The Patient Protection and the Affordable Care Act

  • Welcome to Skyrim Forums! Register now to participate using the 'Sign Up' button on the right. You may now register with your Facebook or Steam account!

JoeReese

Well-Known Member
I could do that too, from now on. I Keep repeating why I think I am right without coming up with facts.

I'm not telling you I'm right. I'm telling you too look for yourself and make the decision with neutral points of reference. I do, of course, inject my opinion and try to get people to see what I see, but who doesn't do that? But what I also do, you seem to miss, is provide you with ways to look it up for yourself. This is key, not taking my word for it.

As far as the age and experience "card" goes, I'm sorry you think it's bogus, but there is a certain understanding that comes with having done things, which does not come with having heard, or read, about them. The best I can tell you there is that, if I'm wrong about that, you can feel free to remind me so in 20 years.
 

Anouck

Queen of Procrastination
Stop listening to professors, or newspaper reporters' quotes from professors, and start looking for yourself.

"stop listening to intellectuals and people who studied for subjects like this". Yeah, indeed. Stop listening to people who did hours and hours of research and who studied on this subject and just think that your own opinion is the good one without ever considering opposite views.

Yes, precisely, because as history has shown us, time and time again, people who have done hours and hours of research only may or may not be telling us the truth of what they've learned, and you must be able to tell the difference or you will just fall into the herd as they shape it. I'm not saying don't hear them, but don't listen to them. In other words, if someone does hours and hours of research and then tells you the moon is made of green cheese, it may not be. "Facts" are great, when they are actually facts, but how many in this world are giving you the straight facts, even those who are bound, sworn, or otherwise responsible to do just that?

Do your own research, before you accept anybody else's research as fact. They may very well be the expert, but that doesn't make them truthful. Open eyes.

I did my own research, but didn't feel like quoting the process in every sb post. I try to keep it short and to the point. Otherwise the post would be 3 times as long and lose his essence because you're not even reading my arguments but all the sources and my long thought process that led me to them.
All the other facts mentioned by republicans in this thread, weren't questioned. As soon as it is the opposition it is suspicious and should be treated like a potential lie. I fully agree that we should stay objective and should not believe everything that is said, but you can't use objectivity as a back up argument against every fact or article you can't prove wrong.
 

Anouck

Queen of Procrastination
As far as the age and experience "card" goes, I'm sorry you think it's bogus, but there is a certain understanding that comes with having done things, which does not come with having heard, or read, about them. The best I can tell you there is that, if I'm wrong about that, you can feel free to remind me so in 20 years.

As I said in my posts, adults have more life experience and knowledge in general, and it is a very understandable argument. I just think it is better to respond to someone else's arguments instead of pulling what I called "the adult card". It is like saying "I am right because I am the teacher". Of course the teacher knows it better, but this won't teach me anything. In the shoutbox when we were having an argument you also said that "I was a 17 year old who didn't know anything about paying taxes", while I have a long personal story to prove you I do. If there are errors in my posts or my arguments, please tackle them. The age/experience thing can be a good argument, but not always.

Why? Because I am surrounded by people your age. And I know a lot of people in the USA of your age. And they too have life experience. And guess what, they have a different opinion. They would disagree with you. That shows that, even though experience is very important, it is not a wild card to being right, because others with similar intelligence and experience feel different.
 

JoeReese

Well-Known Member
To put a point on that, Ano, and some food for thought...your pie charts and graphs, which you use as fact. Where did they come from? Who wrote them? Whose opinion are you citing, and were they constructed with raw data, or have they had a spin put on them?

My post about the increase in tax liability, for example, was not supported by a graph I made or took from a newspaper. It's not this reporter's spin, or that economist's spin, it is a direct link to this year's tax preparation chart, from the IRS. It is the tool provided by the government, for individual taxpayers to compute their estimated tax liability.

When I cite my source for the wording of a bill, I refer people to the Library of Congress records, what used to be called THOMAS. What more factual basis can I give you than telling you where you can read, verbatim, the full text of these bills as recorded by the official recorders of Congress? There is no expert's explanation, opinion, or spin. It is raw information. "Look for yourself." What more could you want?
 

DrunkenMage

Intoxicated Arch-Mage
Wisdom comes not from age, but from knowledge. To say one is wise because they are older does not make it so, a fourteen year old can be more wise than a forty year old. One needs to simply look through history and even our modern times to see, age does not always grant wisdom. Nor does being young mean ignorance.

To say, I am older therefor I am more wise is not the sign of wisdom, but the sign of arrogance. Wisdom comes from the knowledge at hand, not the years spent on this earth. If it was the other way around, then we wouldn't have so many problems in our society and in our governments.

If this was the case, then if your President is older than you. Do not question them, for they know more.
 

Anouck

Queen of Procrastination
To put a point on that, Ano, and some food for thought...your pie charts and graphs, which you use as fact. Where did they come from? Who wrote them? Whose opinion are you citing, and were they constructed with raw data, or have they had a spin put on them?

My post about the increase in tax liability, for example, was not supported by a graph I made or took from a newspaper. It's not this reporter's spin, or that economist's spin, it is a direct link to this year's tax preparation chart, from the IRS. It is the tool provided by the government, for individual taxpayers to compute their estimated tax liability.

When I cite my source for the wording of a bill, I refer people to the Library of Congress records, what used to be called THOMAS. What more factual basis can I give you than telling you where you can read, verbatim, the full text of these bills as recorded by the official recorders of Congress? There is no expert's explanation, opinion, or spin. It is raw information. "Look for yourself." What more could you want?

I did read what you showed me. I had to do quite some reading on other website to learn what the terms meant.

About the pies and graphs I used: they did come from somewhere. And I did look for back up before posting them. However, when I post something on a forum I don't save my arguments, its back up and the sources in a document. If you want to know where I got it from, I am afraid you have to ask me that around the time I post them.
 

JoeReese

Well-Known Member
I'm fine with being considered arrogant, Mage, and what you say has some merit, but it is also not absolute. The wisdom comes with experience, which cannot be shortcut effectively, and so requires age. You are right, however, in the sense that just making it a certain number of years does not mean you have experienced the things needed to be wise to a certain subject.

That being said, can you fault the wisdom in steering people toward the actual source, rather than some reporter's version of the source? You, if you recall, only too happily express your knowledge of things like the Patriot act. Have you read it, or have your read someone's summary of it? If you have made your decision based on a news article, a book, or someone else's understanding of the law, which I suspect to be the case as your response to my THOMAS question was a resounding "huh?", then you are acting unwisely, regardless of your age.
 

JoeReese

Well-Known Member
To put a point on that, Ano, and some food for thought...your pie charts and graphs, which you use as fact. Where did they come from? Who wrote them? Whose opinion are you citing, and were they constructed with raw data, or have they had a spin put on them?

My post about the increase in tax liability, for example, was not supported by a graph I made or took from a newspaper. It's not this reporter's spin, or that economist's spin, it is a direct link to this year's tax preparation chart, from the IRS. It is the tool provided by the government, for individual taxpayers to compute their estimated tax liability.

When I cite my source for the wording of a bill, I refer people to the Library of Congress records, what used to be called THOMAS. What more factual basis can I give you than telling you where you can read, verbatim, the full text of these bills as recorded by the official recorders of Congress? There is no expert's explanation, opinion, or spin. It is raw information. "Look for yourself." What more could you want?

I did read what you showed me. I had to do quite some reading on other website to learn what the terms meant.

About the pies and graphs I used: they did come from somewhere. And I did look for back up before posting them. However, when I post something on a forum I don't save my arguments, its back up and the sources in a document. If you want to know where I got it from, I am afraid you have to ask me that around the time I post them.

Verified but source forgotten. I understand completely. ;)
 

Anouck

Queen of Procrastination
To put a point on that, Ano, and some food for thought...your pie charts and graphs, which you use as fact. Where did they come from? Who wrote them? Whose opinion are you citing, and were they constructed with raw data, or have they had a spin put on them?

My post about the increase in tax liability, for example, was not supported by a graph I made or took from a newspaper. It's not this reporter's spin, or that economist's spin, it is a direct link to this year's tax preparation chart, from the IRS. It is the tool provided by the government, for individual taxpayers to compute their estimated tax liability.

When I cite my source for the wording of a bill, I refer people to the Library of Congress records, what used to be called THOMAS. What more factual basis can I give you than telling you where you can read, verbatim, the full text of these bills as recorded by the official recorders of Congress? There is no expert's explanation, opinion, or spin. It is raw information. "Look for yourself." What more could you want?

I did read what you showed me. I had to do quite some reading on other website to learn what the terms meant.

About the pies and graphs I used: they did come from somewhere. And I did look for back up before posting them. However, when I post something on a forum I don't save my arguments, its back up and the sources in a document. If you want to know where I got it from, I am afraid you have to ask me that around the time I post them.

Verified but source forgotten. I understand completely. ;)

I wonder if the people who used facts in this thread saved them on their pc, including the source, author and all the back up they could find. There were a few graphs that were from pretty obvious websites, and I can probably find them back. But no, not everything. Next time when I use facts in a post instead of completely ignoring it people could ask me about it so I can show them?
 

PrisonerLizzie

Well-Known Member
I did read what you showed me. I had to do quite some reading on other website to learn what the terms meant.

About the pies and graphs I used: they did come from somewhere. And I did look for back up before posting them. However, when I post something on a forum I don't save my arguments, its back up and the sources in a document. If you want to know where I got it from, I am afraid you have to ask me that around the time I post them.

Verified but source forgotten. I understand completely. ;)

I wonder if the people who used facts in this thread saved them on their pc, including the source, author and all the back up they could find. There were a few graphs that were from pretty obvious websites, and I can probably find them back. But no, not everything. Next time when I use facts in a post instead of completely ignoring it people could ask me about it so I can show them?
Or you could just embed your links....
 

Anouck

Queen of Procrastination
Verified but source forgotten. I understand completely. ;)

I wonder if the people who used facts in this thread saved them on their pc, including the source, author and all the back up they could find. There were a few graphs that were from pretty obvious websites, and I can probably find them back. But no, not everything. Next time when I use facts in a post instead of completely ignoring it people could ask me about it so I can show them?
Or you could just embed your links....

You don't add anything new. People asked for the source, and I said why I can't find them back now. So I don't see your point.

"I could've just", yes.
Ask me that after my post next time, not a week later so I can not retrieve the sources. Like I already said in the post you quoted so I don't really see your point.
Also, the facts you guys used weren't questioned either.
 

PrisonerLizzie

Well-Known Member
I wonder if the people who used facts in this thread saved them on their pc, including the source, author and all the back up they could find. There were a few graphs that were from pretty obvious websites, and I can probably find them back. But no, not everything. Next time when I use facts in a post instead of completely ignoring it people could ask me about it so I can show them?
Or you could just embed your links....

You don't add anything new. People asked for the source, and I said why I can't find them back now. So I don't see your point.

"I could've just", yes.
Ask me that after my post next time, not a week later so I can not retrieve the sources. Like I already said in the post you quoted so I don't really see your point.
Also, the facts you guys used weren't questioned either.
It was a suggestion so that people don't have to track you down and bother you just to find out if you are making things up or not
 

Anouck

Queen of Procrastination
Or you could just embed your links....

You don't add anything new. People asked for the source, and I said why I can't find them back now. So I don't see your point.

"I could've just", yes.
Ask me that after my post next time, not a week later so I can not retrieve the sources. Like I already said in the post you quoted so I don't really see your point.
Also, the facts you guys used weren't questioned either.
It was a suggestion so that people don't have to track you down and bother you just to find out if you are making things up or not

Look, if you say the website I use could not be trustworthy, I see your point. But completely assuming I "made it up" I find disrespectful. I know both you and Joe and I trust you enough to assume you wouldn't do something childish like that. Also, if you need to make up evidence your cause is apparently so weak that there is no back up for it whatsoever. And I have better stuff to do than making stuff up for a thread on the Skyrim forums.

You can talk about what I could've done... I could do the same thing. Because for some reason only the facts used by the opposition need to be checked?

Like I said: next time just ask me as soon as you read the post. Don't wait a week because now I most likely won't be able to retrieve it anymore.
 

JoeReese

Well-Known Member
Oh Ano...

ALL facts need to be checked, before they can be determined to BE facts. It sucks, but that's just how it is. As I said before, I don't want you to take my word for it, as I'm not taking the word of anybody else. I've been down that road too many times, and yes, sometimes things do turn out to be true, but it's astounding how often they do not.

That being said, that is the precise reason I try to post the most neutral and objective source material I can. Don't think anybody is singling you out, calling Ano a liar. It's quite different than saying "Trust no one, ever," which is what I'm saying.

Minor things, minimal potential loss, meh...no big deal, but when it comes to major decisions, including deciding who will make decisions which will affect you and those you love, always verify...always.
 

DrunkenMage

Intoxicated Arch-Mage
Considering you Americans pay for alien invasion Pentagon defense plans and zombie outbreak quarantine CDC plans. You'd think health care would cause less resistance.

Oh Ano...

ALL facts need to be checked, before they can be determined to BE facts. It sucks, but that's just how it is. As I said before, I don't want you to take my word for it, as I'm not taking the word of anybody else. I've been down that road too many times, and yes, sometimes things do turn out to be true, but it's astounding how often they do not.

That being said, that is the precise reason I try to post the most neutral and objective source material I can. Don't think anybody is singling you out, calling Ano a liar. It's quite different than saying "Trust no one, ever," which is what I'm saying.

Minor things, minimal potential loss, meh...no big deal, but when it comes to major decisions, including deciding who will make decisions which will affect you and those you love, always verify...always.

Her facts come from Joseph Stiglitz. He is a recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences and the John Bates Clark Medal. He is a former senior vice president and chief economist of the World Bank, and is a former member, and Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers.

Though you don't trust anyone, so what would a leading economist, professor and noble prize winner know about anything... :rolleyes:

All facts can be checked, but a problem doing that with you is that you don't trust anyone. So you can always decide to study economics, get a degree and such. The point of having experts who study in a field of expertise is to use their advise. You can't pick and choose because you don't like the facts. I have debated a fair few Republicans in other threads, I know that if something they don't like appears they will claim it is false.

But aye, it's expected when debating a party that is funded by the Tobacco Company. Guess they didn't like the Dems pushing tougher indoor smoking laws and trying to raise taxes on the Tobacco companies.
 

DrunkenMage

Intoxicated Arch-Mage
Or you could just embed your links....

Source is known.

I had a read and saw you prefer 'natural healing' over mainstream medicine, what do you mean by that exactly?

What is mainstream medicine? Majority of medicine traces it's roots from nature, others use the body's own defense system to create immunity to other issues. I may be confused but when you say mainstream I get the image of something like "That music is too mainstream." Medicine will always advance as science evolves, if something can save your life or your family's life would you deny it for being 'too mainstream'?
 

Anouck

Queen of Procrastination
Oh Ano...

ALL facts need to be checked, before they can be determined to BE facts. It sucks, but that's just how it is. As I said before, I don't want you to take my word for it, as I'm not taking the word of anybody else. I've been down that road too many times, and yes, sometimes things do turn out to be true, but it's astounding how often they do not.

That being said, that is the precise reason I try to post the most neutral and objective source material I can. Don't think anybody is singling you out, calling Ano a liar. It's quite different than saying "Trust no one, ever," which is what I'm saying.

Exactly, that is what I said. All facts need to be checked, but for some reason only the facts of the opposition get questioned by you.
I wasn't debating the 'fact check' thing at all. What I replied to, is that she wanted to check the fact to make sure I wasn't making stuff up. I mean, I know websites provide false information all the time. So if that is why you need a link; sure.
But I have better things to do than making up false graphs and pies. If I don't have enough information about a subject I don't participate in the debate. If you want links so you can check the websites, I make sure I post them next time. But please don't ask for sources just to check if I am not lying. I talked to the two of you before (seems like us 3 are the only ones left in the thread) and I don't see why I would accuse anybody of making up stuff.
And I know I am not being singled out, but I wonder why we'd be so paranoia. It is a political thread on a Skyrim forum. I talked to you two before. I have no reason to 'trust no one, ever'
 

PrisonerLizzie

Well-Known Member
Or you could just embed your links....

Source is known.

I had a read and saw you prefer 'natural healing' over mainstream medicine, what do you mean by that exactly?

What is mainstream medicine? Majority of medicine traces it's roots from nature, others use the body's own defense system to create immunity to other issues. I may be confused but when you say mainstream I get the image of something like "That music is too mainstream." Medicine will always advance as science evolves, if something can save your life or your family's life would you deny it for being 'too mainstream'?

I did not nor have I ever stated that I reject mainstream medicine, just that I prefer to treat colds, aches, pains etc in a way that involves diet, exercise, proper rest and herbs when needed. So what is your point?
 

Recent chat visitors

Latest posts

Top