[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Eaves: Yeah! What the hell was I thinking?!? It IS all about you!

I think getting “evility” and “prelapsarian” into the same sentence may not be as tough as you think. Given that “prelapsarian” indicates a time before sin and “evility” is, well, “evility”, I think the juxtaposition lends itself well to a sentence construction featuring both.

To really add to the level of difficulty, I’d like to add “crepuscular” into the mix and see how you fare. That IS brutish, no?[/quote]

Crepuscular! I’ve always loved that word, ever since watching “Dark Shadows” as a kid. Oooh, delicious.

Nah, you’ll have to come up with something tougher. In today’s horror-fantasy fixated entertainment model, I think that it would be fairly easy to come up with a sentence featuring all three words. Of course, no one would know what they meant. Well, with the exception of “evility”.

Actually, my dog is very crespuscular. But that’s just because she’s a hunting hound who likes treeing raccoons. She may have some deviltry in her, but not an ounce of evility. And I would have to say that prior to last Thursday was her prelapsarian period. She peed on the carpet on Thursday. A lot.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Eaves: Yeah! What the hell was I thinking?!? It IS all about you!

I think getting “evility” and “prelapsarian” into the same sentence may not be as tough as you think. Given that “prelapsarian” indicates a time before sin and “evility” is, well, “evility”, I think the juxtaposition lends itself well to a sentence construction featuring both.

To really add to the level of difficulty, I’d like to add “crepuscular” into the mix and see how you fare. That IS brutish, no?[/quote]

Crepuscular! I’ve always loved that word, ever since watching “Dark Shadows” as a kid. Oooh, delicious.

Nah, you’ll have to come up with something tougher. In today’s horror-fantasy fixated entertainment model, I think that it would be fairly easy to come up with a sentence featuring all three words. Of course, no one would know what they meant. Well, with the exception of “evility”.

Actually, my dog is very crespuscular. But that’s just because she’s a hunting hound who likes treeing raccoons. She may have some deviltry in her, but not an ounce of evility. And I would have to say that prior to last Thursday was her prelapsarian period. She peed on the carpet on Thursday. A lot.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]

Alan, you are absolutely linguicious! That one actually made me light-headed.

I’ve had to discipline myself this weekend (and I don’t mean in a fun way). I’m cramming for exams, so have had to severely curtail my Piggs time. It’s been quite painful.

Sometimes I think you do this just to torture me. You brute.[/quote]

Eaves: “Linguicious”? Wow. That one wins “Word of the Week”. I was going to give it to BigGubment and his use of “evility” (to describe Monsanto), but yours is better. “Evility” is close to another fave of mine, “deviltry”, and it has an Austin Powers-esque ring to it, but “linguicious” is better. It is a tad bit suggestive (wholly unintentionally, I’m sure), but we can overlook that.

I do this to torture you? Nay! Perish the thought! And, honestly, why is THIS always about YOU?[/quote]

Duh?! Because it is. I may not be linguicious, but it *is* always about me.

Don’t argue with me on this point. I’m out of estrogen, and I have a gun.

As for “Word of the Week”, mmmmmmm, I don’t know. “Evility” approaches genius on so many levels. Has a real good visceral feel to it (I certainly feel the Austin Powers vibe), and one shivers in anticipation of the perplexed and questioning looks he/she will receive when employing this word in everyday conversation. Tough as this is on me, Alan, I think “evility” gets WoW, hands down.

You realize that, instead of studying, I’m going to be sitting here trying to dream up a sentence in which I can use both “evility” and “prelapsarian”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]

Alan, you are absolutely linguicious! That one actually made me light-headed.

I’ve had to discipline myself this weekend (and I don’t mean in a fun way). I’m cramming for exams, so have had to severely curtail my Piggs time. It’s been quite painful.

Sometimes I think you do this just to torture me. You brute.[/quote]

Eaves: “Linguicious”? Wow. That one wins “Word of the Week”. I was going to give it to BigGubment and his use of “evility” (to describe Monsanto), but yours is better. “Evility” is close to another fave of mine, “deviltry”, and it has an Austin Powers-esque ring to it, but “linguicious” is better. It is a tad bit suggestive (wholly unintentionally, I’m sure), but we can overlook that.

I do this to torture you? Nay! Perish the thought! And, honestly, why is THIS always about YOU?[/quote]

Duh?! Because it is. I may not be linguicious, but it *is* always about me.

Don’t argue with me on this point. I’m out of estrogen, and I have a gun.

As for “Word of the Week”, mmmmmmm, I don’t know. “Evility” approaches genius on so many levels. Has a real good visceral feel to it (I certainly feel the Austin Powers vibe), and one shivers in anticipation of the perplexed and questioning looks he/she will receive when employing this word in everyday conversation. Tough as this is on me, Alan, I think “evility” gets WoW, hands down.

You realize that, instead of studying, I’m going to be sitting here trying to dream up a sentence in which I can use both “evility” and “prelapsarian”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]

Alan, you are absolutely linguicious! That one actually made me light-headed.

I’ve had to discipline myself this weekend (and I don’t mean in a fun way). I’m cramming for exams, so have had to severely curtail my Piggs time. It’s been quite painful.

Sometimes I think you do this just to torture me. You brute.[/quote]

Eaves: “Linguicious”? Wow. That one wins “Word of the Week”. I was going to give it to BigGubment and his use of “evility” (to describe Monsanto), but yours is better. “Evility” is close to another fave of mine, “deviltry”, and it has an Austin Powers-esque ring to it, but “linguicious” is better. It is a tad bit suggestive (wholly unintentionally, I’m sure), but we can overlook that.

I do this to torture you? Nay! Perish the thought! And, honestly, why is THIS always about YOU?[/quote]

Duh?! Because it is. I may not be linguicious, but it *is* always about me.

Don’t argue with me on this point. I’m out of estrogen, and I have a gun.

As for “Word of the Week”, mmmmmmm, I don’t know. “Evility” approaches genius on so many levels. Has a real good visceral feel to it (I certainly feel the Austin Powers vibe), and one shivers in anticipation of the perplexed and questioning looks he/she will receive when employing this word in everyday conversation. Tough as this is on me, Alan, I think “evility” gets WoW, hands down.

You realize that, instead of studying, I’m going to be sitting here trying to dream up a sentence in which I can use both “evility” and “prelapsarian”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]

Alan, you are absolutely linguicious! That one actually made me light-headed.

I’ve had to discipline myself this weekend (and I don’t mean in a fun way). I’m cramming for exams, so have had to severely curtail my Piggs time. It’s been quite painful.

Sometimes I think you do this just to torture me. You brute.[/quote]

Eaves: “Linguicious”? Wow. That one wins “Word of the Week”. I was going to give it to BigGubment and his use of “evility” (to describe Monsanto), but yours is better. “Evility” is close to another fave of mine, “deviltry”, and it has an Austin Powers-esque ring to it, but “linguicious” is better. It is a tad bit suggestive (wholly unintentionally, I’m sure), but we can overlook that.

I do this to torture you? Nay! Perish the thought! And, honestly, why is THIS always about YOU?[/quote]

Duh?! Because it is. I may not be linguicious, but it *is* always about me.

Don’t argue with me on this point. I’m out of estrogen, and I have a gun.

As for “Word of the Week”, mmmmmmm, I don’t know. “Evility” approaches genius on so many levels. Has a real good visceral feel to it (I certainly feel the Austin Powers vibe), and one shivers in anticipation of the perplexed and questioning looks he/she will receive when employing this word in everyday conversation. Tough as this is on me, Alan, I think “evility” gets WoW, hands down.

You realize that, instead of studying, I’m going to be sitting here trying to dream up a sentence in which I can use both “evility” and “prelapsarian”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]

Alan, you are absolutely linguicious! That one actually made me light-headed.

I’ve had to discipline myself this weekend (and I don’t mean in a fun way). I’m cramming for exams, so have had to severely curtail my Piggs time. It’s been quite painful.

Sometimes I think you do this just to torture me. You brute.[/quote]

Eaves: “Linguicious”? Wow. That one wins “Word of the Week”. I was going to give it to BigGubment and his use of “evility” (to describe Monsanto), but yours is better. “Evility” is close to another fave of mine, “deviltry”, and it has an Austin Powers-esque ring to it, but “linguicious” is better. It is a tad bit suggestive (wholly unintentionally, I’m sure), but we can overlook that.

I do this to torture you? Nay! Perish the thought! And, honestly, why is THIS always about YOU?[/quote]

Duh?! Because it is. I may not be linguicious, but it *is* always about me.

Don’t argue with me on this point. I’m out of estrogen, and I have a gun.

As for “Word of the Week”, mmmmmmm, I don’t know. “Evility” approaches genius on so many levels. Has a real good visceral feel to it (I certainly feel the Austin Powers vibe), and one shivers in anticipation of the perplexed and questioning looks he/she will receive when employing this word in everyday conversation. Tough as this is on me, Alan, I think “evility” gets WoW, hands down.

You realize that, instead of studying, I’m going to be sitting here trying to dream up a sentence in which I can use both “evility” and “prelapsarian”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=patb][quote=mike92104][quote=BigGovernmentIsGood]The only true remedy to deflation is to tax wealth and to have a very high estate tax. This will allow for redistribution of wealth from the upper classes who are hoarding it to the lower, more productive classes who will spend and invest it.[/quote]

There’s an idea! Communism will fix it![/quote]

Republican capitalism got us in this fix, and you
want to keep it up?[/quote]

I am keenly disappointed. This is not Piggs-worthy discourse

Actually, I have nothing against trying to enforce existing tax laws, and perhaps taking away one or two of the tax loopholes that the very wealthy enjoy. However, wholesale redistribution of wealth doesn’t do it for me (and not because I’m wealthy).

I am curious as to what you mean when you say “more productive” in referring to, quote, lower classes. Actually, I’d also like to know what income range are we speaking of here.

In reality, there were millions of lower middle class Americans that earned more wealth than they ever thought possible during the late 90s and early 2000s. I saw a lot of Mercedeses, Cadillacs, and ultra-loaded luxury trucks, and quite a few good-sized boats, plenty of plasma TVs and home theater systems, and kids and adults alike in expensive designer clothes, all paid for with the wealth that people took out of their homes. Is this what constitutes “investment”? Because it didn’t work. And you have a lot of embittered people who are pissed that their homes are worth half of what they owe on them, and acting like they had no part in it.

Sorry, but I’m not seeing any evidence that these people know anything about “investing”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=patb][quote=mike92104][quote=BigGovernmentIsGood]The only true remedy to deflation is to tax wealth and to have a very high estate tax. This will allow for redistribution of wealth from the upper classes who are hoarding it to the lower, more productive classes who will spend and invest it.[/quote]

There’s an idea! Communism will fix it![/quote]

Republican capitalism got us in this fix, and you
want to keep it up?[/quote]

I am keenly disappointed. This is not Piggs-worthy discourse

Actually, I have nothing against trying to enforce existing tax laws, and perhaps taking away one or two of the tax loopholes that the very wealthy enjoy. However, wholesale redistribution of wealth doesn’t do it for me (and not because I’m wealthy).

I am curious as to what you mean when you say “more productive” in referring to, quote, lower classes. Actually, I’d also like to know what income range are we speaking of here.

In reality, there were millions of lower middle class Americans that earned more wealth than they ever thought possible during the late 90s and early 2000s. I saw a lot of Mercedeses, Cadillacs, and ultra-loaded luxury trucks, and quite a few good-sized boats, plenty of plasma TVs and home theater systems, and kids and adults alike in expensive designer clothes, all paid for with the wealth that people took out of their homes. Is this what constitutes “investment”? Because it didn’t work. And you have a lot of embittered people who are pissed that their homes are worth half of what they owe on them, and acting like they had no part in it.

Sorry, but I’m not seeing any evidence that these people know anything about “investing”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=patb][quote=mike92104][quote=BigGovernmentIsGood]The only true remedy to deflation is to tax wealth and to have a very high estate tax. This will allow for redistribution of wealth from the upper classes who are hoarding it to the lower, more productive classes who will spend and invest it.[/quote]

There’s an idea! Communism will fix it![/quote]

Republican capitalism got us in this fix, and you
want to keep it up?[/quote]

I am keenly disappointed. This is not Piggs-worthy discourse

Actually, I have nothing against trying to enforce existing tax laws, and perhaps taking away one or two of the tax loopholes that the very wealthy enjoy. However, wholesale redistribution of wealth doesn’t do it for me (and not because I’m wealthy).

I am curious as to what you mean when you say “more productive” in referring to, quote, lower classes. Actually, I’d also like to know what income range are we speaking of here.

In reality, there were millions of lower middle class Americans that earned more wealth than they ever thought possible during the late 90s and early 2000s. I saw a lot of Mercedeses, Cadillacs, and ultra-loaded luxury trucks, and quite a few good-sized boats, plenty of plasma TVs and home theater systems, and kids and adults alike in expensive designer clothes, all paid for with the wealth that people took out of their homes. Is this what constitutes “investment”? Because it didn’t work. And you have a lot of embittered people who are pissed that their homes are worth half of what they owe on them, and acting like they had no part in it.

Sorry, but I’m not seeing any evidence that these people know anything about “investing”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=patb][quote=mike92104][quote=BigGovernmentIsGood]The only true remedy to deflation is to tax wealth and to have a very high estate tax. This will allow for redistribution of wealth from the upper classes who are hoarding it to the lower, more productive classes who will spend and invest it.[/quote]

There’s an idea! Communism will fix it![/quote]

Republican capitalism got us in this fix, and you
want to keep it up?[/quote]

I am keenly disappointed. This is not Piggs-worthy discourse

Actually, I have nothing against trying to enforce existing tax laws, and perhaps taking away one or two of the tax loopholes that the very wealthy enjoy. However, wholesale redistribution of wealth doesn’t do it for me (and not because I’m wealthy).

I am curious as to what you mean when you say “more productive” in referring to, quote, lower classes. Actually, I’d also like to know what income range are we speaking of here.

In reality, there were millions of lower middle class Americans that earned more wealth than they ever thought possible during the late 90s and early 2000s. I saw a lot of Mercedeses, Cadillacs, and ultra-loaded luxury trucks, and quite a few good-sized boats, plenty of plasma TVs and home theater systems, and kids and adults alike in expensive designer clothes, all paid for with the wealth that people took out of their homes. Is this what constitutes “investment”? Because it didn’t work. And you have a lot of embittered people who are pissed that their homes are worth half of what they owe on them, and acting like they had no part in it.

Sorry, but I’m not seeing any evidence that these people know anything about “investing”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=patb][quote=mike92104][quote=BigGovernmentIsGood]The only true remedy to deflation is to tax wealth and to have a very high estate tax. This will allow for redistribution of wealth from the upper classes who are hoarding it to the lower, more productive classes who will spend and invest it.[/quote]

There’s an idea! Communism will fix it![/quote]

Republican capitalism got us in this fix, and you
want to keep it up?[/quote]

I am keenly disappointed. This is not Piggs-worthy discourse

Actually, I have nothing against trying to enforce existing tax laws, and perhaps taking away one or two of the tax loopholes that the very wealthy enjoy. However, wholesale redistribution of wealth doesn’t do it for me (and not because I’m wealthy).

I am curious as to what you mean when you say “more productive” in referring to, quote, lower classes. Actually, I’d also like to know what income range are we speaking of here.

In reality, there were millions of lower middle class Americans that earned more wealth than they ever thought possible during the late 90s and early 2000s. I saw a lot of Mercedeses, Cadillacs, and ultra-loaded luxury trucks, and quite a few good-sized boats, plenty of plasma TVs and home theater systems, and kids and adults alike in expensive designer clothes, all paid for with the wealth that people took out of their homes. Is this what constitutes “investment”? Because it didn’t work. And you have a lot of embittered people who are pissed that their homes are worth half of what they owe on them, and acting like they had no part in it.

Sorry, but I’m not seeing any evidence that these people know anything about “investing”.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=walterwhite]I vacillate wildly hour to hour[/quote]

Glad the situation is improving.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=walterwhite]I vacillate wildly hour to hour[/quote]

Glad the situation is improving.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=walterwhite]I vacillate wildly hour to hour[/quote]

Glad the situation is improving.

[Author]

Posts