This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Obama a socialist?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Deepthought
but I think I stayed on the topic of socialism for almost all of my 43 posts
I count at least 3 posts in-which you don't.
But anyway;
. Come up with a great, well thought out arguement about socialism and Obama.
Uh, well, he hasn't really done anything socialistic, at all? The healthcare bill isn't anything close to socialism at all. The bailout was required or else the economy would have collapsed.
Post by
MyTie
The bailout was required or else the economy would have collapsed.
Just like cap and trade is required or the sun will burn our ice caps and giant waves will batter us into extinction. I'm a little sick of the government's version of saving my life.
Post by
Deepthought
The bailout was required or else the economy would have collapsed.
Just like cap and trade is required or the sun will burn our ice caps and giant waves will batter us into extinction. I'm a little sick of the government's version of saving my life.
Yeah, what do trained officals know anyway? They'll be asking me to buckle up and drive on the right side of the road next!
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Yeah, what do trained officials know anyway?
Trained
officials. They know a lot about about phones I guess.
Post by
Skyfire
The bailout was required or else the economy would have collapsed.
Just like cap and trade is required or the sun will burn our ice caps and giant waves will batter us into extinction. I'm a little sick of the government's version of saving my life.
Yeah, what do trained officals know anyway? They'll be asking me to buckle up and drive on the right side of the road next!
No, no, no, on the left. ON THE LEFT!
Post by
MyTie
Even though you two comparing the questioning of officials to being as dangerous as driving into oncoming traffic is dumb, it is... well... no, it's just dumb. Tell me why officials should not be questioned, and I'll go ahead and burn my constitution and pray to the dear leader.
Post by
Deepthought
Yeah, what do trained officials know anyway?
Trained
officials. They know a lot about about phones I guess.
I don't get your point.
Even though you two comparing the questioning of officials to being as dangerous as driving into oncoming traffic is dumb, it is... well... no, it's just dumb.
You're right, it's not really an apt analogy. Everyone knows why you shouldn't drive on the wrong side of the road. Not everyone is a trained climatologist.
Tell me why officials should not be questioned, and I'll go ahead and burn my constitution and pray to the dear leader.
Because, as far as I can tell, you haven't put much evidence forward in this topic as to why you disagree with the position the officals are taking apart from
SOCIALISM BAAAAAAD
.
Edit 2: Also, what does this have to do with whether or not Obama is a socialist?
Post by
Skyfire
Even though you two comparing the questioning of officials to being as dangerous as driving into oncoming traffic is dumb, it is... well... no, it's just dumb. Tell me why officials should not be questioned, and I'll go ahead and burn my constitution and pray to the dear leader.
Oh, I was just attempting to joke.
Post by
MyTie
Even though you two comparing the questioning of officials to being as dangerous as driving into oncoming traffic is dumb, it is... well... no, it's just dumb. Tell me why officials should not be questioned, and I'll go ahead and burn my constitution and pray to the dear leader.
Oh, I was just attempting to joke.
Oh, in that case... left side of road lulz... come on guys... lulz
Post by
TheMediator
No one's ruling over anyone. If we both have a claim to the doll, but only one can actually have it, it falls to the laws of probability. The guy with a gun has something like a 99% probability of actualizing his claim, the guy without a gun has a 1% chance.
I don't see the word anarchy there anywhere. Additionally, regardless of political system, it comes down to who can protect their stuff, the only difference is that in one government system or another, there is a different probability for each person due to others intervening in the conflict for different reasons, but you still have the situation that one person can claim it with different likelihoods.
You have a nasty habit of not paying attention to context. I've been discussing anarchy for some pages now. And if you actually look at
what
I was replying to, oh look! Anarchy!
If argument from authority is the weakest kind of arguement, I don't even want to know what that makes an argument from a made-up authority.
What the hell are you talking about? Your brain blew up apparently and you just facerolled that response because I don't see how its relevant to what I said.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
What the hell are you talking about? Your brain blew up apparently and you just facerolled that response because I don't see how its relevant to what I said.
Uh, you're not making any sense.
You took my reply out of context, and I'm pretty sure you know it. Own up and move on.
Let's take what you said sentence by sentence, shall we?
I don't see the word anarchy there anywhere.
That's because I was replying to a post that was solely about anarchism, making it redundant for me to specify that my reply too was concerning anarchy.
Additionally, regardless of political system, it comes down to who can protect their stuff, the only difference is that in one government system or another, there is a different probability for each person due to others intervening in the conflict for different reasons, but you still have the situation that one person can claim it with different likelihoods.
Yes, the laws of probability exist no matter what we do. Your point? In anarchy that's all there is--natural law/order/whatever you want to call it. In a social structure with government there is also man-made and man-imposed law/order/whatever you want to call it.
In short, socialism does not work in a pure anarchy. There needs to be some form of government.
Post by
TheMediator
You took my reply out of context, and I'm pretty sure you know it. Own up and move on.
Oh, I don't object to that.
What about this?
If argument from authority is the weakest kind of arguement, I don't even want to know what that makes an argument from a made-up authority.
What did this have to do with what I was talking about?
Post by
150529
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
If argument from authority is the weakest kind of arguement, I don't even want to know what that makes an argument from a made-up authority.
What did this have to do with what I was talking about?
The form of your argument was that of an argument from authority placed inside a reductio: HSR says x, y follows which is absurd/false, therefore x cannot be true.
Now, in this case you wrongly interpreted / took out of context the authority, which weakens your argument.
Post by
TheMediator
The form of your argument was that of an argument from authority placed inside a reductio: HSR says x, y follows which is absurd/false, therefore x cannot be true.
There's no logical fallacy
If A = B and B = False
Then A = False.
Post by
192184
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
The form of your argument was that of an argument from authority placed inside a reductio: HSR says x, y follows which is absurd/false, therefore x cannot be true.
There's no logical fallacy
If A = B and B = False
Then A = False.
The fallacy is that you attributed A to me.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
^^Will you two stop flexing your epeen and actually debate this issue. how in anyway is Obama a socialist and if he was one, what have these actions done to harm this country...
What do you mean by socialist, harm, and country?
See. We can't stay on topic unless you define those terms.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.