Rshermr
VIP Member
So, your numbers are solid. Your argument is completely persuasive. And your adversary is trying to prove something quite obvious. For agenda reasons. Because it is important for her to show that whatever is being said about what has happened under a democratic president WORKING to whatever degree is UNTRUE. Conservative dogma.
Problem is not whether or not what has happened is working or not, but what should happen to make things better. And Tania could care less. She is simply interested in proving with deceptive arguments that doing nothing is what will work. That any economist, any agency, and any research that suggests that gov intervention in the economy has or will help is wrong.
And that is the damage that her type of argument is meant to do. It is intended to cut off discussion of possible helpful government actions, and to agree with the non action plans of the far right, including libertarian sources. Amazon is strangely perfectly aligned with libertarians such as the Koch brothers, of libertarian economists such as thomas sowell, and with the far right bat shit conservative web sites that are supported by their ilk.
So, the best you can hope from those such as tania is that they do no damage. Their intent is whatever the hell it is, but honesty is not at all of concern. So the con tools, tania included, simply want to derail any discussion of what to do. Why they are willing to go to the extent that some do to disprove fact is not quantifiable. It is a strong agenda well documented, however, by study after study. A group that is aligned with conservative dogma that is described in study after study. The point is that they are a minority, and need to be ignored. And instead, we in the reasoning world need to consider what alternatives to support. And to explain. All else is simply a major waste of time.
What you have accomplished in this thread is important. You have proven that amazon's arguments are invalid. As they almost always are, those arguments were simply arguments with the intent of pushing agenda. That argument having been disposed of, perhaps we can discuss what needs to be done. Because truth is, regardless of what politics say, we have a problem. It is an EMPLOYMENT problem, and one that will be persistent for the future of our country, regardless of whom owns our politics. The nonsense of agenda needs to be pushed aside, or else we are simply wasting time. Agenda wants no solution, she and others pushing these ideas simply want their agenda. Because, we all understand that the agenda is written by those who have something to gain.
The article that started this discussion, if you look at it in it's whole, is not a bad starting point. As long as you do not try to distort it's statement. As long as it is not taken in part to support agenda. Then you can indeed get something of the value from this thread. Otherwise, it is just a food fight.
Problem is not whether or not what has happened is working or not, but what should happen to make things better. And Tania could care less. She is simply interested in proving with deceptive arguments that doing nothing is what will work. That any economist, any agency, and any research that suggests that gov intervention in the economy has or will help is wrong.
And that is the damage that her type of argument is meant to do. It is intended to cut off discussion of possible helpful government actions, and to agree with the non action plans of the far right, including libertarian sources. Amazon is strangely perfectly aligned with libertarians such as the Koch brothers, of libertarian economists such as thomas sowell, and with the far right bat shit conservative web sites that are supported by their ilk.
So, the best you can hope from those such as tania is that they do no damage. Their intent is whatever the hell it is, but honesty is not at all of concern. So the con tools, tania included, simply want to derail any discussion of what to do. Why they are willing to go to the extent that some do to disprove fact is not quantifiable. It is a strong agenda well documented, however, by study after study. A group that is aligned with conservative dogma that is described in study after study. The point is that they are a minority, and need to be ignored. And instead, we in the reasoning world need to consider what alternatives to support. And to explain. All else is simply a major waste of time.
What you have accomplished in this thread is important. You have proven that amazon's arguments are invalid. As they almost always are, those arguments were simply arguments with the intent of pushing agenda. That argument having been disposed of, perhaps we can discuss what needs to be done. Because truth is, regardless of what politics say, we have a problem. It is an EMPLOYMENT problem, and one that will be persistent for the future of our country, regardless of whom owns our politics. The nonsense of agenda needs to be pushed aside, or else we are simply wasting time. Agenda wants no solution, she and others pushing these ideas simply want their agenda. Because, we all understand that the agenda is written by those who have something to gain.
The article that started this discussion, if you look at it in it's whole, is not a bad starting point. As long as you do not try to distort it's statement. As long as it is not taken in part to support agenda. Then you can indeed get something of the value from this thread. Otherwise, it is just a food fight.
Last edited: