3 ms·

This is probably the (unintentionally) funniest comment I’ve ever seen on this site - you don’t have any coherent understanding of the economics of price contro

This is probably the (unintentionally) funniest comment I’ve ever seen on this site - you don’t have any coherent understanding of the economics of price controls, so you just go on about Communist China and and the Holocaust. Surely at some level you realize this is embarrassing? > how can we possibly allow these parasites to live on Private charity is and always has been more effective than government welfare, although the proponents of government welfare would like you to believe otherwise. With the elimination of the rule against perpetuities in the West, the Waqf model would be a superior solution to what we have now.

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
>This is probably the (unintentionally) funniest comment I’ve ever seen on this site - I'm glad you're having fun. None of these topics are laughing matters, but, like the insults you're throwing, they're not novel either. >you don’t have any coherent understanding of the economics of price controls If you had 'coherent arguments' or citations, you would not lower yourself to attacking me instead of my arguments. >so you just go on about Communist China and and the Holocaust. If you'd bother to consider my arguments you'll find that my citations are in fact real world examples of what happens when people with ideas like yours take power. >Surely at some level you realize this is embarrassing? yawn if I'm wrong, prove it If you had cogent arguments you would've made them instead of attacking me and moving the goalposts. >Private charity is and always has been more effective than government welfare, although the proponents of government welfare would like you to believe otherwise. With the elimination of the rule against perpetuities in the West, the Waqf model would be a superior solution to what we have now. Debunked(1). Regardless, if you're just going to keep repeating years debunked tea party talking points I'm happy to keep correcting you. 1. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/private-charity-no-match-for-federal-poverty-aid-experts-say/ https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/private-charity-no...
- centimeter 6y ago
  The fact that you clearly don’t understand the difference between an argument and a citation tells us everything we need to know.

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago

>This is probably the (unintentionally) funniest comment I’ve ever seen on this site - I'm glad you're having fun. None of these topics are laughing matters, but, like the insults you're throwing, they're not novel either. >you don’t have any coherent understanding of the economics of price controls If you had 'coherent arguments' or citations, you would not lower yourself to attacking me instead of my arguments. >so you just go on about Communist China and and the Holocaust. If you'd bother to consider my arguments you'll find that my citations are in fact real world examples of what happens when people with ideas like yours take power. >Surely at some level you realize this is embarrassing? yawn if I'm wrong, prove it If you had cogent arguments you would've made them instead of attacking me and moving the goalposts. >Private charity is and always has been more effective than government welfare, although the proponents of government welfare would like you to believe otherwise. With the elimination of the rule against perpetuities in the West, the Waqf model would be a superior solution to what we have now. Debunked(1). Regardless, if you're just going to keep repeating years debunked tea party talking points I'm happy to keep correcting you. 1. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/private-charity-no-match-for-federal-poverty-aid-experts-say/ https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/private-charity-no...

centimeter 6y ago
The fact that you clearly don’t understand the difference between an argument and a citation tells us everything we need to know.