National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-12-2012, 02:53 AM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
(15-12-2012 02:05 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(10-12-2012 03:29 PM)Humakt Wrote:  I could have taken that as read, you said it and your never wrong are you.
Did I say that? I simply said I am not wrong in this assertion. I did not say I am infallible.
Name an assertion you've made in which you've been wrong? I didn't say you had said you were infallible, I was alluding that your an egotistical blow hard.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Humakt's post
15-12-2012, 04:42 AM (This post was last modified: 15-12-2012 05:02 AM by bemore.)
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
(10-12-2012 07:07 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(09-12-2012 09:57 AM)bemore Wrote:  Well that would require the people of my country, every single person who votes... to be fully informed and educated in the whole monetary system.

Do you think that is the case?


Well, clearly you believe people are so informed that they choose not to vote because of the current course of events. That is certainly not the case, for if they were in any way informed, they'd be voting to fix the mess that they created.

Lets go back in the thread dude. You blamed the state of my countries economy on the basis that not enough people vote.

So I asked you if you think all of the people who are can vote in my country are fully informed on how the economy works and hence the ramifications of what their vote will bring.

Its a simple yes, no or I dont know answer. If your not willing to answer that question (which is up to you) Id at least like to know what led you to this belief please. If I make an assertion I am asked for evidence to back it up. So thats what im asking of you. If its just an opinion of yours then thats cool, just dont try to state it as fact to try and win your case.

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2012, 05:06 AM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
(15-12-2012 04:42 AM)bemore Wrote:  
(10-12-2012 07:07 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Well, clearly you believe people are so informed that they choose not to vote because of the current course of events. That is certainly not the case, for if they were in any way informed, they'd be voting to fix the mess that they created.

Lets go back in the thread dude. You blamed the state of my countries economy on the basis that not enough people vote.

So I asked you if you think all of the people who are can vote in my country are fully informed on how the economy works and hence the ramifications of what their vote will bring.

Its a simple yes, no or I dont know answer. If your not willing to answer that question (which is up to you) Id at least like to know what led you to this belief please. If I make an assertion I am asked for evidence to back it up. So thats what im asking of you. If its just an opinion of yours then thats cool, just dont try to state it as fact to try and win your case.
I just gave my answer.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2012, 05:07 AM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
(15-12-2012 02:53 AM)Humakt Wrote:  
(15-12-2012 02:05 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Did I say that? I simply said I am not wrong in this assertion. I did not say I am infallible.
Name an assertion you've made in which you've been wrong? I didn't say you had said you were infallible, I was alluding that your an egotistical blow hard.
You implied I never believe I am wrong. And you think I am an egotistical blowhard because I know I am right in my assertion?

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2012, 05:24 AM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
You gave an answer but you never answered my question Logica.

You have stated that the state of the economy in my country is because people dont vote. Lets say that everybody did vote Logica.... again I ask the question do you think everybody who votes is in a fully informed position on the whole economic model and in this the ramifications of there choice?

Yes or no?

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-12-2012, 05:50 AM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
(10-12-2012 07:07 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(09-12-2012 09:57 AM)bemore Wrote:  Well that would require the people of my country, every single person who votes... to be fully informed and educated in the whole monetary system.

Do you think that is the case?


That is certainly not the case, for if they were in any way informed, they'd be voting to fix the mess that they created.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2012, 04:45 PM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
When their is an absence of voluntarism the standard of quality goes down, way down. So it would be more or less what we have now, just even worse and more harmful to the economy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2012, 09:06 PM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
(15-12-2012 05:07 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(15-12-2012 02:53 AM)Humakt Wrote:  Name an assertion you've made in which you've been wrong? I didn't say you had said you were infallible, I was alluding that your an egotistical blow hard.
You implied I never believe I am wrong. And you think I am an egotistical blowhard because I know I am right in my assertion?
No I did not imply, I stated I'd never seen you admit error, further I've never seen you even upon invitation admit not knowing or lack of qualification. What I implied or wished to imply is that talking or debating with you is as productive as pissing into the wind. And yes, your mostly correct I think your an egotistical blowhard not because your right in an individual assertion you make, but that you believe yourself right in every pearl of wisdom you grace the world with. Anywhoo, whatever I'm sure your as much for my opinion as I could care for yours.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2012, 10:25 AM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
(16-12-2012 09:06 PM)Humakt Wrote:  
(15-12-2012 05:07 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  You implied I never believe I am wrong. And you think I am an egotistical blowhard because I know I am right in my assertion?
No I did not imply, I stated I'd never seen you admit error, further I've never seen you even upon invitation admit not knowing or lack of qualification. What I implied or wished to imply is that talking or debating with you is as productive as pissing into the wind. And yes, your mostly correct I think your an egotistical blowhard not because your right in an individual assertion you make, but that you believe yourself right in every pearl of wisdom you grace the world with. Anywhoo, whatever I'm sure your as much for my opinion as I could care for yours.
Of course I believe I am right. That is the point of a debate. It is your job to provide me evidence to the contrary. Oh, and the reason you find that I rarely admit I am wrong on this forum is because not many people provide compelling evidence contradicting my positions. If you want multiple examples of me admitting I am wrong, and or losing an argument, ask Atothetheist and Vosur.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2012, 01:45 PM
RE: National implications if NOT voting was made illegal?
(17-12-2012 10:25 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(16-12-2012 09:06 PM)Humakt Wrote:  No I did not imply, I stated I'd never seen you admit error, further I've never seen you even upon invitation admit not knowing or lack of qualification. What I implied or wished to imply is that talking or debating with you is as productive as pissing into the wind. And yes, your mostly correct I think your an egotistical blowhard not because your right in an individual assertion you make, but that you believe yourself right in every pearl of wisdom you grace the world with. Anywhoo, whatever I'm sure your as much for my opinion as I could care for yours.
Of course I believe I am right. That is the point of a debate. It is your job to provide me evidence to the contrary. Oh, and the reason you find that I rarely admit I am wrong on this forum is because not many people provide compelling evidence contradicting my positions. If you want multiple examples of me admitting I am wrong, and or losing an argument, ask Atothetheist and Vosur.
Kinda, there is nothing wrong with having your own take on a debate and forwarding it. I see the point of a debate somewhat differently, the point is not so much to win, it is to advance understanding of the topic for both parties. If I "win" a debate and learn nothing in the process that is less satisfactory to me than "losing" and learning about the subject. Perhaps, the issue of compelling evidence is were we have problems, mostly the debates we have been involved in are not about evidence as the topics have been pretty subjective and really come down to personal preference. Of course, I don't like the position you take in these matters as much as you don't like my stance, but meh. As for asking others, I might think your rude and overly convinced of your own certitude, but I don't think your dishonest, so I'll take you at your word on that.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: