this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
140 points (89.3% liked)

News

35749 readers
2154 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Paragraph 1: argument from authority and questioning my competency.

Paragraph 2: conceding part of the argument to reframe it

Paragraph 3: an appeal to emotion and rewriting history

Paragraph 4: attempt to distract with jargon

Yeah I am not buying what you are selling. Economists consistently support the views of the people who are paying them, consistently make predictions that do not happen, and consistently ignore real world data that goes against what they laughably call theories.

All attempts to reframe, reorient, distract, gatekeep, and every sorta rhetoric tricks will not remove the facts that I have stated. But hey go ahead and prove me wrong, go find me someone employed at Goldman Sachs with an econ degree who for years has stated that the bailouts were a bad idea. Go ahead and find me a government economist who supports student loan amnesty. I will lend you my lantern to find the one honest economists.

We made god in our image, the economist god is homo economis. A being whose integrity is bought for pennies. That says all you really need to know.

[–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Paragraph 1: argument from authority and questioning my competency.

  • no, asking if you have a basic knowledge of what you are arguing and what we can actually discuss. Appears not.

Paragraph 2: conceding part of the argument to reframe it

  • finding common ground to discuss a way forward and being aware of limitations.

Paragraph 3: an appeal to emotion and rewriting history

  • logical explanation of what was done and why, using known theory. See point 1

Paragraph 4: attempt to distract with jargon

  • this is first three weeks of first year economics. See point 1.

Yeah I am not buying what you are selling. Economists consistently support the views of the people who are paying them, consistently make predictions that do not happen, and consistently ignore real world data that goes against what they laughably call theories.

  • you have literally seen the change in inflation rates being implemented in order to starve of recession and keep people employed. First 3 weeks of economics.

All attempts to reframe, reorient, distract, gatekeep, and every sorta rhetoric tricks will not remove the facts that I have stated. But hey go ahead and prove me wrong, go find me someone employed at Goldman Sachs with an econ degree who for years has stated that the bailouts were a bad idea. Go ahead and find me a government economist who supports student loan amnesty. I will lend you my lantern to find the one honest economists.

  • you've discussed multiple inconsistencies and distractions in mine, yet through out your have thrown out personal beliefs and unrealistic possibilities with no evidence behind you.

We made god in our image, the economist god is homo economis. A being whose integrity is bought for pennies. That says all you really need to know.

  • see point above. For the record, im not a paid economists so throw what I'm paid to do out of the equation.