reply to post by SkepticOverlord
yeah, well that could go both ways.
i've proven you absolutely wrong on numerous posts in this thread and not once have you even acknowledged your own error ... interesting exchange i
whatever, theft is theft ... i don't care what name you give it.
i understand the process, i don't agree with it ... why do you insist i have to agree ??
it is my decision isn't it ?
it's a form of persuasion that should be labeled unlawful, period.
and again, we are not discussing mortgages, we are discussing eternal extortion ... generational even ... so, how is that not stealing ??
you cannot lawfully repossess property that has been PAID IN FULL.
and if a retailer were to try it, they would be jailed.
like i said, i fully understand the process.
i still don't agree with it.
title/deed doesn't change hands until the 'note' is paid in full.
transferring a title doesn't necessarily involve sale or purchase.
right answer for the wrong question ... i'll give ya that much.
for that matter, when did they even have an 'investment' in it to re-claim ?
you said ... [color=amber]The moment you signed the mortgage contract
i was referring to the TAXman, not the mortgage company and you
so, back to the question ... when did the State/taxman ever even have an 'investment' to re-claim via perpetual, fluxuating extortion ?
as i said to another, anyone who can dismiss stealing as something else, says an awful lot about their character.
no, my point has been 'taxes' and theft, just like what the OPPT appears to address.
you keep circling back to mortgages ... why i have no idea.
Vermont ?? no thanks, i left the north for a reason.
although, i do like their 'lifestyle' for the most part.
yeah so ... still doesn't reduce the level of theft being perpetrated on the public at large.
no, you avoided it then and you're avoiding it now.
deflection isn't advancing the conversation at all.