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 : The United States election--and the next First Lady? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (16)	3/29/2016 6:01:33 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 107

Response to grusum... Message 30520615 grusum quoting from Solon: "Trump is committed to education." Solon reply: "I said none of that or what is to follow." "how is anyone supposed to know that when you don't attribute anything you posted as coming from anyone else? there was no indication you were copying and pasting." The structure and the tense was ample evidence that it was pasted from another site. But you are right that I did not attribute it. Ever happen to you? I find these days that almost every news item carries one or several links that take the reader back to the article but this was not the case here and I apologise. As to the rest of your criticisms--you seem to be rather picky. If that is how you wish to play it, then I would be happy to discuss anything with you in my own words--with both of us being picky as all Hell! "if you don't agree entirely with the content of a post, you shouldn't post it. it sounds like you're running away from your own post." I think you are being too demanding. And I think your statement is completely wrong. The idea that busy people ought to parse and disclaim every single word in an article paste is ridiculous. If I post a long article from The Economist or The Atlantic, you need to understand there is a default disclaimer that not every sentence or idea is being parsed by me. I do not have time for such nonsense. "But when I post strictly my own words I will defend every single word--even WHEN I CHANGE MY OPINION." <<"first, why would you ever defend something you've said after you've changed your mind on it? why not just admit you were wrong instead?">> You are misunderstanding what I meant. I meant that I own the words I set down even when I DO need to admit to a change of mind. I do not deny my words. "i can't believe that you actually don't want to know the details of any of his plans. and you don't have to worry about his transparency as president yet because he's still only a candidate." I don't mind knowing the details of some of his plans. That is different from not wanting to know even a single solitary detail. I don't need to know ALL the details. I have heard him say a great number of things. What is it you want to know? You already know he has no intention of tipping his hand in matters of exact war strategies, etc. Good deal-making starts with getting as much information as possible from the other side, and giving away as little of your own needs, weaknesses, positions, etc. as possible. So here is a detailed analysis of Trump's tax plan since you want details. Giving details on a tax plan is quite different from tipping your hand in war strategy. Uh-huh?? This analysis is from the "Tax Foundation". Please go through it line by line and calculation by calculation to see if you find any errors. And please let me know if there is any part of the analysis you disagree with and please give me complete and full explanation as to your reasoning. taxfoundation.org You can't give all your ammunition to the opposition (I didn't say the enemy!)--if you hope to have any leverage. "there's no ammunition for the other side, if the argument is backed by sound reasoning." Of course there is. Deal-making is more than an "argument". Giving away your positions and your bottom lines, etc. is clearly affording the other side ammunition. Notice that Cruz is not suing NE like a normal person would. for various reasons, innocent people don't always sue. plus, he hasn't said he wouldn't. Again, I repeat. Notice that Cruz is not suing like a normal person would. If you have noticed that, then no response is necessary. Nobody suggested he wouldn't. I only observed that he isn't. If you believe that he is then please show me where you get that information from.