Ohio lawmakers vote to give themselves a pay raise

[Unicorn]

Ohio lawmakers vote to give themselves a pay raise

https://www.daytondailynews.com/news/sta...P0IC9dlbL/

[David Horn]

(06-05-2019, 11:46 PM)Unicorn Wrote: Ohio lawmakers vote to give themselves a pay raise

https://www.daytondailynews.com/news/sta...P0IC9dlbL/

So what's your point?  Do you prefer underpaid and easily bribable politicians?  If anything, we need to adjust politician pay upwards everywhere, then insist they live on the pay they earn.  Back during Babe Ruth's heyday, there was a joke that he had earned more than the President.  Today, almost all major league  athletes exceed that bar.

[pbrower2a]

Vine --

Either write more individual material... or get help!

You used an inexcusable word... you know, the one that rhymes with maggots.  I have heard that word directed at me with vehement animus... maybe because I am a sissy. (Male lesbian -- yup. Men -- yuck!, and that makes me as straight as one can be).  I get along with male homosexuals as long as we keep our pants up and that the conversation stays safely away from sex.

I have been gay-bashed, and with that I have become vehemently for the rights of LGBT people. A community that respects LGBT rights is far safer for us all. Bigots are often wrong about the people that they meet.  

Much that you say is completely wrong. I am for LGBT rights but clearly against perverts who mess with (and mess up) children. Mainstream gays and lesbians (wisely!) sacrificed those creeps to get the respect of straight people. You can safely assume that once gays and lesbians have children they will protect  them as ferociously against abusive perverts as straight people like me. If I were to have a child in the presence of sexual predators, I might be tempted to keep a literal predator for defense. You know -- Man's Best Friend unless one is a burglar or rapist, in which case it starts acting like a tiger.

...You are using a straw-man argument, one in which you deliberately or recklessly misrepresent the Other Side and knock it down. I have deliberately used an  illustration from people with whom I heavily disagree:

Quote:Strawmen, scarecrows, and mannequins all have one thing in common: they are, by nature, flimsy objects that are easy to knock down. In the context of logical fallacies, a “straw man” argument is an argument that is framed in such a way that it is easy to “knock down” or dismantle.

How many times have you been in conversation with someone—someone who holds an opposing viewpoint to yours—who frames your position in a way that you have not? Then once they frame your position in that way, they attack it, supposing that by doing so they have won the argument? This week’s fallacy is, arguably, one of the most prevalent, and it’s called the “straw man” fallacy.

During times of medieval debate, debaters often began with a clear presentation of their opponent’s position. In Socratic Logic, Peter Kreeft writes about this saying, “One of the rules of medieval debate was designed to block ‘straw man’ arguments: you must first state your opponent’s idea in your own words (to be sure you understand the idea instead of just parroting the words), to his satisfaction, before you go on to refute it.” Such courtesy is rarely given today; instead, those who have conversations with others of differing opinion often try to discredit the opposing viewpoint by caricaturing it, minimizing its coherence, or conducting any other number of methods as a means of destroying its cogence.

https://ses.edu/logical-fallacies-101-straw-man/


The rejection of straw-man arguments is one way to reject obsolete, fanciful,  or fabricated positions of the Other Side. If you are to denounce the Roman Catholic Church for the priestly scandals of child sexual abuse, then do not bring up the Inquisition. (If anything, I know that priests make vows of poverty, obedience, and celibacy, and child sexual abuse is contrary to Church teachings to all, and is as overt a violation of the vow of celibacy as is possible; the Catholic Church now denounces the Inquisition and seeks to root out the child sexual abuse of wayward priests). If you create a straw-man argument, then you are not in a genuine debate.

Quote:A great example of a “straw man” fallacy that falls in the second group was evident in a recent debate between SES Professor Emeritus Dr. Richard Howe and Dr. Ed Buckner. This took place at Georgia State University, and if you’re interested in watching, you can do it here: “Does God Exist?” Debate

It was apparent in this debate that Dr. Buckner’s refusal to address Dr. Howe’s arguments arose from his inability to interact with them. Instead of responding to them, Dr. Buckner chose to interact with the weaker/weakest versions of philosophical arguments, albeit the ones espoused by Richard Dawkins in God Delusion. The problem, of course, is that Richard Dawkins isn’t a philosopher, and plenty of philosophers have pointed out the same.[1]  Further, even though Dr. Buckner was persuaded by the God Delusion, he would have been able to avoid straw man argumentation by investigating the primary sources in Dawkins’ argument. Instead, he relied on Dawkins’ caricature of them. This, of course, is what his critics noted—that Dawkins failed to understand the philosophical arguments that he chose to critique in his book.

[1] See philosophers such as Michael Ruse, Thomas Nagel, or H Allen Orr.
Be that as it may, this is a poignant example of one who chooses to address the weakest version of an argument and “knock it down” instead of interacting with the stronger version that’s being presented.

[pbrower2a]

(06-07-2019, 02:57 AM)vine Wrote: Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.

The problem is not with facts. You offer myths, fabrications, and stereotypes that are not facts.

Consider one of the worst and most infamous pieces of propagandistic bilge-- the forgery known as Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion among other variants. It is an unrelenting smear of Jews conspiring to do evil in an attempt at world domination for the purpose of humiliating and exploiting gentiles. The characters depicted are pure evil, and if Jews were that evil I would support aggressive proselytizing of them, separating Jewish children from Jewish parents so that the children be raised as gentiles, prohibiting the practice of the Jewish religion, and obliteration of Jewish culture. That would include the destruction of huge quantities of books and feature films, the latter (if good) depending heavily upon Jewish talent in directing, script-writing, and acting. Don't forget that much American comedy is Jewish, so we would be bereft of the Marx Brothers, Don Adams, Jerry Lewis, Mel Brooks, Joan Rivers, Carol Lawrence, Harvey Korman, Woody Allen, Jerry Seinfeld...

Well, I have met Jews, and they little resemble characters out of Protocols. They are no more greedy and materialistic than gentiles. Many have concerns other than dominating the world --  like enterprise, medicine, law, science, engineering, cultural creation... as someone about half German-American I find at the least the Ashkenazim my cultural brethren. I have swatted down a neo-Nazi by telling him that if I had to choose between being a Nazi and being a Jew I would be a Jew, as becoming a Jew would require far fewer compromises of my morals and culture.

I have tests of truth, and one of the most effective is the test of internal coherence. Truth does not contradict. It may bring about paradoxes (thus, bigger triangles do not have bigger angles), but we all must deal with those. Truth is generally inconsistent with flawed means of getting knowledge. Sure, on occasion some skid-row drunk might say something profoundly true, but the truth can be found in some cause other than drunkenness.

So I pose a question: how are you going to create a better world? I say that we examine our assumptions.

[David Horn]

(06-07-2019, 03:51 AM)vine Wrote: Defending the government just gets tougher everyday.

I can tell that you're still young.  Reality will eventually catch you as it does to us all.

We've had really thoughtful libertarians in the past, so it's not just your philosophy that rankles.  It's the lack of basic grounding.  Try some three dimensional thinking.

[pbrower2a]

(06-07-2019, 06:57 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-07-2019, 03:51 AM)vine Wrote: Defending the government just gets tougher everyday.

I can tell that you're still young.  Reality will eventually catch you as it does to us all.

We've had really thoughtful libertarians in the past, so it's not just your philosophy that rankles.  It's the lack of basic grounding.  Try some three dimensional thinking.

His is the sort of rhetoric that reminds me of  Jared Loughner -- remember him? He's the nutcase who opened fire on a public meeting of then-Representative Gabby Giffords, putting an end to a promising political career that could have culminated in the Presidency... killing six people and injuring 13 others (including Representative Giffords).

If he is not in need of psychiatric evaluation, he needs to get some real-life experience in work and get a college-level education, ideally in the liberal arts. His deficiencies are obvious. He cannot even judge the reliability of sources. Church Militant? Yuck! One of its articles questioned whether Islam is really a religion, which goes beyond criticism into denial.

Truth be told, kids between 18 and 22 are generally not desirable workers unless their work is strictly repetitive and routine, as on an assembly line or in something like farm labor. If smart they are bulls in a china shop who do not realize that they are potential trouble-makers. Good reason exists for college education, one of which is to tame those bulls without castrating them.

The most important thing that a kid can learn is the capacity for judging the purported facts that they are offered so that (1) they can draw valid conclusions, and (2) learn to recognize the difference between reliable information on the one side and myth, fantasy, deceit, and utter nonsense on the other.

I hope that he starts on a healthy and adequate diet (assuming that vine is male). I have seen several cases of young men committing outrageous outbursts, many of them suggesting anorexia. Anorexic females seem to hurt only themselves, but combine anorexia and testosterone and you may have a dangerous combination.

[pbrower2a]

(06-07-2019, 07:33 AM)vine Wrote: Americans hate freedom with passion.

Not only do Americans want to live in a police state, Americans want the Gestapo to be immune from the law and scream that Americans who attack the Gestapo must get the death penalty.

Get help.

When you think that you are the only sane person in a mental ward you are the craziest person of them all.

[Skabungus]

Public Service Notice.

Regardless of it's age, Vine would appear to be a troll in training. Just a hunch.

Vine, if in fact you are not a troll, I think you should take pbrower2a's advice. Put some original thoughts and opinions down. Formulate some ideas and ask some questions. Debate and
deliberation are much more than cutting and pasting the words of others and issuing sweeping generalizations. I've had some good discussions here, but they have always been the direct result of making the effort to express my own thoughts and opinions as clearly as possible.

[gal39]

I am unable to accept the idea that I should be an obedient subject of a gang of corrupt, unprincipled thugs who pontificate about freedom while enslaving the population.

[David Horn]

(06-07-2019, 10:16 AM)Skabungus Wrote: Public Service Notice.

Regardless of it's age, Vine would appear to be a troll in training.  Just a hunch.

Vine, if in fact you are not a troll, I think you should take pbrower2a's advice.  Put some original thoughts and opinions down.  Formulate some ideas and ask some questions.  Debate and
deliberation are much more than cutting and pasting the words of others and issuing sweeping generalizations.  I've had some good discussions here, but they have always been the direct result of making the effort to express my own thoughts and opinions as clearly as possible.

Well said, er, written.  It's hard to know how many identities are used by one or two people who, having outstayed their welcome, just put on a new set of clothes and carry on.  Vine may well be one of them.  "gal39" certainly is.  Some are worth a comment or two.  Some, but not all.  At least "vine" put the ball on the tee for the rest of us.  For that, (s)he gets a response or two from me.

[pbrower2a]

(06-08-2019, 08:35 PM)Jumpy Wrote: Romans were willing to tolerate any government abuse as long as there were bread and circuses.

Sound familiar?

We aren't the Romans.

We do not have gladiatorial combats or spectacles in which religious dissidents become food for bears and big cats. No, we have not modernized that to spectacles in which pariahs are fed to sharks in aquariums.

[pbrower2a]

(06-12-2019, 09:44 AM)pretty Wrote: Maybe the debt will be paid off by illegal immigrants, technology, a zero percent tax rate, or magic fairy dust, but the reality is that the US debt is increasing constantly, no one cares, and spending more money to reduce the debt will only lead to disaster.

The federal debt ideally buys infrastructure that facilitates taxable, private economic activity or serves as human investment that enhances incomes and makes taxpayers out of people either unemployed or underemployed. Debt is typically the summation of deficits less surpluses; deficits usually accumulate most in times of economic distress.

Maybe we would be wise to not promote speculative booms that lead to financial panics that begin recessions and depressions -- and wars for profits.

Quote:Debt didn’t work out too well for Rome, Germany, Japan, Greece, or Zimbabwe.

Rome -- the problem was the political system that promoted the enrichment of elites at the expense of everyone else including the peonization and enslavement of multitudes. The Roman Empire had no middle class capable of innovation and entrepreneurship that would have allowed the system to advance technologically and broaden its basis of economic activity. The Romans were not that much more primitive than the West in the 1700s. They could have used steam power, water power, paper, and printing -- and they would have advanced to the nineteenth century.

Germany? The hyperinflation that debased German currency resulted from two factors:

(1) deficit financing of the First World War, and
(2) the vindictive treatment of Germany by the victorious powers

War is profitable for warmongers, but destructive to everything else to the extent of its severity. The Allies should have treated the Weimar Republic with more generosity, as it was not going to invade its neighbors and mistreat religious minorities. Hyperinflation required the bankers of the reparations-takers to lend money to Germany, and when that lending stopped, the economy melted down. A people with hurt feelings and a sense of economic loss is always vulnerable to the soothing appeals of a demagogue, and the Antichrist of the 20th century filled that bill.

Japan?

Not so long ago the Japanese were famous for personal thrift. Japan was so pro-thrift that it did not tax interest by savers and bond-holders but did not allow businesses to deduct interest as a cost of doing business. What was the Japanese problem? Speculation. Jap-an went as far as it could with economic development through industry, and the country hit a brick wall in which it could go no further. It could be that there is a natural limit to economic development, and Japan hit that before other countries. Japan had a serious recession in the 1990s that it has yet to get out of.

Greece? Greece is closer to the Middle East in economic development than to Germany or the USA -- and the Greeks started trying to live like Germans or Americans. Bad idea. The country lacks the resources.

Zimbabwe? Print money to cover deficits, print even more money to cover bigger deficits, promote radical social reforms instead of investment, and you start printing this:



It is now worthless as currency. Zimbabwe even abandoned its national currency in favor of hard foreign currency. The moral of every story of hyperinflation is that money is valuable only to the extent that it can buy something. That is the difference between meaningful fiat currency and paper valuable only for what paper can do.

Quote:Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Just as much a hazard is failing to interpret history appropriately. Hitler thought himself an expert.

[Hintergrund]

(06-08-2019, 09:57 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-08-2019, 08:35 PM)Jumpy Wrote: Romans were willing to tolerate any government abuse as long as there were bread and circuses.

Sound familiar?

We aren't the Romans.

We do not have gladiatorial combats or spectacles in which religious dissidents become food for bears and big cats. No, we have not modernized that to spectacles in which pariahs are fed to sharks in aquariums.

Yet.

[Ragnarök_62]

(06-12-2019, 09:05 PM)Hintergrund Wrote:

(06-08-2019, 09:57 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-08-2019, 08:35 PM)Jumpy Wrote: Romans were willing to tolerate any government abuse as long as there were bread and circuses.

Sound familiar?

We aren't the Romans.

We do not have gladiatorial combats or spectacles in which religious dissidents become food for bears and big cats. No, we have not modernized that to spectacles in which pariahs are fed to sharks in aquariums.

Yet.

Close.  NFL Futbah = "gladiatorial combats or spectacles" where the "meat", I mean players end up with  TBI/

[pbrower2a]

(06-12-2019, 09:45 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:

(06-12-2019, 09:05 PM)Hintergrund Wrote:

(06-08-2019, 09:57 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-08-2019, 08:35 PM)Jumpy Wrote: Romans were willing to tolerate any government abuse as long as there were bread and circuses.

Sound familiar?

We aren't the Romans.

We do not have gladiatorial combats or spectacles in which religious dissidents become food for bears and big cats. No, we have not modernized that to spectacles in which pariahs are fed to sharks in aquariums.

Yet.

Close.  NFL Futbah = "gladiatorial combats or spectacles" where the "meat", I mean players end up with  TBI/

If only we could start to appreciate curling.

[pbrower2a]

Golfer --

Did you write anything original, or did you simply cut and paste?

When I cut and paste I identify my sources.

[Kinser79]

(06-08-2019, 09:57 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-08-2019, 08:35 PM)Jumpy Wrote: Romans were willing to tolerate any government abuse as long as there were bread and circuses.

Sound familiar?

We aren't the Romans.

We do not have gladiatorial combats or spectacles in which religious dissidents become food for bears and big cats. No, we have not modernized that to spectacles in which pariahs are fed to sharks in aquariums.

True, in part.  However, those classes most likely to violently rebel (the poorest) tend to get food vouchers and their circuses come in a relatively cheap box.  America is Rome but without the high brow entertainment that the Colosseum provided.

[Hintergrund]

(06-12-2019, 09:45 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:

(06-12-2019, 09:05 PM)Hintergrund Wrote:

(06-08-2019, 09:57 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-08-2019, 08:35 PM)Jumpy Wrote: Romans were willing to tolerate any government abuse as long as there were bread and circuses.

Sound familiar?

We aren't the Romans.

We do not have gladiatorial combats or spectacles in which religious dissidents become food for bears and big cats. No, we have not modernized that to spectacles in which pariahs are fed to sharks in aquariums.

Yet.

Close.  NFL Futbah = "gladiatorial combats or spectacles" where the "meat", I mean players end up with  TBI/

What about Pro Wrestling?

[nvfd]

Wow.

If protesting must be outlawed to prevent broken windows, why not ban airplanes to prevent airplane crashes or ban knives to stop stabbings?

If Americans don't defend free speech, religious freedom, gun rights, freedom from unconstitutional searches and seizures, the right to silence, and the freedom from torture and extrajudicial assassination, what part of the Bill of Rights do they support?

What country is this?