3 ms·

You continue to assume rather arrogantly that OWS has not had an impact that has or will ultimately improve lives. Not all impact is immediately tangible. Addin

You continue to assume rather arrogantly that OWS has not had an impact that has or will ultimately improve lives. Not all impact is immediately tangible. Adding qualifications such as "practical" is begging the question. You continue to assume that Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation together (you cannot separate one from the other) have a net impact on the world that is positive and that is greater than OWS. "Lives saved" is not the only metric, and is not even the best metric. What good is saving a life if that life is consigned to suffering, or worse, effective slavery at the hands of capitalist-fuedalism? Most people who have tasted freedom would rather die fighting than live long as a slave. And even if a good metric, what if the greed and relentlessly accumulating power of the capitalist system that both produced and is produced by Microsoft is the reason Africa, India and the rest of the third world is in the sorry state it is in, and so the underlying reason for the deaths? Please, can you consider the mere possibility that your assumptions are wrong, and the truth that your arguments are logically fallacious, relying on straw men, circular reasoning and begging the question. You have failed to answer any of my specific critiques of your claims, and present opinion as incontrovertible fact.

Kalium 11y ago
> You continue to assume rather arrogantly that OWS has not had an impact that has or will ultimately improve lives. Not all impact is immediately tangible. Adding qualifications such as "practical" is begging the question. No. I assert that looking at results delivered to date, the Gates Foundation has delivered more than OWS has. If history and logic cannot be used as meaningful predictors, then this whole discussion is pointless. > Please, can you consider the mere possibility that your assumptions are wrong, and the truth that your arguments are logically fallacious, relying on straw men, circular reasoning and begging the question. You have failed to answer any of my specific critiques of your claims, and present opinion as incontrovertible fact. I have. In fact, I lived as you urge. You dismiss this, as it did not produce the results you anticipate, so therefore I clearly did it wrong. A clear pattern has emerged. I have seen this sort of reasoning before. I wish you good luck with your new religious avocation. Good day.

Kalium 11y ago

> You continue to assume rather arrogantly that OWS has not had an impact that has or will ultimately improve lives. Not all impact is immediately tangible. Adding qualifications such as "practical" is begging the question. No. I assert that looking at results delivered to date, the Gates Foundation has delivered more than OWS has. If history and logic cannot be used as meaningful predictors, then this whole discussion is pointless. > Please, can you consider the mere possibility that your assumptions are wrong, and the truth that your arguments are logically fallacious, relying on straw men, circular reasoning and begging the question. You have failed to answer any of my specific critiques of your claims, and present opinion as incontrovertible fact. I have. In fact, I lived as you urge. You dismiss this, as it did not produce the results you anticipate, so therefore I clearly did it wrong. A clear pattern has emerged. I have seen this sort of reasoning before. I wish you good luck with your new religious avocation. Good day.