|
10th February 2011, 16:07 | #121 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
10th February 2011, 16:18 | #122 | |
|
Quote:
ie. family in longer term relationship breaks-up and the breadwinner leaves, DPB is used to ensure child(ren) does not suffer = good young girl with no future and not in relationship decides to get pregnant just to get money from DPB = bad |
|
10th February 2011, 16:50 | #123 | |
|
Quote:
And regardless of why someone has kids, the kids exist, and they don't deserve to be punished because of this.
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
10th February 2011, 17:02 | #124 | ||
Stunt Pants
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
||
10th February 2011, 17:25 | #125 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
10th February 2011, 21:14 | #126 | |
Objection!
|
Quote:
|
|
10th February 2011, 22:20 | #127 | |
|
Yeah, but you work in law. I'd be surprised if you didn't.
Quote:
But you're nuts if you think there are "simple facts" about people. I mean, unless you're from the 19th century when people still believed such things.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
10th February 2011, 23:03 | #128 | |
Objection!
|
Quote:
|
|
10th February 2011, 23:32 | #129 |
|
Yeah, about as insightful as pointing out the world is round.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
11th February 2011, 00:12 | #130 | ||
Stunt Pants
|
Quote:
Quote:
BTW, you were actually far more likeable when you were just an annoying born-again. Y'know, before you started all this lofty psychological know-it-all horseshit.
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
||
11th February 2011, 00:57 | #131 | |
Objection!
|
Quote:
|
|
11th February 2011, 01:39 | #132 |
Frag-muff
|
TLNs w 2 Cs FTW
C&C tagteam! |
11th February 2011, 01:42 | #133 |
Stunt Pants
|
wat
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
11th February 2011, 01:42 | #134 |
Frag-muff
|
woo
|
11th February 2011, 01:51 | #135 |
Stunt Pants
|
On drugs again :P
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
11th February 2011, 02:02 | #136 |
Frag-muff
|
Pretty much all of the time at the moment...but yes, just took another dose half an hour ago.
I agree with you about Lightspeed, by the way. I used to suffer pretty serious bouts of intellectual dishonesty myself, until I realised it's more fun to actually learn from discussion, so I'm familiar with it. |
11th February 2011, 09:02 | #137 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
chiQ, I might pay attention to these claims of "intellectual dishonesty", if it weren't rolled out anytime anyone starts ragin'. There's also that people respond to me and my views quite differently in person than on NZG.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
||
11th February 2011, 09:09 | #138 | |
Love, Actuary
|
Quote:
|
|
11th February 2011, 09:45 | #139 |
|
That looks interesting, Richard Wiseman seems a bit like the UK version of Nigel Latta (although his pitching of some psychic TV show at the end of the 2nd Ed. of Into The Darklands kind of put me off him.)
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
11th February 2011, 10:00 | #140 |
|
Although, I don't know why you think I should read it in context of what you quoted.
I mean, what would you think in my situation? For example, I find it easy to obtain and hold down jobs of a technical and interpersonal nature and I get on well with work colleagues. I have close friends from a variety of backgrounds and disciplines, such as academia, medicine, psychology, theology, philosophy as well as more typical jobs such as working with kids, technology, animals, food, etc. Friends who are willing to give me feedback on both my strengths and my weaknesses. Also, I'm quite successful, both through grades and feedback, in a challenging field of study that requires deep self-reflection and personal resilience. Oh, and a few people in an Internet forum think I'm an arsehole.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
11th February 2011, 10:44 | #141 | |
Frag-muff
|
Quote:
|
|
11th February 2011, 12:30 | #142 | |
|
Quote:
Shame on you for not being intelligent enough to suggest punishing kids for their parents mistakes. Tisk Tisk.
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
11th February 2011, 13:21 | #143 | |
|
and now back to the channel at hand
Quote:
and to your first paragraph, how do you know this is a bit of a myth? do you work in the area of social welfare? i ask because like any reasonable person, you have made assumptions that people put all the money from the DPB into raising a child. from anectodal evidence in the media this does not seem to be the case. so why wouldn't a irresponsible person get pregnant on purpose to get additional income that is not spent on the child(ren)? |
|
11th February 2011, 13:58 | #144 | ||
Stunt Pants
|
Wow, real weak way to try to back up your argument. Link 1, some clown accuses of of a semantic argument. Interesting thing in that - you know, when you add this important thing called context - is that I wasn't the one trying to hide behind the twisting meanings of words as a defense. Link 2, nothing at all whatsoever to do with semantics. Irrelevant link. Lolspeed fails.
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
||
11th February 2011, 15:01 | #145 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
The response to legislation which provides incentives and removed some barriers to work (family tax credit, reduced cost of childcare etc) shows that these mothers do want to work. This research has a lot of findings which support this, particularly the part on "Impact on numbers of sole parents receiving benefit" http://www.ird.govt.nz/aboutir/repor...e-parents.html
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. Last edited by fixed_truth : 11th February 2011 at 15:03. |
||
11th February 2011, 15:56 | #146 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
11th February 2011, 16:04 | #147 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
11th February 2011, 16:58 | #148 | |
Frag-muff
|
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_dishonesty |
|
11th February 2011, 17:15 | #149 |
|
"If a person is aware of the evidence and agrees with the conclusion it portends, yet advocates a contradictory view, they commit intellectual dishonesty."
That's what you think I do?
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
11th February 2011, 17:17 | #150 | ||
Stunt Pants
|
Quote:
Quote:
Anyway, I think we're done here now. You've been reduced to your usual pithy-remarks-devoid-of-any-real-meaning-or-substance which you always offer up when you've got no real reply.
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
||
11th February 2011, 17:18 | #151 | |
Stunt Pants
|
Quote:
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
|
11th February 2011, 17:23 | #152 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
11th February 2011, 17:37 | #153 |
Stunt Pants
|
No, if you think I'm talking shit, then you just call me a liar. I know I'm not intellectually honest - it's not my style. OTOH, it's pretty much how you construct every argument of yours.
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
11th February 2011, 17:43 | #154 |
|
Well, this is the only place I'm getting that feedback.
And it only seems certain kinds of discussions result in that feedback. AND only in discussions with a handful of people.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. Last edited by Lightspeed : 11th February 2011 at 17:46. |
11th February 2011, 17:56 | #155 |
Frag-muff
|
I don't think it's the sort of thing people will generally tell you. It's the sort of thing that people just keep to themselves, I think.
I've been intellectually dishonest in a fairly blatant way, and nobody has ever told me so. I know people who are or have been. I've never told them so until you last night. Odds are it's coming to you from here out of exasperation. My reason for coming out and stating my agreement with CCS is I really had hoped you'd take it on board and adjust your approach to discussions with others. CCS is brutal enough, socially, to come out and say what he thinks, where others wouldn't. I don't think it's malice or churlishness, though I do think you've annoyed him. |
11th February 2011, 18:17 | #156 |
|
Yeah, that's one possibility. Are you willing to consider the other? Or perhaps something inbetween?
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
11th February 2011, 18:25 | #157 |
Frag-muff
|
Not with regard to why I think you're intellectually dishonest, no. I'm very clear on the process I went through to form that opinion. With regard to why other people might also consider you intellectually dishonest, certainly.
|
11th February 2011, 18:26 | #158 | |
|
One thing I'll admit to is relating to this forum as I would a psychopath. That is I can communicate as I would with anyone, however with no vulnerability, limited empathy. Because psychopaths burn that shit up and so does NZG.
Quote:
Perhaps I do have friends who would tell me (they fuckin' tell me everything else). Perhaps you're wrong. Or more likely something inbetween. Perhaps sometimes I am intellectually dishonest, and sometimes I just piss you off. I can't believe that after a decade on NZG, that all the heated arguments I've been in, all the fucking bullshit between CCS and I, that it all just boils down to me being intellectually dishonest. I just don't think I'm that special.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. Last edited by Lightspeed : 11th February 2011 at 18:30. |
|
11th February 2011, 18:34 | #159 |
Frag-muff
|
It would be hard to accept that explanation, because I calmly and rationally consider you to be intellectually dishonest myself, but I naturally can't rule out your explanation, because I don't know your friends or your relationship with them.
Considering your explanation of why your friends haven't told you they think you're intellectually dishonest does raise the spectre of further alternatives, of course, and they're unflattering, but we can stick with the those each of us has suggested if you prefer, just to clinch the dishonesty |
11th February 2011, 18:41 | #160 |
|
Just for the record, I thought he was intellectually dishonest way before it was trendy.
__________________
"I choose to believe what I was programmed to believe!" |