Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (44488)	7/29/2010 3:20:22 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

You yourself pointed out (several times) that I was talking about the "rate of wealth accumulation" among different groups... You disagree with yourself INSIDE YOUR VERY OWN POST and then criticize me for only consistently talking about the same topic "99% of the time"? I pointed out that you where mostly posting about that. I don't disagree with myself. I say in the statement in question, the statement that kicked off this whole thread of conversation, you where not talking about the rate of wealth accumulation. That true beyond any reasonable dispute. I replied to that statement. I say the statement is wrong. You say that its right because of xxxx about differential wealth accumulation. That's unreasonable, even silly. If you say someone is wrong (or ridiculous), and they reply to that point and so on. Than the conversation is on that point. You can bring all sorts of words about other topics, you can make most of your post about some other topic, but as long as its framed as a defense of your false statement, the conversation is still about that subject, and all the rest of the statements, accurate or not, well reasoned or not, are non-sequiturs. For example, if I said "My car is silver" (and it is), and you said "that's ridiculous, look at all this data about income inequality, and then you proceeded to post extensively about income inequality, it doesn't change the fact that the issue under the discussion was the color of my car. The same applies with my statement - "The wealth continues to be transferred away from the wealthy, not to the wealthy." Any reply of "that statement is xxxx" is about my statement, and by extension the subject of my statement, no matter how much irrelevant other things you add.