EarnByLoaning - earnbyloaning.com

[littleroundman]

Originally Posted by NelsonN

They do have the right and should sue to put criminals, like scammers, in jail. But never at the expense of my freedom. I should be free to deal on a personal private level with EBL, or any other company or corp.

It's funny, but I have a friend who believes exactly the same as you in that regard.

My friend (I'll call him Tony Soprano to protect his anonymity) has history on his side, too.

He comes from a long line of descendants who like to take care of their own problems, free of government or bureaucratic interference, just like you.

Yep, no pussy laws and lawmakers for them, real "do it yourselfers" those Sopranos.

It does get a bit messy at times, though.

All those bodies and all that blood flying around.

Other than that, Tony and the lads seem very happy.

[morpheus824]

Originally Posted by mrGSH

I am free and allowed to make posts in broken English. You are free to make posts in better English, that still make no sense...

Thanks for my laugh of the day!

I think NelsonN's response (and I would debate his "better English"), proves your point.

Originally Posted by mrGSH

But you should know that if your freedom to steal collides with others' freedom to keep their money, you may expect some consequences.

I heard it put this way once: "Your freedom ends where my nose begins".

NelsonN wants freedom on his terms, and they don't include respect for anyone else's that disagrees with him. I haven't told him not to post, just the opposite. His freedom of speech is not abridged here, other than when the TG government acts as a referee to keep things on an even keel. It's TG's forum, if you don't like it, don't post.

[littleroundman]

Ah, finally, I get it now.

People should be free to play ponzis

However,

People should not be free to speak in negative terms about ponzi players

Stealing other peoples money is a right.

However

Attempting to stop people stealing other peoples money is not a right.

Victimizing the less educated, naive or more trusting is a right

However

Attempting to stop people victimizing the less educated, naive or more trusting is not a right

Disguising a HYIP as a legitimate opportunity is a right

However

Pointing out that an opportunity is a disguised HYIP is not a right

[SnakePlissken]

Littleroundman,

Why the stealth mode?

[awty]

Originally Posted by NelsonN

The government who would pound on the little guy and give a huge leeway to big corps and their friends. Yeah, get them involved because in the end, even if they have to illegally tap our phone conversations, they will do the right thing.

If I may (WAY off topic here!)
A 'question', going along 'classic' US political lines...
Would one rather have a government that supports 'business', which can employ people, and actually generate profits, or one that has a 'solution' to most problems?
(Usually in the form of a 'government program', funded by additional taxes, both personal, and business)

Which one actually 'pounds on the little guy'.

Talking about things, and actually DOING something about it, can be 2 quite different things.

Personally, I don't appreciate government 'interference'. However, 'freedom' has it's price. I happen to believe that things have gone 'way too far' from where the US 'founding fathers' intended, but hey, congressmen here don't even have to abide by the same laws that they make for us citizens...

Anyway, back to the 'discussion'...I'm probably going to regret posting this...
Just my opinoin,
Jeff

[mrGSH]

I am sorry if I offended you. I did not mean to. I was half kidding ;-)

Originally Posted by NelsonN

Sorry, but you are wrong, again.
Governments can do almost anything. But if you do not like it you have two options....
Governments can put people away from breaking the law. But in no way has the U.S. government the right to invade my privacy willy nilly.

Of course, people have the ability to do what they want to. Your argument is the one that doesn't make sense. Did you really have to point this out? Basically you just made my point.

And my point is very clear. Do you think that the government needs to dictate to me what I can do with my money? I don't think so. They do have the right and should sue to put criminals, like scammers, in jail. But never at the expense of my freedom. I should be free to deal on a personal private level with EBL, or any other company or corp.

Do you really think that if the government is tapping my phone line illegally and requesting a corp to have 100 pieces of licensed documents in a drawer that that will ultimately dictate how the business will eventually fair? LOL!

You people have the time, read books about how corp and companies are really put together, find those that also talk about how the red hand of government stifles so many with so much regulations and crap that they can't even get off the ground, before you start calling for the SEC to regulate everything under the sun. This is the same argument against the liberal minds, that somehow throwing money at problems is the solution.

[mrGSH]

I am sorry if I offended you. I did not mean to. I was half kidding ;-)
Governments can do almost anything. But if you do not like it you have two options....

Originally Posted by NelsonN

Sorry, but you are wrong, again.
Governments can put people away from breaking the law. But in no way has the U.S. government the right to invade my privacy willy nilly.

Of course, people have the ability to do what they want to. Your argument is the one that doesn't make sense. Did you really have to point this out? Basically you just made my point.

And my point is very clear. Do you think that the government needs to dictate to me what I can do with my money? I don't think so. They do have the right and should sue to put criminals, like scammers, in jail. But never at the expense of my freedom. I should be free to deal on a personal private level with EBL, or any other company or corp.

Do you really think that if the government is tapping my phone line illegally and requesting a corp to have 100 pieces of licensed documents in a drawer that that will ultimately dictate how the business will eventually fair? LOL!

You people have the time, read books about how corp and companies are really put together, find those that also talk about how the red hand of government stifles so many with so much regulations and crap that they can't even get off the ground, before you start calling for the SEC to regulate everything under the sun. This is the same argument against the liberal minds, that somehow throwing money at problems is the solution.

[schoolofhardknocks]

One of the things that has become clear in this thread is there are two very different sets of premises being made when the comments fly.

1) EBL is a ponzi, and there can be no possible way it is a legitimate, money-making operation that uses the funds loaned to it to generate returns sufficient to repay the loans with interest.

2) EBL is not a ponzi, and has always made their promised payments on time, as agreed upon in the loan contract between lender and Quest Holdings, Inc.

I respect those posters like Morpheus, who believe with all of their heart that EBL is an illegal operation, and seek to discourage potential new members from becoming a lender.

I also respect that there are members who are very happy with EBL, and believe it to have a fully legitimate, underlying business model that allows it to generate ongoing returns.

I do notice that the crowd who believe EBL to be a ponzi do sometimes cross into ad hominem attacks against EBL members personally. I think it is important to remember that neither school of thought has absolute proof that EBL is legal or not legal. So, attacking a member of EBL on the basis that they are participating or propagating an illegal operation is still based on an assumption.

I really think it is a clearer argument to state one's opinion on EBL and not on the motives or thoughts of the members of EBL. But of course, it is an open thread. I just think on topic posts (about the company) and not ad hominem attacks, are more appropriate to an intelligent discussion.

I am actually a little amazed that this thread is still going on because both sides of this equation have passionately defined their points of view and their reasons for holding them. Now that the premises and assumptions of both sides are clear, in most cases I think the debate would have ended.

But it looks like those folks who are happy with EBL's service and believe in it's integrity have left the thread; and those who believe it to be a menace to an unsuspecting society continue to post so that potential members will come across continually new posts warning them away.

So, the thread is now much more of a one-sided source of information - those who believe EBL to be an illegal ponzi.

My advice to those gathering due diligence is to try to gather data from both types of information and make a decision based on as much information that you can gather. Hearing out both sides of an argument often can lead to a better decision, in my humble opinion. At least, that has helped me in the school of hard knocks.

[forexfreedom]

earn by load ..

[awty]

Originally Posted by schoolofhardknocks

I think it is important to remember that neither school of thought has absolute proof that EBL is legal or not legal.

Possibly a valid point.
One could also 'argue' that if it IS a 'legal' program, why is that NOT 'shown' to be the case?
If YOU had a legal, valid, licensed, and registered venue, and were getting a percentage of funds that come in, wouldn't it be one heck of an 'advertising plus', to be able to show it as being legitimate?
One might ask the question - why is that NOT happening...
That, over my short time in this arena, has been a key question, and - possibly worth some consideration?
Just my opinion,
Jeff