Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Cancer almost killed me. My life is not complicated. I have chosen to not become encumbered with teh after effects of all that entails. Feel free to revise your statement.
Which proves my point. You have resided yourself to the notion that it is, there your life is complicated.
If that is your perception then I maintain you are for more interested in makeing yourslef right then you are trying objectively understand people.
I wasn't responding to the OP, I was responding to your comment.
What a retarded statement.
Cancer almost killed my mom and made her life much more complicated. How exactly was that her choice?
No, sorry. As I said before, life is complicated whether you like it or not.
If by a "bunch of qualifiers" you mean claiming that the left does NOT believe in all of them, and that some of them are obvious misrepresentations, then sure. But you don't. But then again, you seem to be continually unable to realize that those on the other side have a valid point of view.
As if the left cared what the right thinks, wants or believes. In fact the left tries hard to shut the right down. "fly over" country anyone? An attempt to shut down talk radio? The list is endless.
So your telling me it wasn't complicated to go to chemo/surgery/doctors visits for however long and deal with the idea of impending death?
Making myself right? If I was interested in that, I'd go to a liberal board. But I'm not. I'm on a board where almost everyone disagrees with me. So, as usual, you are incorrect.
On your point about contradictions. If we're not struggling with contradictions then we're not thinking.
It was as complicated as I chose to make it. Other than deciding to die what other choices do I have? Yes you can choose to let something complicate your life in that you view it as a burden or you let it become your life. That is what I mean by complicated. Things are decidely the most uncomplicated when you have very few choices. I get chemo or I die. I have surgery or I die.
In most people's minds there is no choice there. You let yourself be treated. Why let something you have no control over complicate your life? Cancer is what it is. You can make it more than it is or you can choose to not let it become your life. If that's the hardest thing you have to uncomplicate most everything else shoudl be pretty easy.
Your condescending tone quite clearly shows that you are not interested in objective conversations.
You came to this board for the same reason I did. Because it has people of the opposite view.
Debate with people you agree with tend not too last long and you won't open up to or be presented with new ideas most likely. I have learned things by keeping an open mind and a couple people of from the opposing side have changed my mind on things. The very first time I debated you came off as open minded, but that doesn't seem to be the case anymore. You seem far more interested in being pompous.
If you were interested in finding out what is[/] right instead of that it would be reflected by an attempt to be open minded an unbiased and lack teh condescending tone you use with most people here.
COntradictions can also be reconciled which I have done. The contradiction 'seemingly' is how can you be in favor of killing this person (a death row inmate) and oppossed to killing this one (a baby in the womb). Simple. One is innocent, one is not. One squandered there life, one has yet to live it.
My tone is condescending towards you, because by now I've realized you are unable to have an objective conversation, and hence I feel no need to attempt one with you.
So you, as a conservative, went to a conservative board to find people of the opposite view? Alrighty then....
Thats when I had some degree of respect for you. Your constant generalizations about the left, claiming that you are right and I am wrong about huge issues, incorrect characterizations about the left, and general stupidity have washed that all away. I am very open minded, but I have thought about all of these ideas a lot and considered them a lot and when you present me with another tired hashed over partisan bullshit view, I'm not going to take it very seriously. All of your views have very intelligent and viable defenses of them, you just don't seem to have the ability to articulate any of them.
I am not going to learn what is right from you. Sorry, but you just don't have the intellect to explain these things well enough.
That doesn't mean your views are wrong, they may be right, but you just don't have the intellect to explain them well enough to convince me, especially because most of your justifications for ideas are terrible.
By the way...when you make claims about what the left believes, when you have an obviously biased and foolish understanding of who the left is, how incredibly varied it is, and how one should neutrally describe issues...you deserve all the condescension I will throw at you.
So bascially it is okay to be rude to people you belive to be intellectually inferior to you? Objective does not mean that when we converse I am going to agree with you. It means I am going to make you defend your position. As I recall that's how are first debate ended. You basically got tired of me not agreeing with you.
No, I said I went to a board where there were differing view points. This board has that. This is a perfect example of you wanting to be condescending and looking stupid in the process. Anybody can quite clearly see that there plenty of people of the oppossing view on both sides here.
If you believe I have made in accurate generalizations say so. I'm all ears. As far as claiming I am right and you are wrong well quite clearly you and I are jsut opposite sides of the same coin.
One way to have a debate about 'tired hashed out partisan view' instead of simply immediately labeling that consider at leat for second wether there is really anything to it.
If you still don't think there is an indeed the person is open minded it should be easy enough for you to explain it to them in a way that is not demeaning or condescending. You at the very least have as much to work on communication wise as you claim i do.
One with a superior intellect would not claim that nothing can be learned from someone else based on an incorrect perception.
You don't have the intellect to understand that condescension does not lend itelf well to open mindedness.
Again I woudl examine your preceptions first. You keep saying I make all these innaccurate generalzations, yet you have yet to name me an incorrect one let alone allow me to defend it.
I see no reason to bother being polite with you. You've earned the opposite. And of course objective does not mean that when we converse you agree with me. It does, however, mean that you are willing to engage my point of view and look at it from something other than a narrow and partisan viewpoint which you were unable to do. I don't care whether you agree with me or not, I cared that you consistently announced that I was wrong about the overlying issue, and that you made the same points again and again and were unable to see when i refuted them.
No, this board is majority Conservative. And omg you called me stupid maybe I'll follow in your footsteps and whine a bunch and call you rude and shit.
I have said so. That whole "liberals are more emotional than conservatives" bullshit you tried to claim was completely inaccurate, and really quite juvenile. As for claiming right and wrong, I don't claim that I am right. Merely that others are wrong. I don't have anwsers to most of these problems. I do however have the intelligence to see that some anwsers are incorrect, incoherent, or irrational.
I have considered it. Its tired and hashed out because I've considered it in the past and don't feel the need to continually revisit the exact same issues with the exact same bullshit arguments.
It is easy for me to do so. See my conversations with Hjmick or Gem. Of course that is when the person is open minded and intelligent. I can't force you to see what you just don't want to see. Keep in mind that none of my conversations with them result in us changing our minds towards the other pov. Rather it merely ends in mutual respect towards each others pov and that we each got to our conclusions in a rational thought-out way. You seem unable to do this, and rather continually say that your opponents are irrational, close minded, emotional, some other bullshit like that.
This is also why I find it frustrating to talk to you. Your sentences are so laden with errors I have to pick and choose which ones I want to point out.
1) I said my intellect is superior to yours, not that I am intelligent.
2) I did not make the claim that nothing can be learned based on an incorrect perception.
One with a superior intellect would not claim that nothing can be learned from someone else based on an incorrect perception.
I understand that completely. But further I also understand that you need to meet some minimum amount of competency for me to bother to attempt to understand your views. I thought you met that minimum amount at one time. I spent an awful lot of time trying to understand your views, before I realized what you derived your views from.
You have never told someone they were wrong when you believed them to be wrong? How do you know it was not you that was unable to see my refutations of your point. Our conversation about universal healthcare while long was quite simple. You believe it will improve the health of the entire population. Economics shows that that is unlikely. We got into a truly stupid conversation about the definition of quality of care. You stated you could measure the quality of care of someone that received no care at all. I explained maybe a dozen times trying to differentiate between quality of a system and quality of actual care. You refused to acknowledge the distincition.
No, you implied that by comeing to a conservative board I must there fore only be conversing with people I agree with.
And again you miss stated what I said. the liberal ideology leans more to the emotional. Are the people who call themselves part of that ideology more emotional than a conservative ideology? I can't say for certain but I woudl tend to think so.
I believe that also to be evidenced in the lefts agenda. Two 'feel good'/emotional policies would be raising the minimum wage and again unibersal healthcare. Both on the surface sound like really nice things to do, but on closer examination won't accomplish much of anything. Realistically the minimum wage woudl need to be at least $10/hour to accomplish the goal of makeing sure people can get by. The purpose of univeral health care would really be to improve access to the resource (cause what good is free heatlhcare if you still can't get to see a doc). The thought being as you have said, everyone deserves healthcare, so let's make it free. Well basic economics shows that redcuing the price of something won't improve access to it. In fact it will probably make it worse.
You don't consider it because I am the one saying it. Not because you've actaully considered it.
You have called me close minded as well. With the basic excuse that well you can can call me close minded cause it's true. How is what you are claiming I am any different from what you claim I'm calling you?
Other than spelling (I tend to type too fast) what were the errors).
I also never said you were intelligent. I said you believe your intellect is supperior to mine.
You most certainly did make the claim in #2. You claimed you can no longer learn anything from me because you are of superior intellect. Which I believe to be an incorrect perception.
I strongly suggest pretending for a while that you aren't smarter than me for a while and see what happens.
Pretend you've never meat me before. I'll let the past go if you will. What is true between you and I, or anyone I guess, is that if one has the perception that they are of superior intellect to someone,whether that is actualy true or not, they are more likely to discount all together what that peson says.
I've told people they are wrong if they are wrong about facts, or about the logical progression of an idea. I generally don't tell people their ideas on the overlying issues are wrong, merely how they got to that idea.
Economics does NOT show that is unlikely. At least no ecomonics you provided. This is exactly what I am talking about. I am willing to entertain the idea that socialized medicine will hurt/not help the population. I believe to to be wrong, but it is a completely viable idea. Your ideas about how economics shows it is unlikely are wrong on a factual level. Its not ideological at all, its just factually wrong.
And your distinction between quality of a system and quality of actual care is an ideological distinction. You find it important, I don't.
Not at all. Just that you didn't come here to converse with those you disagree with. If you were really interested in that you would visit a board that did not learn so sharply to the right.
Of course you would. Because you like to think that people have opposing viewpoints because of some weakness in them, not because their opposing viewpoint might actually come from something viable.
Reducing the price of something WILL improve access to it. That is basic, and extremely simple economics. The cheaper something is, the more people can afford it. Derr.
I don't discount altogether what you say. Notice the difference between how I treat you and RSR or RGS. But nor do I accord your statements with the same respect as I would others on this board. I am not going to bother explaining things out to you that I have no faith in your willingness nor ability to comprehend. Your statements about the left and liberals leave me with a bad taste in my mouth about you and so I have no real desire to attempt to try. If you want to "start new and fresh" that would require you to drop all of your assumptions and beliefs not just about me, but what about the left believes. Because when you say stupid shit about how the left is emotional and thats why they are wrong, I really see very little reason to take you seriously.
When price goes down does consumption and demand not increase? If consumption increases what happens to supply? Supply in this case bein medical resources, the only way then for access to improve if price goes down is for supply of the resources to increase. What reason is there to beleive that supply will respond acccordingly to teh increased demand?
No it isn't. This is extremely simple. I agree we don't have a perfect healthcare system a perfect healthcare system to me would be that everybody get what they need when they need it. That isn't the case here. quality of care is you go to the doctor for whatever. You can rate whether you were treated well by determining if a diagnosis was correct, were the staff competent, were necessary resources readily available, etc. Those things are quality of care. THose aren't subjective definitions. If you didn't go to the doctor at all for whatever reason then you received no care and this received none of the above so you can't measure the quality, in other words whether they were good or bad, if never experienced any of them.
It would require the same of you, would it not? You can't tell me you don't have preconceived notions of what the right believes.
When price goes down consumption and demand will increase, thus increasing access to healthcare. Access is how many people have access to it, and how often. This is the same old shit, you are just using a different term.
As I've said before, 0 is a number. I've responded to these arguments before, I'd really rather not pollute another thread with this.
The right believes a whole host of different things. I try very hard not to make generalizations about what the right believes, and I never say "the right believes x", I always try and say "generally, those on the right think x".
there is nothing inherently "emotional" about liberalism.
It is a political philosophy. Saying that liberals are inherently emotional is as ridiculous as saying that nihilists are inherently sullen.
(emotional, compassionate, whatever you want to call it)
"emotional" is different than "compassionate". You need to start using the language with some degree of precision, or communication will be impossible.
My communication is not the problem. Are you Larkin in disguise. You're becomeing as rude and condescending as he is.
The problem is you think you know what I mean when I say emotional and you don't. You use it as your excuse to not have a conversation.
