XPost: alt.autos.toyota, rec.autos.driving, alt.society.liberalism   
   XPost: alt.fan.michael-moore   
   From: tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com   
      
   On 2011-02-13, Gary L  Burnore  wrote:   
   > On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 00:50:48 +0000 (UTC), Brent   
   > wrote:   
      
   >>>>So then the whole argument is refuted by itself? Owning a parking spot   
   >>>>is not a burden on a car owner if it appreciates at least at the rate of   
   >>>>inflation.   
   >>   
   >>> Rignt now if you sold one, you'd lose money.  So no, not refuted by   
   >>> itself.  Also, if you consider that you're paying interest on a loan   
   >>> to pay that $30K, you could consider THAT a burden even if you earn it   
   >>> all back when it's time to sell.   
   >>   
   >>If you need a loan to buy something for $30,000, perhaps the downtown of   
   >>a major city is simply beyond your means.   
   >   
   > Didn't say NEED, did I?   
      
   it's a general 'you', so stop being moronic.   
      
   >  Of course, maybe you should ask the millions who have car loans why   
   > they do so.   
      
   When you don't have an argument, conflate it with something else. People   
   who can afford multi-million dollar residences in the downtowns of major   
   cities don't need car loans either.   
      
   > What a completely moronic argument.   
      
   Yes, your's is.   
      
   >>> If you don't think it's a burden, would you think paying for a house   
   >>> isn't a burden because one day you might make your money back?   
   >>   
   >>I don't think   
   >   
   > Ya got that part right.   
      
   Lame trimming, that's the best you got? HAAHAHHAHAhAHA!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)