You must log in or register to comment.
A naive libertarian might see the anti-competitive auction as fair.
Someone with awareness of history might note the unfair laws which led to banks wresting land from farmers. Then realize that nothing was fair.
“Hey I’ve got the papers, whether it is just or legal really isn’t my problem and I’m sorry for your situation anyway give me the farm.”
“Hey be that as it may the whole community has decided that whoever takes this farm is going to get hit with a bunch of ax-handles.”
“Unfair, injustice”
If you tried that today, someone online would come in and buy up that property. We have no defense against monetary predators like we used to.
I’d think banks probably just have a reserve price these days (a minimum price they’ll accept on the property).
“In other news an auctioneer was beaten to death by a mob of farmers today after not accepting a bid.”
Pretty much this. Penny auctions worked because you had to physically be in the room, which means it’s far easier for your friends and neighbors with guns and other implements of violence to tell the bank rep “hey maybe you should sit this one out bud” when they show up.
You know, because of the implication.
“Are these bidders in any danger?”
“Yes”
Always funny to see mob mentality suddenly justified when it’s for the “right” (subjective) reason.
If someone is trying to rob you, you should always have the right to protect yourself from it
Lol. Lmao, even.
Unfortunately, banks plan for this tactic anymore.
That’s a very weird way to try to use “anymore”.
the fact that you don’t have a positive version of anymore except for approximations like nowadays is the problem. other languages have a word for “from a certain point on” that can be used in both positive and negative sense.
you have no longer which also functions like anymore but I can’t think of an opposite for that either.
from now on is the only thing I can think of that can be used in both senses but that’s only useful for specific times (you could say from then on too, but the then has to be specified).
there’s clearly a need for it so people use anymore in a positive sense. why not.
What about have since? “Banks have since planned for this tactic”
I guess it still implies a specific time/event, but maybe it’s a little less clunky than “from then on”
The problem isn’t the word, it’s grammatical.
I’m not explaining this with proper terms as it’s my first language and didn’t pay attention in class as a kid but: Anymore is negative, but the verb itself needs a negating adverb. In english the correct phrase is:
Unfortunately, banks plan for this tactic now.
Which isn’t an approximation. “Now” in context means exactly “from a certain point on”, and is the positive version.
To grammatically use “anymore” you need to change the wording/structure altogether, and add negation:
Unfortunately, the tactic doesn’t work on banks anymore
Alternatively, changing the meaning altogether for the sake of grammar:
Unfortunately, banks don’t plan for this tactic anymore.
you just elaborated on what I said. also I don’t know what you mean by “it’s not the word it’s grammatical”—the only reason it doesn’t grammatically make sense is the because of the word itself. if “mondy” was the word you could be using it either way.
I disagree that “now” is the positive version of anymore. you can’t use it in past tense. you could use “by then” but I think we’re possibly semantically getting further from “anymore”.
They both have a meaning of “presently” with reference to a change that occured in the past.
‘Now’ is used when something presently is the case (positive) and ‘anymore’ is used when something presently is no longer the case (negative).
Anymore is in the present just as much as now is. They both require present tense verbs even though they tell you something of the past.
Banks do this fuckin tactic now
“bid starts at X amount” is something they were too stupid for?
Starting amounts don’t apply when you have a mob of farmers willing to kill you if you don’t take the 50 cents.
