2 ms·

No I was pointing out that simply because something is beneficial for some people doesn't mean we should want it to exist, which is what I read your comment as

No I was pointing out that simply because something is beneficial for some people doesn't mean we should want it to exist, which is what I read your comment as saying. Please don't tell me what I am thinking.

Workaccount2 3y ago
You're making the argument that cars shouldn't exist because some people die because of them. Like I said, debt is overwhelmingly useful to the vast majority of people who use it. We're not gonna ban cars because a handful of highly emotional road tragedies. We're not gonna abolish debt because of a handful of deranged debt collector stories.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  If you want to make an argument make one. "Some people like it" isn't a strong one but if that's all you got I guess. "We're not going to" presupposed the outcome. I don't agree and won't contend it, since you're not willing to say anything that can be refuted. I'm not the author of the future I can't say what we're gonna. But then neither are you.
  - Workaccount2 3y ago
    "Some people like it" isn't a strong one because it's a straw man of my argument. "The overwhelming majority bear tangible benefit from it" is the actual argument. Debt is a core instrument of modern first world society. Just think about how many people would own a car, much less a home, if you had to pay for it all up front.
    - me-vs-cat 3y ago
      While having a car today is necessary when living any place where a century of planning has assumed everyone who matters has a car, this state of affairs is not indisputably better than what might have happened otherwise. Home mortgages are only a few hundred years old, and it's not like they started out as prevalent as they are today. --- Just because we find ourselves in a particular place today doesn't mean other options aren't feasible. Assuming no better options could have ever existed sounds depressing.

Workaccount2 3y ago

You're making the argument that cars shouldn't exist because some people die because of them. Like I said, debt is overwhelmingly useful to the vast majority of people who use it. We're not gonna ban cars because a handful of highly emotional road tragedies. We're not gonna abolish debt because of a handful of deranged debt collector stories.

giraffe_lady 3y ago
If you want to make an argument make one. "Some people like it" isn't a strong one but if that's all you got I guess. "We're not going to" presupposed the outcome. I don't agree and won't contend it, since you're not willing to say anything that can be refuted. I'm not the author of the future I can't say what we're gonna. But then neither are you.
- Workaccount2 3y ago
  "Some people like it" isn't a strong one because it's a straw man of my argument. "The overwhelming majority bear tangible benefit from it" is the actual argument. Debt is a core instrument of modern first world society. Just think about how many people would own a car, much less a home, if you had to pay for it all up front.
  - me-vs-cat 3y ago
    While having a car today is necessary when living any place where a century of planning has assumed everyone who matters has a car, this state of affairs is not indisputably better than what might have happened otherwise. Home mortgages are only a few hundred years old, and it's not like they started out as prevalent as they are today. --- Just because we find ourselves in a particular place today doesn't mean other options aren't feasible. Assuming no better options could have ever existed sounds depressing.