Devious ACT move

[Lilith7]

It's all very well requiring someone to provide evidence to back their opinion but...

1. when they do, you need to accept and discuss it, preferably by providing your own contrary evidence if you disagree, and
2. you need to require the same from both sides of the argument.

I have yet to be shown any acknowledgement or respect for the sometimes hours I spent looking up and learning about something so that I could be sure my opinion was based on correct information. Or when my first hand life experience results in a view that differs from people who don't appear to know about whatever they are standing forth on.  I have given up.

I have yet to see anyone give any evidence of what is wrong with neoliberalism, how it can be said that all politicians are bastards, why all rich people are greedy, or any of the other sweeping generalisations that are so often made here and apparently accepted without question even when they are completely wrong.

An interesting book on Neo Liberalism. Vulture capitalism, Grace Blakeley.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks...-blakeley/


https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/m...-tony-benn

---

I don't think rich people are greedy. I think they are both lucky and unlucky. But not necessarily greedy.

I do know they have more resources than the average voter. More access to excellent financial management. And that enables them to pay a lower rate of personal tax than the average voter.

That does two things, it reduces the tax available to the economy, and it makes the average voter inclined to think all rich people are greedy. So, it should be corrected, for everyone's sake.

As for research, well, I do it because I like basing my thinking on real stuff sometimes. Doesn't stop me believing in stuff I cannot prove though. Like the multiverse theory, and life after death.

And fairies.

And dragons....

[Lilith7]

I don't think rich people are greedy. I think they are both lucky and unlucky. But not necessarily greedy.

I do know they have more resources than the average voter. More access to excellent financial management. And that enables them to pay a lower rate of personal tax than the average voter.

That does two things, it reduces the tax available to the economy, and it makes the average voter inclined to think all rich people are greedy. So, it should be corrected, for everyone's sake.

As for research, well, I do it because I like basing my thinking on real stuff sometimes. Doesn't stop me believing in stuff I cannot prove though. Like the multiverse theory, and life after death.

And fairies.

Me neither - although some wealthy people may well be greedy, we know that isn't always the case because it wasn't that long ago that a group of wealthy people actually asked govt to tax them more...

I wonder whether that's happened in any other country.