'Shindig'
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
It's possible they all were bed-ridden multi-plegics in rural Kansas, desperate for some high-class Joe and willing to buy Starbucks beans online for their monkey assistants to grind up and turn into breakfast, but.... Occam's Razor says stupid people.
EVEN THEN, they could have gone to Starbucks.com and paid face value.
If it's a store without a website or a phone number, then maybe paying more than face value on eBay isn't stupid. Maybe.
Is the Starbucks thing from the argument we had here in 2002 or 2003? (I remember the apartment I had then.) I was arguing then that people could be rationally paying more than face value. And don't know if starbucks.com sold them back then.
Somebody make me go run errands. I can't participate in the economics conversation anyway, I'm too stupid today.
I have seen charity ebay auctions where people pay more than face value for a gift cert. But then, charity is not rational in the sense that rational is being used here.
No fair keeping secrets. How was I supposed to know what I was arguing for or against?
Could you trust, though, that I wouldn't bring up a straw man just to make a point? You're being exceedingly literal today!
Go shop, Burrell. You'll be participating in economics anyway!
You're being exceedingly literal today!
Today?
I have seen charity ebay auctions where people pay more than face value for a gift cert. But then, charity is not rational in the sense that rational is being used here.
Yeah, I wouldn't count a charity auction here because the goal in a charity auction isn't to purchase the item, it's to give lots of money.
Maybe it's just me, but it sounds like everyone is pretty much saying the same things and it's just a battle of semantics.
Oooh! Thread name for Natter 49!!!!!!
I love when ita and Nutty get into big discussions.