Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
Why would you assume I didn't read it?

I read the links you posted, as well.
Obviously, I'm against stealing.
You had me fooled. You blew my point off as if I was using sensational language to say what you now say is theft.

If a person steals from their employer by giving away free goods, then that's a person who is stealing, too. If that was your whole point, then I agree that it's bad.
No, that's not my point. Tell me what my point is.

Where you lose me is that you're making a direct comparison between actual, quantifiable theft by individuals and a bureaucratic program funded by taxation. These are very different things.
Different topic.

My point is that your story is an anecdote which explains why you feel the way to do (right now).
It's not evidence.
It is not convincing or persuasive.
I link you to a economics professor who has been teaching for a few decades. He used an anecdote merely as an illustration for a broader issue that has been established before that anecdote existed. I then use that to explore our specific topic, and like you have with the last several issues, you just seem to brush it off without considering it more deeply.

self respect? I'm baffled as to what this has to do with anything. It seems like a personal attack.
I am disappoint.

You couldn't have a more patient student. Yet, many of the questions I ask are met with a stark lack of data and emotionally loaded assumptions. Words and ideas have been attributed to me which I have not said and do not espouse. These things make the learning process slower and more difficult.
Then stop portraying such belying behavior. There is virtually no direct evidence of anything in macro. Data-mining is virtually worthless in macro. You say I'm not bringing you worthwhile things, yet when I do it seems you hop to disagreement regardless. Maybe I'm the asshole here, but the types of things you're saying suggest you're not putting much effort into considering the arguments.