Immigrants & Benefits

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

vivatifosi wrote: »

Just curious, are you admitting you know it is a pyramid scheme then;)?

Oh, it's not one of those either, but the frequent misuse of the word "Ponzi" on these boards serves only to illustrate the ignorance of those misusing it.

Sampong

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Oh, it's not one of those either, but the frequent misuse of the word "Ponzi" on these boards serves only to illustrate the ignorance of those misusing it.

Yawn - Ponzi schemes and Pyramid schemes are essentially the same concept, there are differences but pulling people up on technicalities is quite SAD and more likely to be an attempt to distract people from the fact that you have been tripping yourself up in this entire thread.

homelessskilledworker

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

:rotfl:

Not sure which is sadder....

Your lack of knowledge of the difference between a Ponzi scheme and a Pyramid scheme....

Or

Your ignorance of just how devestating to society it would be if the pensioner/worker ratio inverted

What cracks me up about you Hamish is this disingenous BS on racial and immigration matters.
I really wonder if this is some kind of double bluff and you are really a closet racist.

All I can see you doing in these threads is p****g people off, it's like you are inciting anger and hate.
I had the same thought today when there was supposedly three muslim men patrolling an area in London, clearing it of gays, women with short skirts and anyone drinking, my first thought was they were racists pretending to be hardline islamist nutters.

I have parents that come from both side of the divide in Ireland/NI, so I know how racism and bigotry work. Never has ranting or abusing or the be-littleing of the person you are trying to win ever worked on ONE SINGLE OCCASION, like you are doing with all your threads here.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Sampong wrote: »

Yawn - Ponzi schemes and Pyramid schemes are essentially the same concept

Sad..... very sad.

A Ponzi scheme is characterised by outright fraud, where numerous persons are conned into giving funds to a single individual or company which purports to invest on their behalf, but no legitimate investment is ever made. Instead, funds from later participants are used to pay off earlier participants. There is no need whatsoever for participants to recruit additional participants in a pyramid structure, nor necessarily for exponential growth in the number of victims.

A pyramid scheme on the other hand, does indeed require exponential growth in order to survive beyond the first level. Where two becomes four becomes eight becomes sixteen becomes thirty two, etc.

At this point it's also worth noting that not all pyramid schemes are illegal, or unsustainable. For example multi-level marketing enterprises such as Avon, Amway, Tupperware, or Mary-Kay are established, sustainable and entirely legal businesses.

So neither the property market, nor indeed maintaining dependency ratio's in the population, can accurately be described as either a Ponzi scheme or Pyramid scheme.

Neither one involves the fraudulent obtaining of funds which are never invested. And neither one requires exponential population growth.

So for someone to describe either as a "Ponzi", shows a breathtaking level of ignorance.

Sampong

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So for someone to describe either as a "Ponzi", shows a breathtaking level of ignorance.

Nevertheless, that breathtaking level of ignorance doesn't come anywhere close to that as demonstrated by you.

Sampong

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

A Ponzi scheme is characterised by outright fraud, where numerous persons are conned into giving funds .......blah blah

Yes I know

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

A pyramid scheme on the other hand, does indeed require exponential growth in order to survive beyond the first level. Where two becomes four becomes eight becomes sixteen becomes thirty two, etc.

At this point it's also worth noting that not all pyramid schemes are illegal, or unsustainable. For example multi-level marketing enterprises such as Avon, Amway, Tupperware, or Mary-Kay are established, sustainable and entirely legal businesses.

Well thanks for this incredible insight it's really going to brighten up my day now that I know Avon, Amway, Tupperware and MLM are legal businesses. Hell, I may even become an amway rep and sell overpriced cr:money:p to people who don't know any better.

But all of this ponzi/pyramid wisdom of yours doesn't take away from the fact that we have a huge problem with mass immigration in this country and you have been shown to be wrong in your viewpoint over and over

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So neither the property market, nor indeed maintaining dependency ratio's in the population, can accurately be described as either a Ponzi scheme or Pyramid scheme.

Can't say i've ever really thought about this. I guess if you want to be pedantic about it it's fair to say that people, in discussion can compare the property market with a ponzi scheme but of course it would be near impossible to have a discussion with you using any analogy since you would immediately soil your nappy with excitement the instant someone used a "technically incorrect" term.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Sad..... very sad.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I'm not the one who has clocked up over 13,000 posts sitting in front of a computer screen all day talking rubbish on here.

You should actually try getting out more, it may give you a different perspective on the world and you nay start to understand what the problems are.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Sampong wrote: »

I guess if you want to be pedantic about it it's fair to say that people, in discussion can compare the property market with a ponzi scheme .

You could compare the property market with an elephant if you wanted to, but that wouldn't make the comparison valid.

In a Ponzi scheme, the participants by definition do not end up with the goods (usually stocks and shares) they were promised, because no purchase of such goods was made but instead the funds were stolen to pay others.

So unless you can show me a few million people who paid money for a property but were never actually sold a property, it's not a Ponzi.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So unless you can show me a few million people who paid money for a property but were never actually sold a property, it's not a Ponzi.

Could be many yet. Needs time to play out.

It's called the interest only mortgage.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Could be many yet. Needs time to play out.

It's called the interest only mortgage.

So they did actually take possession of a house then?

They pay money, they get the use of the house.

Not a Ponzi.

Graham_Devon

You said "paid money for a property, but never actually sold a property".

I answered.

You've now changed this too "paid money for a property and got use of the property".

I'm just batting out the answers to what you say Hamish. Keep changing what you say, and I'll just bat you another answer! The interest only mortgage though is the key downfall in your argument. For the many who can't now, and the many in the future who will never pay it off, they never got SOLD a property, they got use, as you say.