Steve Kluesner wrote:I am trying to stay out of this but I have to jump in here.......
too is not the same as to
sense is not the same a since
Jeff Cavanaugh wrote:Steve Kluesner wrote:I am trying to stay out of this but I have to jump in here.......
too is not the same as to
sense is not the same a since
"a" is not the same as "as."
Adriel Gray wrote:Fine... Here is your point by point retort. I hope it is everything you wanted it to be... How I slaved for you:
Doug Davis wrote:Adriel Gray wrote:Fine... Here is your point by point retort. I hope it is everything you wanted it to be... How I slaved for you:
Nope its was mostly a long winded personal attack and screed against me, without any real effort put into stating your opinion and then supporting it with referenced published material.
Given you supposedly have a philosophy degree I expected better internet trolling than that. Work harder.
I will give you 4 out of 10 due to length though.
Mark R. wrote:Doug Davis wrote:Adriel Gray wrote:Fine... Here is your point by point retort. I hope it is everything you wanted it to be... How I slaved for you:
Nope its was mostly a long winded personal attack and screed against me, without any real effort put into stating your opinion and then supporting it with referenced published material.
Given you supposedly have a philosophy degree I expected better internet trolling than that. Work harder.
I will give you 4 out of 10 due to length though.
Doug, I think that you are not without blame as far as personal attacks in this thread go either. It's a topic that many people have very strong feelings about and many of them don't even want to listen to what the other side has to say which was certainly the case many times in this thread.
Quoting sources and statistics for this topics is not needed for me, I live in the real world
Doug Davis wrote:
I agree.
But when I try to divorce politics from it or uninformed opinion (which is not the same as an intelligent well thought out and researched opinion)...I get people posting things like:Quoting sources and statistics for this topics is not needed for me, I live in the real world
Which means I might as well be trying to debate science with people who believe the Earth is 6,000 years old or climate change deniers or 911 truthers, as they dont care whether or not their opinion actually has any basis in fact or reality. This is math and science we are trying to discuss, not faith and religion. But without facts and research, people have essentially turned an economics debate into a religious one with nothing more than their "faith" to go on.
ie "This is what I believe to be true and nothing you show me or tell me will dissuade from that belief."
And yes that people can be so obstinate infuriates me to no end.
It would be incredibly helpful if they would write at the beginning of their post:
"This is an un-researched opinion based all on conjecture and anecdotal evidence. Nor do I have any desire to become better informed in the process. I just want to post."
Then I could safely ignore it.
TP Lowe wrote:I just respectfully disagree with Rick. Economics studies have significant values in the real world, as well, in so many nonpolitical settings I can't begin to describe them. I'm not particularly political but I look at macroeconomic data daily in my work. I couldn't care less how either party spins the data, I use it in its raw form to do good work for my clients.
Rick Boman wrote:I can use conjecture as I see fit, since all you have been talking about is theories and ideas, while what I was referring to was real world results that I have personally witnessed. As to un-researched opinions, guess what? They are opinions I have, not over-researched, so called facts that have just as many studies to debunk whichever side you take.
...
Just because you believe yourself to be an economics expert should in no way impede my right to post what I witness everyday. All your studies and sources don't matter to me because I have personal experiences that contradict what your sources are saying. My life experience is my research, which is conducted by me. Your research was done by others.
Rick Boman wrote:The problem is that you aren't debating facts or science, you are debating economics, other peoples interpretations of certain results.
Doug Davis wrote:Rick Boman wrote:The problem is that you aren't debating facts or science, you are debating economics, other peoples interpretations of certain results.
Firstly, Im sorry my post wasnt meant as an attack or insult.
Secondly, do you see your line I quoted above? What exactly do you think science is? Honestly?
Its the exact same thing.
You propose a hypothesis.
You test your hypothesis and collect data.
You see if the hypothesis is supported by the data and what the outcome was.
You publish the results for peer review.
Economists who work in academia do essentially the same thing.
Are there some who work in biased think tanks, or for specific political parties? Sure, then we rule them out as they have an obvious bias. Same as the doctor working for the chemical manufacturer telling you this insecticide is safe to eat on your apples.
Are there some who publish work on hypothetical theories, which havent or cant be tested? Just like theoretical physics? Yes, then we rule them out as well.
And youre right, your experience is valuable. Personal experience can give us amazing insights but can also lead us to have blinders on. And in your first post for better or worse, your opening statement made you sound very dismissive of any research and close minded in what that research may say. If thats not true, then we just had a miscommunication.
Rick Boman wrote:or maybe it is how Economics is reported.
Maybe point me to resources and experts that are unbiased, truly unbiased, and I will listen.
I am very right of center in my views, but I do keep my mind open.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Sallie P. and 28 guests