3 ms·

> That might be true, but you'd make your argument more credible if you cited Bloomberg (or anyone else, but BB is who ZeroHedge cites)... Your statement's not

> That might be true, but you'd make your argument more credible if you cited Bloomberg (or anyone else, but BB is who ZeroHedge cites)... Your statement's not "credible." ZH didn't just cite Bloomberg. The ZH post also includes excerpts from the 93 page report (not included in the Bloomberg article) released by the US senate subcommittee, which was highly relevant. Is anything in the ZH post false? Please add it to the discussion. Next time, please comment on the substance of ideas and arguments instead of ad hominem attacks. It was one of the first searches that came back for the topic I was looking for. It added more context than a brief Bloomberg article.

tptacek 10y ago
Pointing out that a source isn't credible isn't an ad hominem attack --- or, in my case, even an attack at all. I'm broadly sold on the idea that Renaissance profits largely through tax loopholes.
- caminante 10y ago
  Respectfully, for the link, you're attacking ZH and not the substance of ZH's positions.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    ZH isn't the argument. The argument is "does Renaissance succeed principally though tax manipulation".