The Republicans really do have alternatives. Really.

quixotecoyote said:
Oh look, an actual ad hom. We don't get many specimens of this quality nowadays. Most of the ones we've gotten lately get handwaved away by "I wasn't dismissing your argument because you're an idiot, I was just insulting you."

This, my erstwhile examiners of the formations fallacious, is a textbook example in as pristine condition as one could hope for.

Note that the argument is indeed addressed, through the reference to taxes, but it is dismissed through the assumption that Tsukasa is a student and therefor should not be listened to.

Students are often (erroneously) perceived as not working/not paying taxes and this (erroneous) assumption is used to dismiss Tsukasa's argument.

Note how it does not point out any flaw in the argument. Pay close attention to the lack of objections to any assumption, proposition or argument. Observe how the only objection raised is the identity or character of the person making the argument.

An argument against the man. Ad Hominem
Click to expand...
Nope just a statement of fact. He IS a student and does not have to pay the taxes for all of the spending he is advocating. He does not have standing to demand those of us that do pay taxes to pay for his wish list of tax payer funded programs.
 
mhaze said:
No, you can't win this argument with studies. Check Nordhaus, Lombert. Check entry level arguments againgt Stern. Then let me know how you feel about the numerical basis of the "cost of inaction is higher".
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm willing to accept inaccuracy in that report.

But now I remember the IPCC report as well. And there is still that University of Maryland one, which broke it down by region in the US.

RE my prior comment, "elitist" I think is the right word, because blue collar Democrats will vote with their pocket book that their elite urban counterparts would take money from.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that somehow disproves free market economic disincentives...
 
Texas said:
Nope just a statement of fact. He IS a student and does not have to pay the taxes for all of the spending he is advocating. He does not have standing to demand those of us that do pay taxes to pay for his wish list of tax payer funded programs.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you understand what an ad hominem fallacy is.

It is exactly what you describe: claiming someone should not be listened to because they do not have the standing/morals/character/etc. to make the argument, rather than challenging them on the merits of the argument itself.

(and as a student who has worked 50 hour weeks at a regular job between getting their BA and going back to school for a MA, and still works a part time job on the side, you're talking out your ass about students paying taxes)
 
Last edited:
Texas said:
Nope just a statement of fact. He IS a student and does not have to pay the taxes for all of the spending he is advocating. He does not have standing to demand those of us that do pay taxes to pay for his wish list of tax payer funded programs.
Click to expand...

Well, it is odd that you used the statement of fact to avoid the arguments entirely...

But you are wrong to say I don't pay taxes, I just don't pay income taxes. And that makes your argument even sillier, as the item we are talking about doesn't even involve income taxes.
 
quixotecoyote said:
I'm not sure you understand what an ad hominem fallacy is.

It is exactly what you describe: claiming someone should not be listened to because they do not have the standing/morals/character/etc. to make the argument, rather than challenging them on the merits of the argument itself.
Click to expand...

I am not talking debate tactics and logical fallacies. I am talking real life actions that the taxpayers of this country are funding. Actual taxpayers are become a fairly exclusive club in this country and there are fewer of us every year but the bill just keeps getting exponentially larger. I have no time to coddle class room Marxists when it comes to my money.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Well, it is odd that you used the statement of fact to avoid the arguments entirely...

But you are wrong to say I don't pay taxes, I just don't pay income taxes. And that makes your argument even sillier, as the item we are talking about doesn't even involve income taxes.
Click to expand...
Give me a break.
 
Texas said:
I am not talking debate tactics and logical fallacies. I am talking real life actions that the taxpayers of this country are funding. Actual taxpayers are become a fairly exclusive club in this country and there are fewer of us every year but the bill just keeps getting exponentially larger. I have no time to coddle class room Marxists when it comes to my money.
Click to expand...

Wow, doubling- or is it tripling- down are we?

Give me a break.
Click to expand...

No.
 
Texas said:
I am not talking debate tactics and logical fallacies. I am talking real life actions that the taxpayers of this country are funding. Actual taxpayers are become a fairly exclusive club in this country and there are fewer of us every year but the bill just keeps getting exponentially larger. I have no time to coddle class room Marxists when it comes to my money.
Click to expand...

You bad you can't come up with an argument to refute them instead of just saying "non-taxpayer" as if it was an actual argument. You'd figure if they were wrong, you could give a reason.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Well, it is odd that you used the statement of fact to avoid the arguments entirely...

But you are wrong to say I don't pay taxes, I just don't pay income taxes. And that makes your argument even sillier, as the item we are talking about doesn't even involve income taxes.
Click to expand...
I'll make a deal with you. Let's ignore each other. I have neither the time or desire to debate a kid that is still in school who thinks he actually knows anything about the real world.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Yes, I'm willing to accept inaccuracy in that report.

But now I remember the IPCC report as well. And there is still that University of Maryland one, which broke it down by region in the US.
Click to expand...
There were also glaring errors in the brief IPCC section.

So I don't think there ever was any clear certainty or majority opinion, whatever you want to call it, on the economics of mitigation.
 
Texas said:
I'll make a deal with you. Let's ignore each other. I have neither the time or desire to debate a kid that is still in school who thinks he actually knows anything about the real world.
Click to expand...

And regrettably the specimen shows deterioration over time. No longer an ad hom as the argument is not even tangentially mentioned, it mutates along with the more common brethren into pointless insult.
 
quixotecoyote said:
You bad you can't come up with an argument to refute them instead of just saying "non-taxpayer" as if it was an actual argument. You'd figure if they were wrong, you could give a reason.
Click to expand...

When I pay the bills that is all the argument I need to win the argument with someone that wants me to pay theirs too. You may not like it but hey life's rough.
 
Texas said:
When I pay the bills that is all the argument I need to win the argument with someone that wants me to pay theirs too. You may not like it but hey life's rough.
Click to expand...

Excellent! I was disappointed with the loss of the last one, but here we have a classic strawman!

Tsukasa never claimed he wanted you to pay his bills, so restating the actual argument as a different and easy to dismiss one creates a wonderfully easy, if dishonest target.

Now, if you wanted to argue that increasing taxes to pay for energy funding was the same as you paying his bills, that would be an honest, if silly argument. But ... that's not what you did.
 
quixotecoyote said:
Excellent! I was disappointed with the loss of the last one, but here we have a classic strawman!

Tsukasa never claimed he wanted you to pay his bills, so restating the actual argument as a different and easy to dismiss one creates a wonderfully easy, if dishonest target.

Now, if you wanted to argue that increasing taxes to pay for energy funding was the same as you paying his bills, that would be an honest, if silly argument. But ... that's not what you did.
Click to expand...
You are oddly obsessed with "logical fallacies". I guess you took a class once and you got a gold star so here is a lollipop.
 
Texas said:
You are oddly obsessed with "logical fallacies". I guess you took a class once and you got a gold star so here is a lollipop.
Click to expand...

And this is a non-sequitur, as in, "this has sod-all to do with anything."

And yes, I do have a tendency to be obsessed with things making sense and being honest, thank you for noticing.
 
quixotecoyote said:
And this is a non-sequitur, as in, "this has sod-all to do with anything."

And yes, I do have a tendency to be obsessed with things making sense and being honest, thank you for noticing.
Click to expand...
No you have a tendency to mental masturbation thinking it is profound. Now, in your vernacular, sod off.
 
Texas said:
No you have a tendency to mental masturbation thinking it is profound. Now, in your vernacular, sod off.
Click to expand...

Ah well, if you must picture someone masturbating, I suppose it's better me than the Marquis, just for the general mental health of the board.

But if you can't come up with a single argument against an energy tax or a single defense of your own dishonest, illogical argumentation, I suppose you can have the last word.

Of course, if you'd care to try, I am powerless to stop you.
 
Texas said:
Nope just a statement of fact. He IS a student and does not have to pay the taxes for all of the spending he is advocating. He does not have standing to demand those of us that do pay taxes to pay for his wish list of tax payer funded programs.
Click to expand...

I'm an undergraduate student, and I paid more than my parents in taxes last year. No EITC for me, no mortgage deductions, no dependents. My taxes were for income that I made because of my skills and education. More importantly than your idiocy, exactly what percentage of income or dollar amount must one pay in taxes in order to have an opinion about the budget?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom