|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On July 23 2026 08:12 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 06:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 05:32 LightSpectra wrote:
The most moderate thing an anti-Trump moderate Democrat can do is repeatedly, passionately defend Donald Trump's rape of E. Jean Carroll. Story checks out. It was a minor point, but your repeated use of the word "adjudicated" was wrongheaded and incorrect on the law, on the nature of jury decisions, and on the list of charges. That's one of the problems in these parts. You insist on being incorrect so hard that any attempt on a correction is listed as "defending Donald Trump." It's like you could insist that Donald Trump poisoned 3 hookers in Fargo, and pointing out that it's wrong is "defending Donald Trump." On July 23 2026 05:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 05:04 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:
[quote]
Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different.
American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left.
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:
[quote]
Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different.
American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left.
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans I never claim to not be of that persuasion though, people are free to take it or leave it Others seem to live under the misapprehension that occasionally saying you don’t support x, covers you from criticism when you constantly defend x, or equivocate in a manner that is indistinguishable from defence Entirely their prerogative, but it’s inevitable other people will form certain impressions I can speak from firsthand experience that being moderately against or conditionally against (with reservations) instead of forcefully and vitriolically against gets chalked up to MAGA and begets a hundred thread tropes and accusations. Sorry, if you overlabel something, and particularly use ephemera to trash somebody's secret tribe, you're going to get criticism directed at your criticism. If the thread has a straight majority of people doing this, then you have to show that your mind can handle non-MAGA critiques of Democrats, and (in Introvert's case) pro-Republican stances that aren't instantly MAGA. Because it's fucking easy as hell to junk contrary opinions as MAGA, or opinions you can't understand as showing the logic of MAGA, and I'm pretty sure you're deep in that. Not positive. On July 23 2026 04:49 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:
[quote]
Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different.
American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left.
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:
[quote]
Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different.
American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left.
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans Nope, that’s what you are pretending to be. You show this every time you twist people’s words to fit your narrative. I don’t even know why you bother at this point, you’re act is not fooling anyone. Just make that your signature: and if you disagree, you're probably a fake centrist. Then you've cut your ideological burden in more than half. Only people to your left can be heard and responded to. No, not at all, this is my frustration. Conversatives are perfectly capable of arguing their ideas without recourse to defending the indefensible in and the likes of a Trump I’m perfectly happy with the former, the latter is a huge waste of time I agree with you except for what gets labeled "defending the indefensible" with some regularity in these parts. Which is kind of key. I want people, including you, to be more thoughtful when it comes to broad labels and believing in what you say, but what I get back is overgeneralization in likely result from intellectual laziness. So I have to say the only sane reaction is to view these labels of "far right" or "playing with words" as more instances of "rules for thee, and not for me." And also to point out that fact once a month or so until I've gained the point, or people start acknowledging their own tribal prejudices or laziness. I've seen nothing to suggest Introvert is anywhere close to a non-insane person's use of the term "far right." On July 23 2026 05:59 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 05:28 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 05:20 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 05:04 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:
[quote]He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:
[quote]He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans I never claim to not be of that persuasion though, people are free to take it or leave it Others seem to live under the misapprehension that occasionally saying you don’t support x, covers you from criticism when you constantly defend x, or equivocate in a manner that is indistinguishable from defence Entirely their prerogative, but it’s inevitable other people will form certain impressions I can speak from firsthand experience that being moderately against or conditionally against (with reservations) instead of forcefully and vitriolically against gets chalked up to MAGA and begets a hundred thread tropes and accusations. Sorry, if you overlabel something, and particularly use ephemera to trash somebody's secret tribe, you're going to get criticism directed at your criticism. If the thread has a straight majority of people doing this, then you have to show that your mind can handle non-MAGA critiques of Democrats, and (in Introvert's case) pro-Republican stances that aren't instantly MAGA. Because it's fucking easy as hell to junk contrary opinions as MAGA, or opinions you can't understand as showing the logic of MAGA, and I'm pretty sure you're deep in that. Not positive. On July 23 2026 04:49 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:
[quote]He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:
[quote]He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans Nope, that’s what you are pretending to be. You show this every time you twist people’s words to fit your narrative. I don’t even know why you bother at this point, you’re act is not fooling anyone. Just make that your signature: and if you disagree, you're probably a fake centrist. Then you've cut your ideological burden in more than half. Only people to your left can be heard and responded to. This is my point. You didn’t disagree with me. You made shit up to disagree with. It’s your “style”. I live in a community that is 90% conservative, I do completely fine with talking to conservatives. They just are not pretending to be something else, and they do not make up shit I said, they respond to my actual words. Your act has a shelf life and it’s past. I think it's pretty well documented in this thread. Introvert talked about left-wingers including union leaders with sympathies/praise for the Cuban system, you change what Introvert said to communists (typical bad-faith means of attacking someone), of course it's pointed out, but changing what somebody said to attack it is now "dancing around the word" (typicalx2) while calling him "far right." So my suggestion to you is to edit your posts to remove the bad faith and give a clearer understanding of what you said. If you stand by what you said, then you're in the impossible situations of simultaneously calling left-winger criticism as basic arguing about words (you changed the words) but right-winger criticism is not arguing about words. So, pick what you really think is true and resolve internal contradictions. If you can't, that says something about you too! Yawn. There is nothing wrong with asking someone who considers themselves r center right, the positions right of them. You trying to stoke internet fites is just a waste of time. I don't really regard you calling Introvert "far right" or myself, dyhb, "fake centrist," as coming from someone that's opposed to "stoking internet fites." I think you like starting fights, and have gotten a bit too used to avoiding criticism. Once that's solved, I have no issue with you. You would have to criticize something I said instead of making shit up and criticizing me for it to find out if I could handle it or not. Given that your incapable of it, you won’t ever find out. I mean the last two pages have you exchanging Introvert's "far left" for "communist," and calling Introvert "far right," and myself "fake centerist," so you'll have to be a little more specific on things you actually wrote that you're pretending you never did. Just tell me which posts you no longer believe in, or edit the posts and link them again.
I'd be more than happy for you to change the language for what you really meant to say, rather than cry about people quoting your own words back to you.
I mean three posts attacking Introvert's views on communists and questioning his views on communists, despite Introvert intentionally not using the word communist, is a pretty stupid thing to double-down on for three posts. Let's talk it out and not "It is clear this is what you believe" when you goof.
|
On July 23 2026 08:27 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 08:12 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 06:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 05:32 LightSpectra wrote:
The most moderate thing an anti-Trump moderate Democrat can do is repeatedly, passionately defend Donald Trump's rape of E. Jean Carroll. Story checks out. It was a minor point, but your repeated use of the word "adjudicated" was wrongheaded and incorrect on the law, on the nature of jury decisions, and on the list of charges. That's one of the problems in these parts. You insist on being incorrect so hard that any attempt on a correction is listed as "defending Donald Trump." It's like you could insist that Donald Trump poisoned 3 hookers in Fargo, and pointing out that it's wrong is "defending Donald Trump." On July 23 2026 05:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 05:04 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans I never claim to not be of that persuasion though, people are free to take it or leave it Others seem to live under the misapprehension that occasionally saying you don’t support x, covers you from criticism when you constantly defend x, or equivocate in a manner that is indistinguishable from defence Entirely their prerogative, but it’s inevitable other people will form certain impressions I can speak from firsthand experience that being moderately against or conditionally against (with reservations) instead of forcefully and vitriolically against gets chalked up to MAGA and begets a hundred thread tropes and accusations. Sorry, if you overlabel something, and particularly use ephemera to trash somebody's secret tribe, you're going to get criticism directed at your criticism. If the thread has a straight majority of people doing this, then you have to show that your mind can handle non-MAGA critiques of Democrats, and (in Introvert's case) pro-Republican stances that aren't instantly MAGA. Because it's fucking easy as hell to junk contrary opinions as MAGA, or opinions you can't understand as showing the logic of MAGA, and I'm pretty sure you're deep in that. Not positive. On July 23 2026 04:49 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans Nope, that’s what you are pretending to be. You show this every time you twist people’s words to fit your narrative. I don’t even know why you bother at this point, you’re act is not fooling anyone. Just make that your signature: and if you disagree, you're probably a fake centrist. Then you've cut your ideological burden in more than half. Only people to your left can be heard and responded to. No, not at all, this is my frustration. Conversatives are perfectly capable of arguing their ideas without recourse to defending the indefensible in and the likes of a Trump I’m perfectly happy with the former, the latter is a huge waste of time I agree with you except for what gets labeled "defending the indefensible" with some regularity in these parts. Which is kind of key. I want people, including you, to be more thoughtful when it comes to broad labels and believing in what you say, but what I get back is overgeneralization in likely result from intellectual laziness. So I have to say the only sane reaction is to view these labels of "far right" or "playing with words" as more instances of "rules for thee, and not for me." And also to point out that fact once a month or so until I've gained the point, or people start acknowledging their own tribal prejudices or laziness. I've seen nothing to suggest Introvert is anywhere close to a non-insane person's use of the term "far right." On July 23 2026 05:59 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 05:28 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 05:20 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 05:04 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:
[quote]
Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics
Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:
[quote]
Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans I never claim to not be of that persuasion though, people are free to take it or leave it Others seem to live under the misapprehension that occasionally saying you don’t support x, covers you from criticism when you constantly defend x, or equivocate in a manner that is indistinguishable from defence Entirely their prerogative, but it’s inevitable other people will form certain impressions I can speak from firsthand experience that being moderately against or conditionally against (with reservations) instead of forcefully and vitriolically against gets chalked up to MAGA and begets a hundred thread tropes and accusations. Sorry, if you overlabel something, and particularly use ephemera to trash somebody's secret tribe, you're going to get criticism directed at your criticism. If the thread has a straight majority of people doing this, then you have to show that your mind can handle non-MAGA critiques of Democrats, and (in Introvert's case) pro-Republican stances that aren't instantly MAGA. Because it's fucking easy as hell to junk contrary opinions as MAGA, or opinions you can't understand as showing the logic of MAGA, and I'm pretty sure you're deep in that. Not positive. On July 23 2026 04:49 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:
[quote]
Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics
Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:
[quote]
Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans Nope, that’s what you are pretending to be. You show this every time you twist people’s words to fit your narrative. I don’t even know why you bother at this point, you’re act is not fooling anyone. Just make that your signature: and if you disagree, you're probably a fake centrist. Then you've cut your ideological burden in more than half. Only people to your left can be heard and responded to. This is my point. You didn’t disagree with me. You made shit up to disagree with. It’s your “style”. I live in a community that is 90% conservative, I do completely fine with talking to conservatives. They just are not pretending to be something else, and they do not make up shit I said, they respond to my actual words. Your act has a shelf life and it’s past. I think it's pretty well documented in this thread. Introvert talked about left-wingers including union leaders with sympathies/praise for the Cuban system, you change what Introvert said to communists (typical bad-faith means of attacking someone), of course it's pointed out, but changing what somebody said to attack it is now "dancing around the word" (typicalx2) while calling him "far right." So my suggestion to you is to edit your posts to remove the bad faith and give a clearer understanding of what you said. If you stand by what you said, then you're in the impossible situations of simultaneously calling left-winger criticism as basic arguing about words (you changed the words) but right-winger criticism is not arguing about words. So, pick what you really think is true and resolve internal contradictions. If you can't, that says something about you too! Yawn. There is nothing wrong with asking someone who considers themselves r center right, the positions right of them. You trying to stoke internet fites is just a waste of time. I don't really regard you calling Introvert "far right" or myself, dyhb, "fake centrist," as coming from someone that's opposed to "stoking internet fites." I think you like starting fights, and have gotten a bit too used to avoiding criticism. Once that's solved, I have no issue with you. You would have to criticize something I said instead of making shit up and criticizing me for it to find out if I could handle it or not. Given that your incapable of it, you won’t ever find out. I mean the last two pages have you exchanging Introvert's "far left" for "communist," and calling Introvert "far right," and myself "fake centerist," so you'll have to be a little more specific on things you actually wrote that you're pretending you never did. Just tell me which posts you no longer believe in, or edit the posts and link them again. I'd be more than happy for you to change the language for what you really meant to say, rather than cry about people quoting your own words back to you. I mean three posts attacking Introvert's views on communists and questioning his views on communists, despite Introvert intentionally not using the word communist, is a pretty stupid thing to double-down on for three posts. Let's talk it out and not "It is clear this is what you believe" when you goof.
You have an extreme love for German leaders from the 30s and 40s, that yell lots, and have famous mustaches.
Don’t you dare say I called you Nazi, because I clearly did not.
I can talk things out with intro, he shares his actual views, sanitized but they are his held beliefs. You not so much. You just pop on with strawmans.
|
Northern Ireland27227 Posts
On July 23 2026 06:57 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 05:32 LightSpectra wrote:
The most moderate thing an anti-Trump moderate Democrat can do is repeatedly, passionately defend Donald Trump's rape of E. Jean Carroll. Story checks out. It was a minor point, but your repeated use of the word "adjudicated" was wrongheaded and incorrect on the law, on the nature of jury decisions, and on the list of charges. That's one of the problems in these parts. You insist on being incorrect so hard that any attempt on a correction is listed as "defending Donald Trump." It's like you could insist that Donald Trump poisoned 3 hookers in Fargo, and pointing out that it's wrong is "defending Donald Trump." Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 05:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 05:04 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:On July 22 2026 13:05 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I purposely have not used the word communist because I know when anyone does it leads to exactly what you are doing, which is arguing about the word more than anything else.
I'm not interested in this odd aside but I am a big fan of the American revolution and as an American conservative that's the thing I'm trying to conserve and adapt.
Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different. American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left. I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:On July 22 2026 13:05 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I purposely have not used the word communist because I know when anyone does it leads to exactly what you are doing, which is arguing about the word more than anything else.
I'm not interested in this odd aside but I am a big fan of the American revolution and as an American conservative that's the thing I'm trying to conserve and adapt.
Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different. American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left. I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans I never claim to not be of that persuasion though, people are free to take it or leave it Others seem to live under the misapprehension that occasionally saying you don’t support x, covers you from criticism when you constantly defend x, or equivocate in a manner that is indistinguishable from defence Entirely their prerogative, but it’s inevitable other people will form certain impressions I can speak from firsthand experience that being moderately against or conditionally against (with reservations) instead of forcefully and vitriolically against gets chalked up to MAGA and begets a hundred thread tropes and accusations. Sorry, if you overlabel something, and particularly use ephemera to trash somebody's secret tribe, you're going to get criticism directed at your criticism. If the thread has a straight majority of people doing this, then you have to show that your mind can handle non-MAGA critiques of Democrats, and (in Introvert's case) pro-Republican stances that aren't instantly MAGA. Because it's fucking easy as hell to junk contrary opinions as MAGA, or opinions you can't understand as showing the logic of MAGA, and I'm pretty sure you're deep in that. Not positive. On July 23 2026 04:49 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:On July 22 2026 13:05 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I purposely have not used the word communist because I know when anyone does it leads to exactly what you are doing, which is arguing about the word more than anything else.
I'm not interested in this odd aside but I am a big fan of the American revolution and as an American conservative that's the thing I'm trying to conserve and adapt.
Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different. American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left. I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:On July 22 2026 13:05 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I purposely have not used the word communist because I know when anyone does it leads to exactly what you are doing, which is arguing about the word more than anything else.
I'm not interested in this odd aside but I am a big fan of the American revolution and as an American conservative that's the thing I'm trying to conserve and adapt.
Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different. American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left. I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans Nope, that’s what you are pretending to be. You show this every time you twist people’s words to fit your narrative. I don’t even know why you bother at this point, you’re act is not fooling anyone. Just make that your signature: and if you disagree, you're probably a fake centrist. Then you've cut your ideological burden in more than half. Only people to your left can be heard and responded to. No, not at all, this is my frustration. Conversatives are perfectly capable of arguing their ideas without recourse to defending the indefensible in and the likes of a Trump I’m perfectly happy with the former, the latter is a huge waste of time I agree with you except for what gets labeled "defending the indefensible" with some regularity in these parts. Which is kind of key. I want people, including you, to be more thoughtful when it comes to broad labels and believing in what you say, but what I get back is overgeneralization in likely result from intellectual laziness. So I have to say the only sane reaction is to view these labels of "far right" or "playing with words" as more instances of "rules for thee, and not for me." And also to point out that fact once a month or so until I've gained the point, or people start acknowledging their own tribal prejudices or laziness. I've seen nothing to suggest Introvert is anywhere close to a non-insane person's use of the term "far right." Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 05:59 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 05:28 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 05:20 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 05:04 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:43 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans I never claim to not be of that persuasion though, people are free to take it or leave it Others seem to live under the misapprehension that occasionally saying you don’t support x, covers you from criticism when you constantly defend x, or equivocate in a manner that is indistinguishable from defence Entirely their prerogative, but it’s inevitable other people will form certain impressions I can speak from firsthand experience that being moderately against or conditionally against (with reservations) instead of forcefully and vitriolically against gets chalked up to MAGA and begets a hundred thread tropes and accusations. Sorry, if you overlabel something, and particularly use ephemera to trash somebody's secret tribe, you're going to get criticism directed at your criticism. If the thread has a straight majority of people doing this, then you have to show that your mind can handle non-MAGA critiques of Democrats, and (in Introvert's case) pro-Republican stances that aren't instantly MAGA. Because it's fucking easy as hell to junk contrary opinions as MAGA, or opinions you can't understand as showing the logic of MAGA, and I'm pretty sure you're deep in that. Not positive. On July 23 2026 04:49 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 04:33 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 04:00 WombaT wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Oh noes turns out running defence on behalf of the Trumps of the world for years has people thinking you share their politics Who could have possibly predicted such a thing? I hope you incorporate a "theory of mind" that allows for other people being convinced of things that you deny, and you being convinced of other things that they deny. Since this depends on the shared, bitter history that's endemic here, I'd have to ask Introvert if he likewise says Wombat "turns out he's been running defense on behalf of left-wingers that hate appropriate labels for years." On July 23 2026 04:07 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:57 dyhb wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. He's very defensive about words and labels when its left-wingers in regards to your comments on teachers & Cubans, but simultaneously assertive about words and labels regarding right-wingers when he can call you far right and label movements. So just keep holding up that mirror and make him hate his own reflection, in my opinion. Shocking that our fake centerist swoops in to defend a position and ignore the words written. At least you stay on brand. Anti-Trump, anti-progressive, moderate Democrat. Which is to say, a target of regular hate for progressives. They hate their neighbors more than they hate Republicans Nope, that’s what you are pretending to be. You show this every time you twist people’s words to fit your narrative. I don’t even know why you bother at this point, you’re act is not fooling anyone. Just make that your signature: and if you disagree, you're probably a fake centrist. Then you've cut your ideological burden in more than half. Only people to your left can be heard and responded to. This is my point. You didn’t disagree with me. You made shit up to disagree with. It’s your “style”. I live in a community that is 90% conservative, I do completely fine with talking to conservatives. They just are not pretending to be something else, and they do not make up shit I said, they respond to my actual words. Your act has a shelf life and it’s past. I think it's pretty well documented in this thread. Introvert talked about left-wingers including union leaders with sympathies/praise for the Cuban system, you change what Introvert said to communists (typical bad-faith means of attacking someone), of course it's pointed out, but changing what somebody said to attack it is now "dancing around the word" (typicalx2) while calling him "far right." So my suggestion to you is to edit your posts to remove the bad faith and give a clearer understanding of what you said. If you stand by what you said, then you're in the impossible situations of simultaneously calling left-winger criticism as basic arguing about words (you changed the words) but right-winger criticism is not arguing about words. So, pick what you really think is true and resolve internal contradictions. If you can't, that says something about you too! Yawn. There is nothing wrong with asking someone who considers themselves r center right, the positions right of them. You trying to stoke internet fites is just a waste of time. I don't really regard you calling Introvert "far right" or myself, dyhb, "fake centrist," as coming from someone that's opposed to "stoking internet fites." I think you like starting fights, and have gotten a bit too used to avoiding criticism. Once that's solved, I have no issue with you.
Give me some sensible arguments and I’ll happily engage.
If people want to continue to defend a completely deficient regime, both morally and in terms of base competence I mean that’s their prerogative
If that makes me intellectually cloistered then so be it, I’d prefer that to being morally bankrupt
|
On July 23 2026 08:05 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 07:56 Introvert wrote:On July 23 2026 04:06 Billyboy wrote:On July 23 2026 03:28 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 23:15 Billyboy wrote:On July 22 2026 13:05 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 11:35 Billyboy wrote:On July 22 2026 10:38 Introvert wrote:On July 22 2026 09:48 Billyboy wrote:On July 22 2026 09:34 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
For which part? How much do you know of Cold War era left-wing activism?
[quote]
Joe Biden won. You need better gotchas. The teachers being communists, or your definition of communists. Because it’s strange that the most right wing democracy around has this communist problem that none of the much more left wing European countries have. Also, you lose all credibility when you call Biden a communist. I didn't say the teachers are communists. I said many union leaders are lefties with sympathies for Cuba. We'd be totally screwed if the average teacher was like the union leaders. Remember when, during COVID for example, the head the LA teachers union said that learning loss wasn't real, that it was OK that the students didn't know time tables because they knew oppression and "coup"? That's the sort of thing I'm talking about. or things like this https://x.com/CTULocal1/status/1971749649951142009?lang=enAre we actually going to pretend teachers unions are led by normal center left liberals? On July 22 2026 09:53 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2026 07:32 Introvert wrote:
[quote]
I haven't read the report yet, though I hope to find the time. But Cuban/American left-wing crossover is not a secret or something unknown, and many union organizers are very left-wing and love the Cuban "system." Teachers unions in particular seem to have an affinity for that sort of crackpottery. What exactly is the Cuban "system" that teachers/unions have an affinity for? Same as the usual BS they all say, praising its education and healthcare system. Edit: btw it's often framed as supporting Cuban union members or calling on the US to lift restrictions. Harder to find out and out praise for the Cuban regime as time has gone on. Fewer people gushing over the Castros. But there's no reason for a US union to take a position on a topic like that. Nevermind how, since so much over there is government run, it's not like you are finding actual free assocations of workers instead of state associations. Saying something is good in another system with way lower reasources doesn’t make you a communist, it makes you able to look at things without bias. Certificate strange to call people who are likely not nearly as close to communism communist when you get so pissed at trump being called a fascist when he hits almost all the main features. Out of curiosity you have always bristled at being called far right. What positions are right of yours? Feel free to pick abortion, or taxation, or whatever floats your boat. I purposely have not used the word communist because I know when anyone does it leads to exactly what you are doing, which is arguing about the word more than anything else. I'm not interested in this odd aside but I am a big fan of the American revolution and as an American conservative that's the thing I'm trying to conserve and adapt. Dancing around the word doesn’t make the accusation any different. American conservatives are far right for the most part at this moment (including yourself). What I don’t understand is why your are embarrassed of that, but not of the belief itself? It’s not like GH is offended when he is called far left. I am trying to figure out what you are on about. Arguing about words while simultaneously telling me it doesn't matter because reasons. My one sentence opinion is that if you put me in the "far right" box then you havw made the box too big. I mean I asked you to name some positions right of yours and dodged hard and fast. It should be easy for someone on the center right to do. I’m saying you calling people communist or saying they are communist without saying the word communist is no different. It is clear this is what you believe and it is a ridiculous take. Everyone left of you is not a communist, basically everyone that is not “an American conservative “ is left of you. The weird part is how you don’t own it and try to claim to be some sort of centerist with no positions right of yours. If you were at all centerist there would be a whole bunch right of yours. I'm not answering because it's a weird digression. I didn't say everyone to the left of me is a communist. Are you upset I said "left" and not "far left?" If you would like to collapse all criticism of, say, teachers unions leaders into criticism of the left, center included....be my guest if you want but it's probably a bad idea. Rather than pushing back it's just going to tar everyone. There are people to "the right" of me but thankfully I don't actually believe America is on the cusp of a fascist tyranny because I think they are a way smaller segment of the population than "the left" would try to have us believe. I do not think it’s weird, I think it is why you think people are so out there. I also think it’s a painfully easy question for someone who’s not far right. And as mentioned, I don’t get why so many people with far right views bristle at being called far right.
Where are you even getting this scale from? Where on the axis/horseshoe do you put the two examples I gave? I've been posting my views here for years, you asking for a list smells fishy. Like in the past year I've been pro-Ukraine, and pro-bombing Iran. Pro-life, bur trying to make it durable by taking it slow and getting buy in. Pro-immigration enforcement but professionally done, nor whatever Noem seems to have been doing. Anti-tarriffs while expressing deep disdain for many NATO members. Anti-government buying stakes in corporations but recognizing legitimate defense needs. Hater of almost all unions. Teachers and labor unions, yes, but also police and firefighter unions. Restraining government spending not by something ludicrous like "cutting waste" and foreign aid but by making reforms that allow us to outgrow our debt. Acknowledging Trump is a bad person a million times while not agreeing he was worse than the alternatives in any of the 3 elections he's run in. I've said now multiple times Biden won in 2020 but that things like voter ID are good and 6 weeks of early voting and tsking 3 weeks to count are bad.
That was way more than you should have got but I say it to demonstrate that the point you are trying to make is not a very good one.
|
On July 22 2026 17:44 oBlade wrote:
I think shareholder value decreasing is a net good in the world. It makes people work harder in response after everything is ruined.
I also think shareholder value staying the same is a net good in the world. It allows people to conserve capital and their share in businesses that they have already built.
Lastly, I think shareholder value increasing is a net good. Growing the pie is the key to more production and more prosperity to share.
Things that look like shares and also go up and down but aren't shares, for example when you buy dollars, you aren't a shareholder (for better or worse) in USA, Inc., or speculative fake investments like NFTs and crypto, they may or may not add value to anything.
Wondering what all the emotional ranting about purple hairs was about, only to come back and agree with me that no, shareholder value is not a consistent measure of benefit to the world.
Or is this like some epic rhetorical takedown that nobody got because it wasn't as clever as you thought it was?
Here's ETisME's direct words, by the way, from back where I first asked:
"actually create things that advance society", "how do you measure "actual"
we measure cost/profit because that's how we can put a medium of exchange value to the equation.
Now you see why I might have asked questions then about how useful of a measure this really is, and on return asked about it again through the lens of what I'd suggest is the extended application of this concept (the share market). No, the claim made was not that money was a perfect measure, but it was that money is/should be the measure. I don't think that's an uncharitable reading.
|
On July 23 2026 09:59 Turbovolver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2026 17:44 oBlade wrote:
I think shareholder value decreasing is a net good in the world. It makes people work harder in response after everything is ruined.
I also think shareholder value staying the same is a net good in the world. It allows people to conserve capital and their share in businesses that they have already built.
Lastly, I think shareholder value increasing is a net good. Growing the pie is the key to more production and more prosperity to share.
Things that look like shares and also go up and down but aren't shares, for example when you buy dollars, you aren't a shareholder (for better or worse) in USA, Inc., or speculative fake investments like NFTs and crypto, they may or may not add value to anything. Wondering what all the emotional ranting about purple hairs was about, only to come back and agree with me that no, shareholder value is not a consistent measure of benefit to the world. Or is this like some epic rhetorical takedown that nobody got because it wasn't as clever as you thought it was?
The word "purple" is not an emotional tirade, relax, everything's going to be okay, but I'll still keep things terse on the off chance you find some other random word to coopt into an excuse to not reading the point.
There are ~4 measures of value
1) What a seller will sell it for (a kind of ceiling)
2) What a buyer will buy it for (a kind of floor)
3) The price that markets are equilibrating towards
4) "It kind of feels like it's 'worth' this much bro" (subjective)
We do not agree. I said the system that allows shareholders to gain value, by allowing them to hold shares in a company and measuring the value of their shares to begin with, leads to net prosperity on the whole, even if there are local inefficiencies that seem disconnected from the value YOU hypothetically think is fair. That's my answer. Yours was "hmm difficult question no clear-cut answer you go first oBlade."
On July 23 2026 09:59 Turbovolver wrote:Here's ETisME's direct words, by the way, from back where I first asked: Show nested quote +
"actually create things that advance society", "how do you measure "actual"
we measure cost/profit because that's how we can put a medium of exchange value to the equation.
Now you see why I might have asked questions then about how useful of a measure this really is, and on return asked about it again through the lens of what I'd suggest is the extended application of this concept (the share market). No, the claim made was not that money was a perfect measure, but it was that money is/should be the measure. I don't think that's an uncharitable reading.
So he originally made a point about money and you told him to justify his point about something that isn't money, in a way which he didn't say.
|
On July 23 2026 08:59 Introvert wrote:
Where are you even getting this scale from? Where on the axis/horseshoe do you put the two examples I gave? I've been posting my views here for years, you asking for a list smells fishy. Like in the past year I've been pro-Ukraine, and pro-bombing Iran. Pro-life, bur trying to make it durable by taking it slow and getting buy in. Pro-immigration enforcement but professionally done, nor whatever Noem seems to have been doing. Anti-tarriffs while expressing deep disdain for many NATO members. Anti-government buying stakes in corporations but recognizing legitimate defense needs. Hater of almost all unions. Teachers and labor unions, yes, but also police and firefighter unions. Restraining government spending not by something ludicrous like "cutting waste" and foreign aid but by making reforms that allow us to outgrow our debt. Acknowledging Trump is a bad person a million times while not agreeing he was worse than the alternatives in any of the 3 elections he's run in. I've said now multiple times Biden won in 2020 but that things like voter ID are good and 6 weeks of early voting and tsking 3 weeks to count are bad. These are all sensible disagreements. Which is to say, debatable points for the past 100 years that aren't identifiably MAGA or far-right or whatever the vogue phrase is when the mind turns off. The far right or MAGA loses meaning when, in order to label you one, it must be both pro and anti-tariff, both pro and anti-Ukraine, both pro and anti-state capitalism. I'm not one to force so ill-fitting of terms on people who I've never met. I don't expect to find that this is all an act if I look up posts from 1 year or 2 years ago.
|
On July 23 2026 13:36 oBlade wrote:
The word "purple" is not an emotional tirade, relax, everything's going to be okay, but I'll still keep things terse on the off chance you find some other random word to coopt into an excuse to not reading the point.
No like seriously, you somehow got from me saying "ETisME believes Good Business = Good by definition" to talking about purple-haired imaginary communists, it's kind of cringe and this "no u" is laughable.
We do not agree. I said the system that allows shareholders to gain value, by allowing them to hold shares in a company and measuring the value of their shares to begin with, leads to net prosperity on the whole, even if there are local inefficiencies that seem disconnected from the value YOU hypothetically think is fair. That's my answer. Yours was "hmm difficult question no clear-cut answer you go first oBlade."
No, I wasn't asking for your beliefs. You're the one that asked some gotcha question about what I believe, even though I freely admitted (in my earlier post to ETisME from the other go around, to be fair) that finance is not my area and I might simply need education on the topic. Rather than go read some biased randos on the internet giving both sides of that argument, I figured I'd ask the people here operating from that as a framework for their case. That's why I said "if you want to make a case, I'm all ears". So are you going to make a case, are you for example going to address my list of things that genuinely make me wonder if shareholder value is an overall good measure of societal benefit?
Or my original question from all those pages ago, does society win out if LV sells their bags for $1000 instead of $200? On the surface level I'd say that difference in price seems to amount to a minor difference in distribution of wealth between one very rich company and some rich customers. Is that... good? Or does it only become a win if we go international and we got foreign money coming in, so now that's good from the point of view of the country where LV is based?
You're under no obligation to play educator of course, but you inserted yourself loudly into the conversation, so, *shrug*
Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 09:59 Turbovolver wrote:Here's ETisME's direct words, by the way, from back where I first asked:
"actually create things that advance society", "how do you measure "actual"
we measure cost/profit because that's how we can put a medium of exchange value to the equation.
Now you see why I might have asked questions then about how useful of a measure this really is, and on return asked about it again through the lens of what I'd suggest is the extended application of this concept (the share market). No, the claim made was not that money was a perfect measure, but it was that money is/should be the measure. I don't think that's an uncharitable reading. So he originally made a point about money and you told him to justify his point about something that isn't money, in a way which he didn't say.
He made a point that the way "advancing society" is/should be measured is "by cost/profit". Is that not what you take from that quote? It can't be "a point about money" unless you think the point is simply "money measures value" which I would say is not a point, it's a tautology.
|
On July 23 2026 14:23 Turbovolver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 13:36 oBlade wrote:
The word "purple" is not an emotional tirade, relax, everything's going to be okay, but I'll still keep things terse on the off chance you find some other random word to coopt into an excuse to not reading the point. No like seriously, you somehow got from me saying "ETisME believes Good Business = Good by definition" to talking about purple-haired imaginary communists, it's kind of cringe and this "no u" is laughable.
There are multiple different theories of value in the world.
I think some of the theories are absurd, but the fact that some of the people who believe them identify themselves with purple hair is a convenient but incidental act of generosity by them. If you or someone in your vicinity have purple hair, it was not meant as a personal slight. Purple hair can work on some people.
But "Good Business = Good" came after my post, think you have the order wrong.
On July 23 2026 14:23 Turbovolver wrote:Show nested quote +We do not agree. I said the system that allows shareholders to gain value, by allowing them to hold shares in a company and measuring the value of their shares to begin with, leads to net prosperity on the whole, even if there are local inefficiencies that seem disconnected from the value YOU hypothetically think is fair. That's my answer. Yours was "hmm difficult question no clear-cut answer you go first oBlade." No, I wasn't asking for your beliefs. You're the one that asked some gotcha question about what I believe, even though I freely admitted (in my earlier post to ETisME from the other go around, to be fair) that finance is not my area and I might simply need education on the topic. Rather than go read some biased randos on the internet giving both sides of that argument, I figured I'd ask the people here operating from that as a framework for their case. That's why I said "if you want to make a case, I'm all ears".
That wasn't a gotcha question, it was a question.
On July 23 2026 14:23 Turbovolver wrote:
So are you going to make a case, are you for example going to address my list of things that genuinely make me wonder if shareholder value is an overall good measure of societal benefit?
Or my original question from all those pages ago, does society win out if LV sells their bags for $1000 instead of $200? On the surface level I'd say that difference in price seems to amount to a minor difference in distribution of wealth between one very rich company and some rich customers. Is that... good? Or does it only become a win if we go international and we got foreign money coming in, so now that's good from the point of view of the country where LV is based?
You're under no obligation to play educator of course, but you inserted yourself loudly into the conversation, so, *shrug*
I'm thirsty, what's the benefit to society if I drink a glass of water? How does society win if I have iced spring water instead of tepid swamp giardiasis cocktail?
How about this, does society win if LV sells a bag for just $200?
Get past the fact that you say you don't know enough to have an opinion and think about it.
You'll realize what you are stuck on is not this or that system of whether value exists and how you can measure it, it's that your probing question is dealing with an extremely local example versus an entire global aggregate. One bag vs. entire society? The only answer to that, as worded, is it's so negligible in comparison EITHER WAY that the question has turned to bullshit as framed.
Now I'd expect you can agree it's better if millions of people have access to cheap clean water so they aren't thirsty, and can cook and clean and bathe, than if they didn't. The value of the system is in that even if I buy the water for more than it cost the company to deliver it to the shelf, or to my faucet, THAT is a win over what it would cost me to dig a well, build a plant, a pipeline, buy land to a water source and then an aqueduct, etc. That in general the system gravitates towards efficient distributions.
That doesn't mean the system without fail produces no local inefficiencies.
In the case of a luxury good, what is happening is we have so much prosperity, that it's a form of value to someone who has surplus capital to get a Rolex or something, which means a watchmaker or bag designer can have a cushy job where their own labor is now compensated much more than if they were digging aqueducts all day just to not die of thirst.
Communism will nuke the people who own Rolex, therefore nuking Rolex, therefore nuking that person's job and their colleagues and all the workers along the chain, for the purpose of economic equality.
Central planning has its own inefficiencies, like when the USSR almost made whales extinct while hunting them to meet quotas that nobody was buying. This is the reason why just the same way the US Founders went back to Polybius and realized the most stable government is a mixed government, the best and most stable economy, when correctly implemented, is a mixed economy because it allows each aspect to correct the other's mistakes and pick up the slack.
On July 23 2026 14:23 Turbovolver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2026 09:59 Turbovolver wrote:Here's ETisME's direct words, by the way, from back where I first asked:
"actually create things that advance society", "how do you measure "actual"
we measure cost/profit because that's how we can put a medium of exchange value to the equation.
Now you see why I might have asked questions then about how useful of a measure this really is, and on return asked about it again through the lens of what I'd suggest is the extended application of this concept (the share market). No, the claim made was not that money was a perfect measure, but it was that money is/should be the measure. I don't think that's an uncharitable reading. So he originally made a point about money and you told him to justify his point about something that isn't money, in a way which he didn't say. He made a point that the way "advancing society" is/should be measured is "by cost/profit". Is that not what you take from that quote? It can't be "a point about money" unless you think the point is simply "money measures value" which I would say is not a point, it's a tautology.
One of your first objections is look shareholder value can be disconnected from reality. That means a company can be profitable while its shares tank too. In that framework society can easily be benefitting while some finance bro is left holding the bag. But it's not quite that money simply measures value, it's that markets decide value. That's what the money is doing. This is not necessarily true in systems where you have price controls. Even though the money is doing the measuring. For example bread in the USSR. Bread in Venezuela. Or North Korea set their currency to $1 = 2.16 won for years until they had to stop because actual black market prices were off by 100x.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
