you mean you knew that it is a system of myth making by the preistly class, with no predictive power?
Basic laws of supply and demand and subjective equivalence and so on work and have predictive power.
oh. you’re just a religious fantastic.
Where I live socialists are like US Republicans in, well, US. You may disagree or agree or play some emotion like you just did, thinking that makes for an argument, this doesn’t change the fact that you will go fuck yourself.
You present yourself as above emotional displays, then tell a stranger to go fuck themselves over some mildly worded casual internet debate, presumptivly displaying your anger at the inconsequential judgement of your words.
Moreover, you reference “basic laws of supply and demand”, as if reciting words without adding any substance to your argument proves your point and displays your intellect/knowledge. Well, it certainly does one of those things. Probably not in the way you think it does.
The point I’m making is; you are clearly lacking in self-awareness, which is understandable given that you seem to be fresh out of high school (you reference English class, which is something typically only done by kids/young adults). You may want to work on your critical thinking skills and your ability to formulate logically structured arguments if you want to engage in good faith debate while presenting yourself as some sort of expert. Just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.
No, I present myself as above using them instead of arguments, which is not the same. One more such cheat move and I block you to avoid more emotional displays from my own side.
You may want to work on your critical thinking skills and your ability to formulate logically structured arguments if you want to engage in good faith debate while presenting yourself as some sort of expert.
I may want to say that you are the one not arguing in good faith, first of all because you’ve cheated again. Fool blocked.
I’ll rather demonstrate supply and demand to you: there’s supply of my attention. I give my attention for satisfaction of communicating to someone or reading something interesting, maybe learning something interesting. Your first comment gave me that satisfaction in the form of the humorous contrast between a user named “commie” being pretentious about economics. Your second comment I’ve spent my attention on, but there won’t be a third. The supply of my attention, my demand for satisfaction from yadda-yadda-yadda balance out the way that I’m blocking you.
you mean you knew that it is a system of myth making by the preistly class, with no predictive power?
oh. you’re just a religious fanatic.
Basic laws of supply and demand and subjective equivalence and so on work and have predictive power.
Where I live socialists are like US Republicans in, well, US. You may disagree or agree or play some emotion like you just did, thinking that makes for an argument, this doesn’t change the fact that you will go fuck yourself.
You present yourself as above emotional displays, then tell a stranger to go fuck themselves over some mildly worded casual internet debate, presumptivly displaying your anger at the inconsequential judgement of your words.
Moreover, you reference “basic laws of supply and demand”, as if reciting words without adding any substance to your argument proves your point and displays your intellect/knowledge. Well, it certainly does one of those things. Probably not in the way you think it does.
The point I’m making is; you are clearly lacking in self-awareness, which is understandable given that you seem to be fresh out of high school (you reference English class, which is something typically only done by kids/young adults). You may want to work on your critical thinking skills and your ability to formulate logically structured arguments if you want to engage in good faith debate while presenting yourself as some sort of expert. Just a suggestion. Take it or leave it.
No, I present myself as above using them instead of arguments, which is not the same. One more such cheat move and I block you to avoid more emotional displays from my own side.
I may want to say that you are the one not arguing in good faith, first of all because you’ve cheated again. Fool blocked.
no, they don’t. those are tautologies.
Hard to take seriously somebody nicknamed “commie” on this.
oh, well maybe you could try to show me an economic story errr… “theory” that is not just a tautology.
I’ll rather demonstrate supply and demand to you: there’s supply of my attention. I give my attention for satisfaction of communicating to someone or reading something interesting, maybe learning something interesting. Your first comment gave me that satisfaction in the form of the humorous contrast between a user named “commie” being pretentious about economics. Your second comment I’ve spent my attention on, but there won’t be a third. The supply of my attention, my demand for satisfaction from yadda-yadda-yadda balance out the way that I’m blocking you.
ah. storytelling. maybe you’ll be a good priest someday.
I missed the cause and effect.