Questions for capitalists.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-10-2013, 02:51 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(25-10-2013 02:19 PM)frankksj Wrote:  If my arguments are weak, then how come I can accurately and reliably predict what questions you will run from and refuse to address? Isn't it scientifically accepted that the one who understands complex interactions best is the one who can reliably and accurately predict the outcome?

I listed 2 questions in BIG, BOLD type in my last post, and predicted you would run from them and refuse to address them. Big, big surprise. That's exactly what you did. You cannot come up with one example of any other place that did nearly as well as those places that practiced laissez-faire capitalism, so you keep running to irrelevant side points.

This argument about the NY photo is absurd. Do a google search on it. It is all over the internet with the tag NY 1920's: https://www.google.com/search?sa=X&espv=...500%3B1050

And do a google search for "New York 1920's" and it's one of the first images. Plus, according to Wikipedia, the building was officially opened on May 20, 1930, just 4.5 months after the end of the 1920's. Therefore, it's quite likely that all the google images are RIGHT and that you are WRONG, because in all likelihood on December 31, 1929, the exterior was already complete and they were doing interior work.

Therefore, NOT ONLY have you run from my questions, NOT ONLY have you tried to derail the subject to irrelevant side points, BUT ON TOP OF IT, I still believe you're factually wrong and the photo is from the 1920's.

I am not running from your questions - I haven't been involved in this debate except to point out your factual errors.

Carry on your debate, I'm not part of it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 02:59 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
@Chas,

That's just it. You do 'drive by attacks', but then refuse to back them up.

You said I was factually wrong for labeling that NY photo '1920s' and insisted it was taken in the 30's. When I point out that your 'drive by attack' was wrong, and that it was taken in the 20's, you're off on a different subject.

I will ask you one time a basic question, and keep asking it of you every time to do a drive by attack:

Do you agree that the place that enjoyed the greatest growth and transformation in the 50 years after WWII was Hong Kong? If not, what place did better?

The whole point of your drive by attacks is to claim my statement about Hong Kong is wrong, yet you refuse to back up those attacks and keep changing the subject.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 03:17 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(25-10-2013 02:59 PM)frankksj Wrote:  @Chas,

That's just it. You do 'drive by attacks', but then refuse to back them up.

You said I was factually wrong for labeling that NY photo '1920s' and insisted it was taken in the 30's. When I point out that your 'drive by attack' was wrong, and that it was taken in the 20's, you're off on a different subject.

I will ask you one time a basic question, and keep asking it of you every time to do a drive by attack:

Do you agree that the place that enjoyed the greatest growth and transformation in the 50 years after WWII was Hong Kong? If not, what place did better?

The whole point of your drive by attacks is to claim my statement about Hong Kong is wrong, yet you refuse to back up those attacks and keep changing the subject.

I am pointing out your errors of fact since you seem to play so fast and loose with it.
You are entitled to your arguments and opinions, but not to your own facts.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 04:26 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(25-10-2013 03:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  I am pointing out your errors of fact since you seem to play so fast and loose with it. You are entitled to your arguments and opinions, but not to your own facts.

Really? Well out of the dozens of pages and thousands of facts I've listed this past month, I only found 3 facts that you disputed me on, and 2 of them you backed down on, leaving only 1 that I retracted. Does this REALLY count as being 'fast and loose' with facts?

1. The photo was New York in the 1920's

You insisted I was playing loose with the facts and it had to be taken in the 1930's or later. I provided proof, and you have backed down. So you were playing fast and loose with the facts.

2. In the 'communism' post you disputed my claim that only N Korea, Cuba and the US place barriers to prevent their citizens from emigrating if they find the laws and/or taxes too burdensome.

After many pages and all my links to various government sites, you seem to have backed down on this.

3. That Hong Kong was a 'little fishing village' after WWII.

This is subjective. The population was 500k. But there were, as you put it, buildings and infrastructure beyond fishing boats. Since this was immaterial to my point, I retracted the claim.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 04:30 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(25-10-2013 04:26 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(25-10-2013 03:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  I am pointing out your errors of fact since you seem to play so fast and loose with it. You are entitled to your arguments and opinions, but not to your own facts.

Really? Well out of the dozens of pages and thousands of facts I've listed this past month, I only found 3 facts that you disputed me on, and 2 of them you backed down on, leaving only 1 that I retracted. Does this REALLY count as being 'fast and loose' with facts?

1. The photo was New York in the 1920's

You insisted I was playing loose with the facts and it had to be taken in the 1930's or later. I provided proof, and you have backed down. So you were playing fast and loose with the facts.

I backed down? No, I did not. What proof?

Quote:2. In the 'communism' post you disputed my claim that only N Korea, Cuba and the US place barriers to prevent their citizens from emigrating if they find the laws and/or taxes too burdensome.

After many pages and all my links to various government sites, you seem to have backed down on this.

I backed down? No, I did not.

Quote:3. That Hong Kong was a 'little fishing village' after WWII.

This is subjective. The population was 500k. But there were, as you put it, buildings and infrastructure beyond fishing boats. Since this was immaterial to my point, I retracted the claim.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 05:07 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
Of course you backed down and ate crow.

At 2:46pm you wrote: “That picture of NYC can't be the 1920's as the Chrysler building was not completed until 1930”

At 3:19pm I responded with the link where I got it, as well as the google search that yielded it, and the precise date when the Chrysler building was completed.

Your response at 3:51pm was..... nothing at all about the issue we were debating over the date of the photo

So at 3:59pm I brought it up AGAIN, writing “You said I was factually wrong for labeling that NY photo '1920s' and insisted it was taken in the 30's. When I point out that your 'drive by attack' was wrong, and that it was taken in the 20's, you're off on a different subject.”

At 4:17pm you responded, and again refused to touch the topic of the photo

At 5:26pm I brought it up AGAIN for a 3rd time, and yet again you refuse to take a position and state whether you are still arguing the photo could not have been taken in the 1920's, or if you are conceding I was right. But you insist you didn't 'back down'. Yes, you did. I gave you 3 chances to respond to my evidence, you ran from them all 3 times. Then you say 'What proof?', as though you can't remember the proof I sent you just 2 hours ago which included links to the source of the photos and statistics about the Chrysler building.

So, answer the fucking question:

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

It's such a stupid, trivial detail that's really irrelevant for the discussion at hand. If you cannot accept you were wrong about something so insignificant that has no impact on the big issue and is factoid that isn't of interest to either of us and isn't a reflection on either of us, is it not hard to see why it's impossible for you to ever admit you're wrong about the big issue we're debating, which cuts right to the core of your belief system?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 05:21 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(25-10-2013 05:07 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Of course you backed down and ate crow.

At 2:46pm you wrote: “That picture of NYC can't be the 1920's as the Chrysler building was not completed until 1930”

At 3:19pm I responded with the link where I got it, as well as the google search that yielded it, and the precise date when the Chrysler building was completed.

Your response at 3:51pm was..... nothing at all about the issue we were debating over the date of the photo

So at 3:59pm I brought it up AGAIN, writing “You said I was factually wrong for labeling that NY photo '1920s' and insisted it was taken in the 30's. When I point out that your 'drive by attack' was wrong, and that it was taken in the 20's, you're off on a different subject.”

At 4:17pm you responded, and again refused to touch the topic of the photo

At 5:26pm I brought it up AGAIN for a 3rd time, and yet again you refuse to take a position and state whether you are still arguing the photo could not have been taken in the 1920's, or if you are conceding I was right. But you insist you didn't 'back down'. Yes, you did. I gave you 3 chances to respond to my evidence, you ran from them all 3 times. Then you say 'What proof?', as though you can't remember the proof I sent you just 2 hours ago which included links to the source of the photos and statistics about the Chrysler building.

So, answer the fucking question:

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

It's such a stupid, trivial detail that's really irrelevant for the discussion at hand. If you cannot accept you were wrong about something so insignificant that has no impact on the big issue and is factoid that isn't of interest to either of us and isn't a reflection on either of us, is it not hard to see why it's impossible for you to ever admit you're wrong about the big issue we're debating, which cuts right to the core of your belief system?

Chas doesn't answer yes or no questions.

I am not saying or implying that you support the failures and abuses of capitalism, I am asking you how or why have faith in such a system with it's track record past and present.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 05:23 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 05:26 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(25-10-2013 05:07 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Of course you backed down and ate crow.

At 2:46pm you wrote: “That picture of NYC can't be the 1920's as the Chrysler building was not completed until 1930”

At 3:19pm I responded with the link where I got it, as well as the google search that yielded it, and the precise date when the Chrysler building was completed.

Your response at 3:51pm was..... nothing at all about the issue we were debating over the date of the photo

So at 3:59pm I brought it up AGAIN, writing “You said I was factually wrong for labeling that NY photo '1920s' and insisted it was taken in the 30's. When I point out that your 'drive by attack' was wrong, and that it was taken in the 20's, you're off on a different subject.”

At 4:17pm you responded, and again refused to touch the topic of the photo

At 5:26pm I brought it up AGAIN for a 3rd time, and yet again you refuse to take a position and state whether you are still arguing the photo could not have been taken in the 1920's, or if you are conceding I was right. But you insist you didn't 'back down'. Yes, you did. I gave you 3 chances to respond to my evidence, you ran from them all 3 times. Then you say 'What proof?', as though you can't remember the proof I sent you just 2 hours ago which included links to the source of the photos and statistics about the Chrysler building.

So, answer the fucking question:

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

Do you still insist the photo couldn't have been taken in the 1920's, or do you concede my facts were right in the first place?

It's such a stupid, trivial detail that's really irrelevant for the discussion at hand. If you cannot accept you were wrong about something so insignificant that has no impact on the big issue and is factoid that isn't of interest to either of us and isn't a reflection on either of us, is it not hard to see why it's impossible for you to ever admit you're wrong about the big issue we're debating, which cuts right to the core of your belief system?

The photo is from 1932.

And again, I am not part of the debate in this thread.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 05:34 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
Fine, I guess the photo was from 1932. See, I'll admit it when I'm wrong.

However, back to the REAL issue, I will ask you again for your opinion. Will you please answer:

Do you agree that the place that enjoyed the greatest growth and transformation in the 50 years after WWII was Hong Kong? If not, what place did better?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: