3 ms·

The link has no such implication. It just says he doesn’t have a smart phone. Even if he survives solely off of social security, his COLA adjustment will be mo

The link has no such implication. It just says he doesn’t have a smart phone. Even if he survives solely off of social security, his COLA adjustment will be more than $40 a year

9rx 7mo ago
It says he cannot get tickets because, as we established, he needs to spend $40 more over the price of the ticket in order to facilitate the transaction. So, either: 1. He cannot get tickets because the cost of the ticket plus $40 exceeds his budget. 2. He can get tickets because $40 more is no big deal. The link asserting that he cannot get tickets implies #1. If he can get tickets then what are we even talking about?
- raw_anon_1111 7mo ago
  We have established no such thing. The link in no way implies that he can’t afford a $40 smart phone, it just says he won’t get one. He’s been a season ticket holder for 50 years. What are the chances that he would stop if it costs $40 more?
  - 9rx 7mo ago
    > it just says he won’t get one. Right, because the cost blows his budget. If money was no object his personal assistant would already have the tickets purchased and would be busy putting the game schedule in his calendar. The only hurdle is cost, as always. > What are the chances that he would stop if it costs $40 more? Huh. There's that figure again. If is not established, why do we keep seeing this meaningless and baseless figure appear out of nowhere? Of course, it isn't meaningless or baseless. Contrary to your insistence all of a sudden, it was clearly established in a number of earlier comments as how much it would cost to be able to purchase the season tickets. And so the answer is the chances appear to be nil. Best I can tell, he chose to opt out of getting tickets over that $40. If it was all a ruse and he actually bought the tickets all along, then what are we even talking about?
    - raw_anon_1111 7mo ago
      This is the sum total of what the article says > This 81 year old man is a lifelong Dodgers fan & has been a season pass holder for over 50 years & was just told that he would no longer be allowed to get printed tickets only digital from now on & he’s barely able to navigate a computer & phone.Dodgers aren’t replying to anyone. At no point did it say he couldn’t afford season tickets for the first time in 50 years because he couldn’t afford a cell phone. But now you are saying he can afford season tickets and a “personal assistant”, but a cell phone is a bridge too far? If the price of the season tickers had been x+$40 this year do you think he would have broken his 50 year streak? He opted out of getting tickets over learning how to “navigate a computer & phone”
      - 9rx 7mo ago
        > He opted out of getting tickets over learning how to “navigate a computer & phone” Which is just a cost. Either he has to pay to learn, or pay someone else to do it for him. A cost you maintain is just $40. > If the price of the season tickers had been x+$40 this year do you think he would have broken his 50 year streak? Well, given your assertions about $40 being the added cost, that' exactly what he did. Allegedly. I suspect what you are really trying to get at is that he actually has purchased the tickets and that this is just a silly ruse for social media attention. Or you are subtly trying to say that $40 is woefully underestimated. But you don't see that out to lunch to walk back on that now. I am sure you carefully calculated the cost. Else why would you post it at all?
        raw_anon_1111 7mo ago
        I am not trying to say anything. I’m saying you pulled the idea that he couldn’t afford a phone but could afford season tickets for 50 years is ludicrous and you are the only person that has jumped to that conclusion when absolutely everyone else read just what the article says - he doesn’t know how to use a computer or a phone.
        9rx 6mo ago

The link has no such implication. It just says he doesn’t have a smart phone. Even if he survives solely off of social security, his COLA adjustment will be more than $40 a year

9rx 7mo ago

It says he cannot get tickets because, as we established, he needs to spend $40 more over the price of the ticket in order to facilitate the transaction. So, either: 1. He cannot get tickets because the cost of the ticket plus $40 exceeds his budget. 2. He can get tickets because $40 more is no big deal. The link asserting that he cannot get tickets implies #1. If he can get tickets then what are we even talking about?

raw_anon_1111 7mo ago
We have established no such thing. The link in no way implies that he can’t afford a $40 smart phone, it just says he won’t get one. He’s been a season ticket holder for 50 years. What are the chances that he would stop if it costs $40 more?
- 9rx 7mo ago
  > it just says he won’t get one. Right, because the cost blows his budget. If money was no object his personal assistant would already have the tickets purchased and would be busy putting the game schedule in his calendar. The only hurdle is cost, as always. > What are the chances that he would stop if it costs $40 more? Huh. There's that figure again. If is not established, why do we keep seeing this meaningless and baseless figure appear out of nowhere? Of course, it isn't meaningless or baseless. Contrary to your insistence all of a sudden, it was clearly established in a number of earlier comments as how much it would cost to be able to purchase the season tickets. And so the answer is the chances appear to be nil. Best I can tell, he chose to opt out of getting tickets over that $40. If it was all a ruse and he actually bought the tickets all along, then what are we even talking about?
  - raw_anon_1111 7mo ago
    This is the sum total of what the article says > This 81 year old man is a lifelong Dodgers fan & has been a season pass holder for over 50 years & was just told that he would no longer be allowed to get printed tickets only digital from now on & he’s barely able to navigate a computer & phone.Dodgers aren’t replying to anyone. At no point did it say he couldn’t afford season tickets for the first time in 50 years because he couldn’t afford a cell phone. But now you are saying he can afford season tickets and a “personal assistant”, but a cell phone is a bridge too far? If the price of the season tickers had been x+$40 this year do you think he would have broken his 50 year streak? He opted out of getting tickets over learning how to “navigate a computer & phone”
    - 9rx 7mo ago
      > He opted out of getting tickets over learning how to “navigate a computer & phone” Which is just a cost. Either he has to pay to learn, or pay someone else to do it for him. A cost you maintain is just $40. > If the price of the season tickers had been x+$40 this year do you think he would have broken his 50 year streak? Well, given your assertions about $40 being the added cost, that' exactly what he did. Allegedly. I suspect what you are really trying to get at is that he actually has purchased the tickets and that this is just a silly ruse for social media attention. Or you are subtly trying to say that $40 is woefully underestimated. But you don't see that out to lunch to walk back on that now. I am sure you carefully calculated the cost. Else why would you post it at all?
      - raw_anon_1111 7mo ago
        I am not trying to say anything. I’m saying you pulled the idea that he couldn’t afford a phone but could afford season tickets for 50 years is ludicrous and you are the only person that has jumped to that conclusion when absolutely everyone else read just what the article says - he doesn’t know how to use a computer or a phone.
        9rx 6mo ago