... doing what the rich do doesn't seem that challenging when the government backs them up whenever they fail or are simply incapable of adjusting or expanding fast enough to be globally competitive.
Yeah, huh? All you have to do is get rich and the government will bail you out no matter what you do. And on the same planet where that's true, you can flap your arms really fast and fly around the room, too. It's probably something in the water there.
Strawman.
I thought my strawman could play with your bullhit. Perfect barnyard combination. If you don't have to worry about failing when your rich because the government backs you up, then you can fly around the room like a little hummingbird just by flapping your arms really fast. If (a) then (b).
Since (a) is bullspit, then (b) has to be something that's bullspit, too.
See how that works?
Oh boy, here we go... the next several pages will be arguments about strawmen and fallacies and levels of individual comprehension. :roll:
A strawman is a strawman specifically because it creates a misleading interpretation of the opponent's argument. Admitting that you created a misleading interpretation of my argument while also claiming you hit my argument on the nose doesn't make sense.
Do you have a real objection or not?
It wasn't a misleading interpretation of your argument. You didn't have an argument. You had bullspit drivel that anyone with enough brain energy to find the "on" switch of a computer would recognize to be false at face value. Bailouts have happened but if someone is stupid enough to think that the government will bail them out if they fail then they're too stupid to be rich in the first place. I didn't like bailouts, either, but to pretend they're common place and done just to prop up the rich is ridiculous. You know better.
I don't need a strawman to ridicule your statements. Ridicule is the natural result of making ridiculous statements.
Government "back up" isn't limited to bailouts, although relevant industries receive more than indicated by the attention grabbing 2008 recession.
I see an endless pissing match coming over this and I'll just bow out because we both know it's bullspit to assert that the government bails out the rich and I'm sure as hell not interested in refuting an endless fount of specious argumentation over it.
Makes sense. People usually aren't interested in keeping up arguments they have to lose.
If I thought anyone on this board was stupid enough to actually believe the government always bails out the rich, I might stick around and argue, but it's really all for naught because even you know it's bullspit, so CYA.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?