[Leica] Nathan's PAD 31/1/2015: the human face of the crisis

[Jayanand Govindaraj]

Well, we elect the guys who write the laws.....

Keeping blinkers on ones' beliefs never helps. Remember what Keynes once
told a reporter who accused him of changing his mind - "When the facts
change, I change my mind. What do you do?"

Accepting Caveat Emptor protects us, the consumer, and not the other way
around. Being careful and reading the fine print (it is invariably going to
be there, however much we dislike it) makes us take wiser and more
considered decisions.

My last post on this. Coincidentally, I ran into Robert Samuelson's column
(required reading for me) today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-challenging-what-we-know-about-the-housing-bubble/2015/02/01/660c16f6-a89c-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html

Cheers
Jayanand




On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 6:35 PM, George Lottermoser <
george.imagist at icloud.com> wrote:

> just me too!
>
> In far too many cases thieves write the laws, codes, charters and so
> called fine print
>
> a note off the iPad, George
>
> On Feb 2, 2015, at 5:02 AM, Frank Dernie <Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I have always thought the concept of “caveat emptor” was a thieves
> charter/conmans dream, in as much as effectively the law is saying that if
> you have dealt with a thief, or other criminal, and you did not notice
> yourself that they were criminals that the loss is your own fault.
> > As a person who has almost always had dealings with honest, trustworthy
> people I find the idea that Caveat emptor could be a legal defence hateful.
> But that is just me!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>