Yes, I was. Plain and simple.
No you where not. Maybe 99% of the time you where, but not always. If you quote and reply to a statement that isn't about the relative accumulation of wealth, and in that reply disagree with the statement, that reply, isn't about the relative accumulation of wealth.
If you say "that statement is false" (or silly, or "utterly ridiculous"), you are saying something about that statement, and by extension what that statement is about.
Its unreasonable and incorrect to say "your wrong" (which is included in calling someone else's statement "utterly ridiculous", if it was right then its not ridiculous), and then turn around and say "I wasn't talking about what you where talking about (in this case transfers of wealth).
Re: "You keep defending the statement by talking about the rate of accumulation of wealthy by various sectors of the population...."
You see? NOW you are even disagreeing with yourself inside the exact same post!
Not at all. I recognize, and have never disputed, that a lot of what your saying is about the rate of accumulation of wealth by different groups. I only dispute your claim that you where talking about that at every point of the conversation ("(I was always discussing the RATE of relative accumulation of wealth by various traunches of the population"), specifically in your reply to my claim about transfers. Most of what you posted as about what you claim it was about, but - "That claim is completely and utterly ridiculous when trends are examined over a longer term.", is a statement about a claim, and the claim wasn't about differences in accumulation of wealth, so the sentence you posted wasn't about difference in accumulation of wealth. |
