3 ms·

Attack their argument, not the source.

• onemoreact 15y ago
  Ok, corporate donations are not linked to what everyone inside a corporation decides but rather a small set of people whose interest don't necessarily align with the shareholders or the workers at large. Handing disproportionate power to middlemen breeds corruption without the counterbalance of risking large personal fortunes or publicity. This same argument also disproves the idea of giving personal tax breaks on large incomes as apposed to corporate tax breaks for small businesses. AKA middle management don't create jobs so tax breaks targeting 'job creators' that include them are misnamed. Edit: The above is a position piece just like those people at the Heritage Foundation are paid to create. There is nothing wrong with suggesting you find credible sources that are not simply spouting propaganda.
• rhizome 15y ago
  "Consider the source" is a perfectly valid heuristic for credibility, which is necessary when counterarguing major political topics like those surrounding Glass-Steagall/Graham-Leach-Bliley. Is HF the most credible source for GP's argument? If so, then that is part of the story.