Obelix Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 Go ahead if you want to show how the Tory proves that it's all about meritocracy and nowt to do with privilege and inherited wealth. Best of luck! Whats the matter did the nasty tory call you names or something? The standard rallying cry of the left has always been we didn't get <whatever> in response to their own failings. It's been the case for decades and it'll never change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Arctor Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 Whats the matter did the nasty tory call you names or something? The standard rallying cry of the left has always been we didn't get <whatever> in response to their own failings. It's been the case for decades and it'll never change. Great standard of argument there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 It's on the same level as yours. When you actually put an argument up and need it refuting I'll do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Arctor Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 It's on the same level as yours. When you actually put an argument up and need it refuting I'll do so. Ok. Wanting to increase the greater good by ensuring everyone has a decent income, and proposing to do this by not allowing a minority of people to become super rich, does not necessarily involve feelings of envy but can be based on ideas of social justice. Which I've already essentially said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 And you are wrong. As I said. You want to take legitamatly earnt monies from someone and give it to others because you dont think they should be allowed to have it. Regardless of how you wish to dress that up it's envy of someone elses success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Arctor Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 And you are wrong. As I said. You want to take legitamatly earnt monies from someone and give it to others because you dont think they should be allowed to have it. Regardless of how you wish to dress that up it's envy of someone elses success. Great, you say put an argument up, so I put an argument up and your great refutation is: "You're wrong". You're wasting my time now. Prove that it's logically necessary that wanting everyone to have enough involves envy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 Post #16. Come back when youve logically refuted that argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Arctor Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 Post #16. Come back when youve logically refuted that argument. Yep, easy. You pointed out that I wanted wealth redistributed. Correct. You then made a leap of logic to assert that this must be due to envy. That is supposition. You need to show how a desire to redistribute wealth must result from envy. You haven't done and I don't think you can. I don't think you know what a logical necessity is. Until you've answered that your argument is just so much supposition. I'll check back in the morning to see how you got on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 No you fail. I just have to show that your wish is bourne of resentment and from your general mien in this and other posts that is obvious. It's the Left all over - the nasty party. The party that hates people to succeed because in theor eyes it means people are left behind. The same people that want everyone to share misery because it's too much to let some people suceed because it's not fair. Thats the party of envy and no matter how much you dress it up and complain it's not so, the only place that agrees with you is your own little special echo chamber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 I honestly don't know. Which doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, we are talking about principles here. Such as the principle of the haves returning 45%+ of their income to the have nots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now