3 ms·
Ah yes, the Flimflam-Fo Equation with its key parameters, "rich person a" and "rich person b". Conspiracy theories might well be defined just by the applicatio
by mjburgess 9y ago
Ah yes, the Flimflam-Fo Equation with its key parameters, "rich person a" and "rich person b".
Conspiracy theories might well be defined just by the application of the fallacy, "if someone benefits, then they intended it".
And here we see this fallacy being applied. Sound like a textbook conspiracy to me. The extremely weathly are not interested in increasing their net wealth, only in specific purchases to further their goals -- which are very easy to undermine with crashes.
People who are merely wealthy might possibly wish to increase their general wealth and therefore believe a crash will help them do that. That is an incredibly outsized risk for a wealthy person to needlessly take however.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- zbentley 9y ago> the fallacy, "if someone benefits, then they intended it". Slightly tangential, but neat: that fallacy has a name! It's the "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc There might be a more specific named fallacy for when post-hoc happens with regard to individuals' intentions and benefits rather than causes and effects in general though.