A good example of why southern conservatives are not trusted.

Southern Man said:
I didn't make the accusation, and therefore need to prove nothing.

Lets trade neg rep more often, you foolish sissy boy. :)
Click to expand...

You made an assertion and provided no corroborating evidence to back up your assertion...

You dodged answering and called me some petty name...EXACTLY how everyone expects a "'Southern Man" to act!
 
ZappasGuitar said:
You made an assertion and provided no corroborating evidence to back up your assertion...

You dodged answering and called me some petty name...EXACTLY how everyone expects a "'Southern Man" to act!
Click to expand...

And this is how I expected you, a foolish sissy boy, to act, by committing a logical fallacy:

Shifting the Burden of Proof

If we assert a statement as truth, it is up to us to establish its validity. We can't make the opponent of our argument responsible for proving its opposite (although we'd like to).

"Vegetarianism is a stupid, unnatural lifestyle, and I'd like to see anyone prove me wrong on that."
Click to expand...


http://punctilious.org/grammar/composition/argument_logic.htm
 
Southern Man said:
The thing about Lott was a lie.
Click to expand...

I might be mistaken , but that sure looks like YOU making the accusation "the thing about Lott was a lie..."


Southern Man said:
I didn't make the accusation, and therefore need to prove nothing.

Lets trade neg rep more often, you foolish sissy boy. :)
Click to expand...

Shifting the Burden of Proof

If we assert a statement as truth, it is up to us to establish its validity. We can't make the opponent of our argument responsible for proving its opposite (although we'd like to).


YOU asserted the Lott comment was a lie, thereby asserting the basic truthfulness of your statement.

It is up to YOU to establish it's validity...not that anyone thinks you ever will.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
I might be mistaken , but that sure looks like YOU making the accusation "the thing about Lott was a lie..."




Shifting the Burden of Proof

If we assert a statement as truth, it is up to us to establish its validity. We can't make the opponent of our argument responsible for proving its opposite (although we'd like to).


YOU asserted the Lott comment was a lie, thereby asserting the basic truthfulness of your statement.

It is up to YOU to establish it's validity...not that anyone thinks you ever will.
Click to expand...

Maineman claimed that Lott: "thought we would be a better country today if he had succeeded". I say that that statement is a lie, and it is up to him to prove his claim. :pke:
 
PostmodernProphet said:
because you can sell three times as many widgets at $1?......
Click to expand...

That makes sense IF we're talking a production line or one has people working for them but in the case of doctors they have to do the job themselves. For example, let's say a doctor makes 5 grand from an operation. He does two a day for a total of 10 grand. If he lowered his price to $2500.00 an operation he will make more money if he gets 6 patients but how many hours is going to work? He's going to make less per hour.

In fact, the same can be said for production. If a company has to add new machinery and personnel in order to produce more one has to figure the cost. Is the company going to make sufficient profit off its investment?

If the company is making a profit of $5.00 off each pill it's compared to the investment. If the profit falls to $3.00/pill will even making more pills pay for a new factory and more personnel and still return a decent profit?
 
Southern Man said:
Maineman claimed that Lott: "thought we would be a better country today if he had succeeded". I say that that statement is a lie, and it is up to him to prove his claim. :pke:
Click to expand...

Of course if you simply provided the ACTUAL quote, you'd prove maineman wrong and yourself correct at the same time.
 
Southern Man said:
Maineman claimed that Lott: "thought we would be a better country today if he had succeeded". I say that that statement is a lie, and it is up to him to prove his claim. :pke:
Click to expand...

Perhaps this will shed a little light on things.

"Senate Republican leader Trent Lott of Mississippi has provoked
criticism by saying the United States would have been better off if
then-segregationist candidate Strom Thurmond had won the presidency in
1948.

Speaking Thursday at a 100th birthday party and retirement celebration
for Sen. Thurmond (R-S.C.) in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Lott
said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for
president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the
country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems
over all these years, either."

Thurmond, then governor of South Carolina, was the presidential nominee
of the breakaway Dixiecrat Party in 1948. He carried Mississippi,
Alabama, Louisiana and his home state. He declared during his campaign
against Democrat Harry S. Truman, who supported civil rights
legislation, and Republican Thomas Dewey: "All the laws of Washington
and all the bayonets of the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes,
our schools, our churches."
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200212/msg00039.html
 
apple0154 said:
That makes sense IF we're talking a production line or one has people working for them but in the case of doctors they have to do the job themselves. For example, let's say a doctor makes 5 grand from an operation. He does two a day for a total of 10 grand. If he lowered his price to $2500.00 an operation he will make more money if he gets 6 patients but how many hours is going to work? He's going to make less per hour.

In fact, the same can be said for production. If a company has to add new machinery and personnel in order to produce more one has to figure the cost. Is the company going to make sufficient profit off its investment?

If the company is making a profit of $5.00 off each pill it's compared to the investment. If the profit falls to $3.00/pill will even making more pills pay for a new factory and more personnel and still return a decent profit?
Click to expand...

you mean "widgets" isn't a good analogy for a service business?.....sucks that you brought it up then.....

look, you claim that the medical industry is "profiteering" over NOT providing services to the poor (despite the fact they are in fact offering such services).....the reason your analogy doesn't work is that you don't "profit" from not doing something in the service industry......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the relevance?......
Click to expand...

The relevance is due to your writing in msg 285, "and why do you think it's right for taxi driver's fees to be set.....if you get in a cab and the meter starts at $50 get out of the cab and find one that doesn't....."

Why would you condone a person's attempt to rip off another? That is basically what Greenspan condoned.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Of course if you simply provided the ACTUAL quote, you'd prove maineman wrong and yourself correct at the same time.
Click to expand...

the quote was "I want to say this about my state: when Strom Thurmond ran for President, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."...

maineman's claim was that thereby Lott was indicating his support for banning interracial marriage.....there may be some liberals stupid enough to believe maineman's claim.....liberals are notoriously stupid.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you mean "widgets" isn't a good analogy for a service business?.....sucks that you brought it up then.....

look, you claim that the medical industry is "profiteering" over NOT providing services to the poor (despite the fact they are in fact offering such services).....the reason your analogy doesn't work is that you don't "profit" from not doing something in the service industry......
Click to expand...

Widgets is fine. I thought I'd vary analogies to help you understand. In any case, if you want to be specific to what medical services are you referring?
 
apple0154 said:
The relevance is due to your writing in msg 285, "and why do you think it's right for taxi driver's fees to be set.....if you get in a cab and the meter starts at $50 get out of the cab and find one that doesn't....."

Why would you condone a person's attempt to rip off another? That is basically what Greenspan condoned.
Click to expand...

let's get back to the original argument....you indicated that panels should be set up to establish how much money doctors should earn for their services......you were asked if you wanted a panel to determine how much YOU should earn.....your response led to restrictions against taxi drivers who were ripping people off.....is it your position that doctors are ripping people off but you are not, so it's okay to have panels setting their pay and taxi driver's pay but not yours?.....is that were we stand?......is that how you are establishing relevance?......if so, I want a panel to decide if you are also ripping people off.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the quote was "I want to say this about my state: when Strom Thurmond ran for President, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."...

maineman's claim was that thereby Lott was indicating his support for banning interracial marriage.....there may be some liberals stupid enough to believe maineman's claim.....liberals are notoriously stupid.......
Click to expand...

Obviously you have a comprehension problem. I even posted the supporting parts of the article. ""All the laws of Washington and all the bayonets of the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes, our schools, our churches."

He didn't want Negros in people's homes and schools and churches but you think he was for interracial marriage? Where the hell was the marriage partner supposed to live? In the dog house? In a tent in the back yard? At their parent's home? Sleep in the car on the street?

You're one crazy dude, PP.
 
apple0154 said:
Widgets is fine. I thought I'd vary analogies to help you understand. In any case, if you want to be specific to what medical services are you referring?
Click to expand...


widgets apparently aren't "fine", because when I pointed out the reason why it didn't fit you abandoned it.....if, as you point out, there is a limit to how many services a person can provide in the course of a day, then it is hardly true that he can "profit" from serving less.....

as to what services I am referring to, as I recall it was YOU that started the issue by claiming doctors were profiteering....why don't you tell me what services YOU are referring to.....
 
apple0154 said:
Obviously you have a comprehension problem. I even posted the supporting parts of the article. ""All the laws of Washington and all the bayonets of the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes, our schools, our churches."

He didn't want Negros in people's homes and schools and churches but you think he was for interracial marriage? Where the hell was the marriage partner supposed to live? In the dog house? In a tent in the back yard? At their parent's home? Sleep in the car on the street?

You're one crazy dude, PP.
Click to expand...
I don't recall Lott making any of those statements....do you have a link?.....that is, after all, what we are referring to, isn't it.....Lott's comment on the occasion of Thurmond's retirement?.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
let's get back to the original argument....you indicated that panels should be set up to establish how much money doctors should earn for their services......you were asked if you wanted a panel to determine how much YOU should earn.....your response led to restrictions against taxi drivers who were ripping people off.....is it your position that doctors are ripping people off but you are not, so it's okay to have panels setting their pay and taxi driver's pay but not yours?.....is that were we stand?......is that how you are establishing relevance?......if so, I want a panel to decide if you are also ripping people off.....
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know if I'm ripping people off because I'm retired.

I'm not saying all doctors or most doctors rip people off but some do. Just like some taxi drivers try to rip people off. Of course, the colloquial term is "charging what the market will bear."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top