SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (25892)2/8/2008 5:56:03 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
Buddy it was and is quite clear that I answered the question and I explained why. Maybe the variables through you off. So I'll use words.

I said that it excludes money that the government owes itself and nothing else. If it excludes nothing else, than it includes sovereign foreign ownership of debt by definition.

You might argue my answer is wrong. Its possible that such a claim, should you make it, would even be correct. But its silly to say I didn't answer your question.

Re: " It seems quite obvious to me that they are."

It may "seem" one way or another to you... but no evidence has been presented to establish that contention.


The evidence I provides was the incidents that happened. Its not detailed analysis of the costs, but its not "no evidence" either.

As for "run and published" by the OMB etc. that's a listing of who made the studies not an argument for their accuracy.

Generally for a specific claim of fact, absent other evidence or information, I'd accept such sources. But they are presenting opinion, not specific fact. I disagree with their opinion. So far you have provided no argument for it being a correct opinion unless you count ad-hominem as an argument.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext