That's not the case. The flights you purchased were sold as advertised, and that's the point I'm making. They didn't sell you tickets to flights that didn't exist. That is where their obligation as a vendor

What, exactly, was unethical about what they did? I agree that it's a much better customer service to offer travel advice, but Expedia doesn't hold itself out for that. It doesn't guarantee anything other

Gonna have to side with Chelsea on this one. Expedia has no obligation to adjust travel plans based on anything other than what the user chooses. Flights are customer-chosen, not Expedia-mandated. This

Having watched the presentation and read through the white paper, this implementation of decentralized dispute resolution is a terrible idea. Let me explain why. First, and probably foremost, there is

Yeah well, we can't all be cool guys who go to Steemfest, now can we?

I really should do one of these as well. I've been here since Aug 2016, and I think it's time for a retrospective. Excellent post @shadowspub. Glad you're here with us, sticking it out still :)

Usury was prohibited among the Israelites, but it was condoned between Israelites and Gentiles, so that assertion is bunk. Lending at interest isn't going to go away or even substantially diminish. Even

You do realize that you can trade on margin at exchanges like Poloniex, right? That you can purchase an amount of crypto greater than the amount you can actually pay for on credit with the exchange? You're

I'm also curious as to how the banks will be done away with. So long as people want things now rather than waiting to save the requisite funds, or want to make an initial expenditure on the basis of a

The admiralty law argument is a bunk argument. That's a tired argument paraded around by sovereign citizens who think they've found a run-around for the judicial system, but it's utter nonsense. Admiralty

I do, so you're preaching to the choir. Again, I'm not arguing about what ought to be the case. Only what is the case and what is enforceable at law. Contract law wasn't written by banksters; its codification

No, that's not how I think it works. You enter into an agreement to purchase the house from the seller, who agrees to sell you the house for a certain price denominated in whatever currency. Not having

I'm with the engineer from Steemit, Inc. It's so simple and straightforward. It only took me a month to understand it, and I only have an IQ of 170. If I can do it, surely anyone else can.

Additionally, you can't say the bank has put nothing into the deal. Clearly, the fiat money offered by the bank to the home buyer was worth the consideration of allowing the bank to hold a lien on the

The loan shark's. Duh. That doesn't relate at all to the previous scenario, where no force or.violence was employed. Contract law is contract law. It's built on the express premise that a promise, once

The person who fails to pay on time, which, in your example, is you. Absent fraud, coercion, or undue influence, you entered into that loan agreement with the bank voluntarily. Intervening circumstances

That is truly excellent! Congratulations on reaching dolphin status. I'm shooting for the same once I have the funds to do so. Law school is plenty expensive as well, as is raising two kids. :D I hope

I can only imagine. My ex is going through nursing school and it's unbelievably difficult. Never fails to amaze me just how hard it is to prep for a particular career, instead of just getting a degree.

Dude, look at the title of your post. I was being facetious and trying to joke around.

It really is. I'm going to be relying on Partiko as well, I think. Mainly I keep it for keeping track of people responding to comments, but, I might start posting from it as well. I just need to get back