[ExI] Repudiating the national debt
danust2012 at gmail.com
Thu May 12 02:14:04 UTC 2016
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 6:58 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 Dan TheBookMan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> every presidential election cycle in the US is seen as the most
>> choice in the entire history of the species if no the universe.
> We've had some
> terrible presidents
> and we've had some mediocre presidents
> but this is the first time in my lifetime there is a 24.1% chance a
> be president in 8 months.
So panic and go hysterical. What will that achieve?
And consider this: What impact will you have on that outcome? I think it's
pretty close to nil -- even if you foam at the mouth from now until
November. My guess is this too shall pass. (I'm guessing that Trump will
lose. Who knows? I've never had good predictive success with elections --
save for broad generalizations like "the government will win" and "things
will get worse, but they won't go completely awry.")
Let me add a little more here. Why not simply advocate getting rid of the
presidency, so that, if you succeed, there won't be a madman attaining that
level of power?
>> I eagerly await you to misinterpret the above -- after trimming stuff
out to make
>> it seem as if you've reasonably responded to me.
> Sorry if I don't comment on ever line of your post like a
> Rabbinical scholar examining the Talmud.
The issue is not your not going over every line I've written, though my
posts are simply not that long or complex that one would need to do that.
My issue is that you reinterpret statements I make into something that is
wildly different and delete parts of what I do state. This seems to me far
more like you're not interested in a reasonable discussion, but merely in
making your interlocutors look bad or to persuade yourself that you're
right regardless of the evidence.
Sample my Kindle books via:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat