It's not the word she is saying but what her
tone would be if she were being vocal to him. This should "really" get
interesting now. I would not put my guard down if I were him.<g Just my
opinion as a female who is well aware of the two versions of "honey".

Bea
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:24:13 -0500, Sparky Singer wrote:
>
> Leythos wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:08:45 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>
>>>well those bush federal tax cuts only went to the very rich, and you may
>>>have noticed that since they went into effect that your local city, state,
>>>and property taxes have been increased to cover the lack of federal funds at
>>>the local level. another bush weapon of mass distraction! the irony is the
>>>people that feel they were good for them as individuals and the country.
>>
>>
>> Middle class workers and the non-working poor don't create jobs, when was
>> the last time you saw a person on Welfare or a factory worker create 5 new
>> jobs in the community?
>
> In the Bush economy *no one* is creating jobs (GWB - first president
> since H Hoover to have a net loss of jobs for an entire term), so much
> for the stimulation from the tax cuts.

Wrong, I started an IT company 2 years ago, and have been adding work
since the second month. It's no easy finding people willing to work and
that have a good technical background also.

I've found that every one of our customers, across the USA, is also hiring
on a regular basis - care to explain away reality?

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news😛an.2005.03.16.12.04.16.657537@nowhere.lan...
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:24:13 -0500, Sparky Singer wrote:
>>
>> Leythos wrote:
>>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:08:45 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>>
>>>>well those bush federal tax cuts only went to the very rich, and you may
>>>>have noticed that since they went into effect that your local city,
>>>>state,
>>>>and property taxes have been increased to cover the lack of federal
>>>>funds at
>>>>the local level. another bush weapon of mass distraction! the irony is
>>>>the
>>>>people that feel they were good for them as individuals and the country.
>>>
>>>
>>> Middle class workers and the non-working poor don't create jobs, when
>>> was
>>> the last time you saw a person on Welfare or a factory worker create 5
>>> new
>>> jobs in the community?
>>
>> In the Bush economy *no one* is creating jobs (GWB - first president
>> since H Hoover to have a net loss of jobs for an entire term), so much
>> for the stimulation from the tax cuts.
>
> Wrong, I started an IT company 2 years ago, and have been adding work
> since the second month. It's no easy finding people willing to work and
> that have a good technical background also.
>
> I've found that every one of our customers, across the USA, is also hiring
> on a regular basis - care to explain away reality?
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>

reality is a quality or state of being actual or true. your reality may be
that there has been job creation among the people that you know, but the
national reality is that there has been a net loss of jobs during bushes
first term. this is an example of why you can not rely on local polling and
a good lesson for a startup businessman like yourself to learn.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:28:18 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>
> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> news😛an.2005.03.16.12.04.16.657537@nowhere.lan...
>> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:24:13 -0500, Sparky Singer wrote:
>>>
>>> Leythos wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:08:45 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>well those bush federal tax cuts only went to the very rich, and you may
>>>>>have noticed that since they went into effect that your local city,
>>>>>state,
>>>>>and property taxes have been increased to cover the lack of federal
>>>>>funds at
>>>>>the local level. another bush weapon of mass distraction! the irony is
>>>>>the
>>>>>people that feel they were good for them as individuals and the country.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Middle class workers and the non-working poor don't create jobs, when
>>>> was
>>>> the last time you saw a person on Welfare or a factory worker create 5
>>>> new
>>>> jobs in the community?
>>>
>>> In the Bush economy *no one* is creating jobs (GWB - first president
>>> since H Hoover to have a net loss of jobs for an entire term), so much
>>> for the stimulation from the tax cuts.
>>
>> Wrong, I started an IT company 2 years ago, and have been adding work
>> since the second month. It's no easy finding people willing to work and
>> that have a good technical background also.
>>
>> I've found that every one of our customers, across the USA, is also hiring
>> on a regular basis - care to explain away reality?
>>
>
> reality is a quality or state of being actual or true. your reality may be
> that there has been job creation among the people that you know, but the
> national reality is that there has been a net loss of jobs during bushes
> first term. this is an example of why you can not rely on local polling and
> a good lesson for a startup businessman like yourself to learn.

Chris, the loss of jobs was started before Bush took office, at least in
the IT community it was started during the Clinton regime. During the Bush
years I've seen the normal order of business changes - meaning that due to
the expanding of technology over the globe, making data/communications
possible like have never before been possible, the outsourcing of many
jobs, and the investments of the countries in data/call centers in order
to take those jobs for low rates. It's a natural order and has nothing to
do with Bush or really Clinton - the technology made it easier and very
simple to change projects and call type jobs to countries where they rate
is 1/10th of the US rate.

As for net job loss, it's been a lot of political hype - sure, there are
many people out of work, and many people were blindly ignorant and didn't
see it happening until they got their pink slips, but it was writing on
the wall for more than a year in most locations if people just weren't
sheep.

I left a job as a director making a very good salary, I left that job on a
spurious decision, I had always want to start my own company, but, when
asked to fire a group in order to outsource their positions - I decided to
leave that company and start my own. No planning, no seed money, etc.. and
the interesting thing is that we're still growing, we're still making
money, and we're still picking up quality clients and adding to the team.
We have not been impacted by the economy, but I suspect we understand the
nature of the industry and where it's moving/needs are and were to
position our skills/resources for best ROI.

You can't blame Bush for job loss during his first term, no President has
that much impact on the economy, it was already in the works when he took
office. If you go back and look at the economy and where it was headed,
there was nothing that any President (either R/D/I) could have done to
prevent it, it's just simple economics and corporate greed.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:48:31 -0600, Bea xx wrote:
>
>>Irene is giving in - "honey" is a sure tipoff.
>
> I think not. When most women get to the point of saying "honey" in such
> discusions, it would seem to me they are loading their big guns and will
> certainly come back with more ammunition. I note she also repeated the
> "honey" in another post. It's not the word she is saying but what her
> tone would be if she were being vocal to him. This should "really" get
> interesting now. I would not put my guard down if I were him.<g Just my
> opinion as a female who is well aware of the two versions of "honey".

Yea, when my wife starts calling me "Honey" I know I'm in serious trouble,
and if she does it in front of other people I know that I've done/said
something wrong - now if I could just figure out what before she smacks me
in the head :)

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...
but the fact remains that bush is the first president to loose jobs since
hoover; despite your 'reality' and all the justification in the world.

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news😛an.2005.03.16.15.13.07.312734@nowhere.lan...
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:28:18 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>
>> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
>> news😛an.2005.03.16.12.04.16.657537@nowhere.lan...
>>> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:24:13 -0500, Sparky Singer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Leythos wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:08:45 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>well those bush federal tax cuts only went to the very rich, and you
>>>>>>may
>>>>>>have noticed that since they went into effect that your local city,
>>>>>>state,
>>>>>>and property taxes have been increased to cover the lack of federal
>>>>>>funds at
>>>>>>the local level. another bush weapon of mass distraction! the irony
>>>>>>is
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>people that feel they were good for them as individuals and the
>>>>>>country.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Middle class workers and the non-working poor don't create jobs, when
>>>>> was
>>>>> the last time you saw a person on Welfare or a factory worker create 5
>>>>> new
>>>>> jobs in the community?
>>>>
>>>> In the Bush economy *no one* is creating jobs (GWB - first president
>>>> since H Hoover to have a net loss of jobs for an entire term), so much
>>>> for the stimulation from the tax cuts.
>>>
>>> Wrong, I started an IT company 2 years ago, and have been adding work
>>> since the second month. It's no easy finding people willing to work and
>>> that have a good technical background also.
>>>
>>> I've found that every one of our customers, across the USA, is also
>>> hiring
>>> on a regular basis - care to explain away reality?
>>>
>>
>> reality is a quality or state of being actual or true. your reality may
>> be
>> that there has been job creation among the people that you know, but the
>> national reality is that there has been a net loss of jobs during bushes
>> first term. this is an example of why you can not rely on local polling
>> and
>> a good lesson for a startup businessman like yourself to learn.
>
> Chris, the loss of jobs was started before Bush took office, at least in
> the IT community it was started during the Clinton regime. During the Bush
> years I've seen the normal order of business changes - meaning that due to
> the expanding of technology over the globe, making data/communications
> possible like have never before been possible, the outsourcing of many
> jobs, and the investments of the countries in data/call centers in order
> to take those jobs for low rates. It's a natural order and has nothing to
> do with Bush or really Clinton - the technology made it easier and very
> simple to change projects and call type jobs to countries where they rate
> is 1/10th of the US rate.
>
> As for net job loss, it's been a lot of political hype - sure, there are
> many people out of work, and many people were blindly ignorant and didn't
> see it happening until they got their pink slips, but it was writing on
> the wall for more than a year in most locations if people just weren't
> sheep.
>
> I left a job as a director making a very good salary, I left that job on a
> spurious decision, I had always want to start my own company, but, when
> asked to fire a group in order to outsource their positions - I decided to
> leave that company and start my own. No planning, no seed money, etc.. and
> the interesting thing is that we're still growing, we're still making
> money, and we're still picking up quality clients and adding to the team.
> We have not been impacted by the economy, but I suspect we understand the
> nature of the industry and where it's moving/needs are and were to
> position our skills/resources for best ROI.
>
> You can't blame Bush for job loss during his first term, no President has
> that much impact on the economy, it was already in the works when he took
> office. If you go back and look at the economy and where it was headed,
> there was nothing that any President (either R/D/I) could have done to
> prevent it, it's just simple economics and corporate greed.
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 18:04:58 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>
> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...
> but the fact remains that bush is the first president to loose jobs since
> hoover; despite your 'reality' and all the justification in the world.

If you understood anything about the Economy you would understand that
"Bush didn't lose any jobs", the corporations as part of our free market
moved those jobs outside the USA and there is/was nothing that the US
Government could do about it - it started under Clinton's watch and
continued into Bush's first term. You can only hold the corporate greed
responsible for it, not any elected official.

My reality is to understand the economics, market, worker skill pools,
services demand, and the value of services we offer.

How about you spout something other than news-media drivel, how about you
come back with a response based on your OWN findings and understanding and
not these news-story clippings you post.

So, you going to show me where Bush hasn't turned the Clinton economy
around?

It would also be nice if you bottom posted when you reply so that the
thread can be properly followed.


--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

I am beginning to think that Chris believes in a government that does
everything for the individual and is responsible for and will care for the
individual from birth to death. In return, that same government has a right
to as much of the assets of those same individuals as said government
wishes to take. At least that appears to be the types of groups that he
likes to quote and refer to in his posts.

Irene


"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news😛an.2005.03.16.18.30.08.58459@nowhere.lan...
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 18:04:58 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>
>> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...
>> but the fact remains that bush is the first president to loose jobs since
>> hoover; despite your 'reality' and all the justification in the world.
>
> If you understood anything about the Economy you would understand that
> "Bush didn't lose any jobs", the corporations as part of our free market
> moved those jobs outside the USA and there is/was nothing that the US
> Government could do about it - it started under Clinton's watch and
> continued into Bush's first term. You can only hold the corporate greed
> responsible for it, not any elected official.
>
> My reality is to understand the economics, market, worker skill pools,
> services demand, and the value of services we offer.
>
> How about you spout something other than news-media drivel, how about you
> come back with a response based on your OWN findings and understanding and
> not these news-story clippings you post.
>
> So, you going to show me where Bush hasn't turned the Clinton economy
> around?
>
> It would also be nice if you bottom posted when you reply so that the
> thread can be properly followed.
>
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Bea xx wrote:
>>Irene is giving in - "honey" is a sure tipoff.
>
> I think not. When most women get to the point of saying "honey" in such
> discusions, it would seem to me they are loading their big guns and will
> certainly come back with more ammunition.

Sparky stands by his post.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Leythos wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:24:13 -0500, Sparky Singer wrote:
>
>>Leythos wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:08:45 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>well those bush federal tax cuts only went to the very rich, and you may
>>>>have noticed that since they went into effect that your local city, state,
>>>>and property taxes have been increased to cover the lack of federal funds at
>>>>the local level. another bush weapon of mass distraction! the irony is the
>>>>people that feel they were good for them as individuals and the country.
>>>
>>>
>>>Middle class workers and the non-working poor don't create jobs, when was
>>>the last time you saw a person on Welfare or a factory worker create 5 new
>>>jobs in the community?
>>
>>In the Bush economy *no one* is creating jobs (GWB - first president
>>since H Hoover to have a net loss of jobs for an entire term), so much
>>for the stimulation from the tax cuts.
>
> Wrong, I started an IT company 2 years ago, and have been adding work
> since the second month.

Work or workers?

> It's no easy finding people willing to work and
> that have a good technical background also.

Is this a typo, i.e., "no" should have been "not"? (or are you a Scotsman?)

> I've found that every one of our customers, across the USA, is also hiring
> on a regular basis - care to explain away reality?

The key is "net" gain/loss of jobs. Like Hoover, Bush has a net loss. No
one claims that no one has hired anyone in the US since 01/20/2001.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Dogface wrote:
> "Christopher Muto" <muto@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:ez_Zd.3690$hA3.2427@trnddc09...
>
>>blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...
>
>
> Well, this pretty much sums up you're ability to debate a topic based on
> facts!

Sorry this was over your head.

Don't you think Wolfowitz will make a great president of the World Bank?
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

sheesh, can't you just concede a simple fact which you misspoke about?
please don't believe me, go to the department of labour's site and add up
the numbers yourself. of course when you determine the facts are as i say
you can publish your conspiracy theory on why the department of labour
statistics are wrong. http://www.dol.gov/

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news😛an.2005.03.16.18.30.08.58459@nowhere.lan...
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 18:04:58 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>
>> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...
>> but the fact remains that bush is the first president to loose jobs since
>> hoover; despite your 'reality' and all the justification in the world.
>
> If you understood anything about the Economy you would understand that
> "Bush didn't lose any jobs", the corporations as part of our free market
> moved those jobs outside the USA and there is/was nothing that the US
> Government could do about it - it started under Clinton's watch and
> continued into Bush's first term. You can only hold the corporate greed
> responsible for it, not any elected official.
>
> My reality is to understand the economics, market, worker skill pools,
> services demand, and the value of services we offer.
>
> How about you spout something other than news-media drivel, how about you
> come back with a response based on your OWN findings and understanding and
> not these news-story clippings you post.
>
> So, you going to show me where Bush hasn't turned the Clinton economy
> around?
>
> It would also be nice if you bottom posted when you reply so that the
> thread can be properly followed.
>
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Dogface wrote:
> Where are all your facts on why social security is not in crisis? Where are
> all your observations and opinions based on those facts and figures?

Whoa, whoa, whoa, it's not up to us to prove there is *no* crisis - Bush
claims there is a crisis to justify changing SS, so it's up to him to
substantiate that claim or STFU.
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news😛an.2005.03.16.20.08.29.595558@nowhere.lan...
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:58:56 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>
>> sheesh, can't you just concede a simple fact which you misspoke about?
>> please don't believe me, go to the department of labour's site and add up
>> the numbers yourself. of course when you determine the facts are as i
>> say
>> you can publish your conspiracy theory on why the department of labour
>> statistics are wrong. http://www.dol.gov/
>
> I never said you were wrong, <snip>

right, i said *you* were wrong.

you just didn't care to admit it.

nobody's perfect, we all can make mistakes, but your inability to admit it
was my point.
as the rest of what you said... just your way of trying to distract form the
above point (very bush/wmd like - d for distraction).
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:40:49 -0500, Sparky Singer wrote:
>
>> I've found that every one of our customers, across the USA, is also
>> hiring on a regular basis - care to explain away reality?
>
> The key is "net" gain/loss of jobs. Like Hoover, Bush has a net loss. No
> one claims that no one has hired anyone in the US since 01/20/2001.

Scotty, you've missed the point - Bush had/has nothing to do with the
loss/gain of jobs, it happened due to the implementation of technology by
companies that wanted to utilize off-shore resources to increase their
profits and the greed driven by share-holders.

The government can't and keep corporations from moving their work
off-shore, and you can only blame the corporations and share holders.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 01:30:01 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>
> as the rest of what you said... just your way of trying to distract form
> the above point (very bush/wmd like - d for distraction).

Chris, I was going to try and believe that you had something to say, was
going to try and assume that you were not just one of the sheep repeating
what's read/herd in the news, but your inability to back up your
statements proves to me that you don't really have anything except the
news/hype to state.

If you want to make your point, go back and answer my questions, I have
yours.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
 
Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news😛an.2005.03.17.02.52.10.730857@nowhere.lan...
>
> ...your inability to back up your statements proves to me that you don't
> really have anything...

you mean your inability to back up what *you* say. if you can't concede a
simple fact then this isn't a discussion. it is childish.