$15 minimum wage...I know I'm poking the bear, but...

[Kheldarson]

Is that relevant? Condescension is condescension, is it not?

You’re the one in the debate. It's your behavior we're responding to, not unnamed others. So, yes, it is relevant.

I don't make policy. Or law.

And? Again, you are the one debating. You are the one whose position and knowledge are being challenged. You can’t say "well, I don’t have to know or learn anything because X and Y don't on the same topic". Then you're not debating; you're being a troll.

Quit hiding behind your smokescreen.

[Rapscallion]

And? Again, you are the one debating. You are the one whose position and knowledge are being challenged. You can’t say "well, I don’t have to know or learn anything because X and Y don't on the same topic". Then you're not debating; you're being a troll.

Quit hiding behind your smokescreen.

Dunno if it's trolling. Large swathes of politics these days are defined by claims of "The other lot are worse than we could ever be". Lacks substance, but looks very familiar here.

Rapscallion

[Canarr]

Is that relevant? Condescension is condescension, is it not?

Well, you're the one trying to excuse your condescension with someone else's. Not the other way around.

[mjr]

You’re the one in the debate. It's your behavior we're responding to, not unnamed others. So, yes, it is relevant.

I disagree, obviously. If you really look at and analyze what politicians say (even politicians whose political views you share), you'll find condescension. I guess it's a matter of perspective. If you agree with what a politician says, it's not condescension I guess.

And? Again, you are the one debating. You are the one whose position and knowledge are being challenged.

Ok, but again: How does my knowledge on the topic differ from that of policymakers? How does it differ from those who post on here? The knowledge and position of others is brought up frequently in debates. I'm not worried about it.

You can’t say "well, I don’t have to know or learn anything because X and Y don't on the same topic". Then you're not debating; you're being a troll.

That's not what I said, at all. I'm merely pointing out that it's likely that decision makers and policy makers have no more knowledge on this than I (or any of you) do. Remember John Edwards and the $400 haircut? People tried to make excuses for him ("Oh, he needed to get a $400 haircut.").

[mjr]

Well, you're the one trying to excuse your condescension with someone else's. Not the other way around.

No, not really. Unless you consider "pointing it out" to be "excusing".

[Canarr]

No, not really. Unless you consider "pointing it out" to be "excusing".

Yes, really. When GK accused you of condescension, you basically just pointed out: "Well, they do it, too!"

[Kheldarson]

Ok, but again: How does my knowledge on the topic differ from that of policymakers? How does it differ from those who post on here? The knowledge and position of others is brought up frequently in debates. I'm not worried about it.

Because you're the one debating. When someone says that you don't know X on any topic, the appropriate response is to either prove your knowledge or admit you didn’t know and go forth and learn. That's what we all do here. That's why we post links and figures: we're proving our positions through our knowledge and research.

Saying that "Well person Y who's not debating doesn't know it so I don't need to either" simply shows that you have no intention to debate, learn, or actually participate in the process. You seem to expect to come in, lay down your unsupported pearls of wisdom, and have us swallow them.

Prove your position through fact and logic. Pointing out how non-debaters don't know these things simply proves your own ignorance and desire to remain ignorant.

Also, stop with the blanket statements. There's actually nobody in office I agree with 100%, so, yes, condescension from those in office pisses me off too. Further, just because somebody disagrees with you doesn't mean they're automatically your polar opposite. There are gradations in opinion and political spectrum.

[s_stabeler]

there's also the fact that someone being condescending doesn't mean they are wrong...

[BlaqueKatt]

Saying that "Well person Y who's not debating doesn't know it so I don't need to either" simply shows that you have no intention to debate, learn, or actually participate in the process. You seem to expect to come in, lay down your unsupported pearls of wisdom, and have us swallow them.

Prove your position through fact and logic. Pointing out how non-debaters don't know these things simply proves your own ignorance and desire to remain ignorant.

and it's a logical fallacy known as "tu quoque", not an argument.

[Rageaholic]

and it's a logical fallacy known as "tu quoque", not an argument.

Yeah, and it's not even a good one as it provides no examples. Just "well they do it too".

[mjr]

Yes, really. When GK accused you of condescension, you basically just pointed out: "Well, they do it, too!"

That assertion is not incorrect. And it's not like any of you have ever been condescending toward those you disagree with.

[mjr]

Also, stop with the blanket statements.

Ha ha ha ha!! That's RICH!!!

[mjr]

Prove your position through fact and logic.

Fact: None of you know as much about this as you think you do. NONE of you.

[Canarr]

That assertion is not incorrect. And it's not like any of you have ever been condescending toward those you disagree with.

That assertion is also not incorrect. But you're still excusing your behavior with "Others do it, too!"

[Kheldarson]

Fact: None of you know as much about this as you think you do. NONE of you.

Yes, and? We're providing a variety of links, anecdotes, and statistics from a large pool of information to make our point. You point to politicians and say "well, that's what they say" or "they don't get it either". Just because we don't have all the facts doesn’t mean we can't make arguments about the facts we do have. But we do have a requirement to take new facts and data that's presented and evaluate our arguments against such facts and either change our arguments or show why the new source is incorrect.

You seem incapable of doing the last part because every time you're challenged you deflect and point to others, as evidenced by even this response to me. It's rather pitiable.