Total posts: 80
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Yeah say they live together but not married. Dad can file as head of household and claim the kid as a dependent. Mom has no income on paper so it’s pointless for her to file taxes but she takes care of the kid. The new Medicaid has work requirements but does have an exemption for people who take care of dependents but the kids not her dependent for tax purposes it’s the dads dependent. If they do get married then the dads income goes on the moms Medicaid application and she won’t qualify for Medicaid anymore because the dads income is too high.
Created:
Posted in:
Query: If a baby mamas on medicaid and watches the kid but the dad takes the dependent deduction on his tax returns, can she qualify for the taking care of dependent child exemption from the new medicaid work requirements
Created:
I thought David was going to own the site. Doesnt this imply control over the domain, the coding, etc. Why would it be necessary to make a new site
Created:
-->
@Barney
Holocaust denial is all about the need murder any surviving Jews. Trying to separate it, would be like trying to separate out the orange from the citrus fruit.If people show up in KKK robes burning a cross on a new neighbors lawn, we don't need further context to know that it's not about giving said neighbor a friendly welcome.
I have read that a lot of it comes from anti-Israeli propaganda in Islamic countries because it undermines the rationale for the creation of Israel. Then the seed of disinformation is planted in the marketplace of ideas where perhaps it flourishes in hate.
Created:
-->
@Barney
I started out here by saying this:
Most holocaust denial is probably bad faith dog whistling intended to undermine Jewish victimhood status. Little if any good faith holocaust denial
I did read the article you linked. It described the fallacy like this:
Premise P₁: A generalization holds for most cases in group G
Premise P₂: One case in G does not match the generalization
Conclusion Q: Therefore, the generalization must be false or irrelevant
The flaw lies in assuming that one or a few outliers invalidate a trend rather than prove its complexity.
So, Im not concluding that the generalization is false or irrelevant. That a user engages in holocaust denial would be relevant in concluding whether or not the user is engaging in hate speech. I dont think its definitive, but perhaps its dispositive, depending on how certain you want to be when it comes to moderation decisions. Like, what is the optimal degree of certainty when it comes to moderation? Preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing evidence, reasonable doubt, etc.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
And how does flat earth theory lead to anywhere the same outcomes as Holocaust denial?They are not comparable to be banned. At most NASA and space stuff has to worry.
It doesnt lead to anywhere the same outcomes as holocaust denial. I simply cited it as an example of a good faith denial of something that is almost universally accepted as true to show that there could be some, albeit few, holocaust deniers who do it in good faith.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
It is denying in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Created:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Most holocaust denial is probably bad faith dog whistling intended to undermine Jewish victimhood status. Little if any good faith holocaust denial, though I figure it probably does exist like it does with the people who think the moon landing was faked, the 9/11 conspiracy theories or the flat earthers.
Created:
Posted in:
The problem:
Brandolini's law (or the bullshit asymmetry principle) is an Internet adage coined in 2013 by Italian programmer Alberto Brandolini. It compares the considerable effort of debunking misinformation to the relative ease of creating it in the first place. The adage states:The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it.
The AI generated solution -
This passage is a highly opinionated argument advocating for tax cuts, referencing three presidents (Kennedy, Reagan, and Trump) while dismissing opposing views (particularly those attributed to "Shoofly," likely a derogatory reference to the Congressional Budget Office or another economic analyst). Below is a fact-check and bias analysis:### **Fact-Checking Key Claims**1. **"Three different presidents in two parties proposed across-the-board tax cuts and in all three cases, tax revenue increased substantially."**- **JFK (1964 cuts under LBJ):** Post-tax-cut revenue **did rise**, but largely due to economic growth, not solely the cuts. The top marginal rate was **70% before cuts**, so reductions had a different context than today.- **Reagan (1981 & 1986):** Revenue initially **fell** after the 1981 cuts, contributing to deficits. It later recovered due to economic expansion and base-broadening in the 1986 reform.- **Trump (2017):** Revenue **initially dropped** post-TCJA before recovering, but **deficits grew** due to spending and economic conditions (pre-pandemic).- **Verdict:** **Partially true but misleading.** Revenue increases were not immediate, and other factors (economic cycles, inflation, fiscal policy) played major roles.2. **"CBO theory... thrice proven wrong."**- The CBO (and other analysts) often **underestimate dynamic effects** but are generally cautious in scoring tax cuts. Their models prioritize static analysis, which critics argue is incomplete.- **Verdict:** **Debatable.** The CBO has revised estimates, but "proven wrong" is an oversimplification.3. **"Shoofly predicted the demise of the Supreme Court..."**- Unclear reference, possibly a mocking nickname for a pundit or institution. If referring to the CBO, this is **false**—the CBO doesn’t make political predictions about the Supreme Court.- **Verdict:** **Unsubstantiated/irrelevant.**### **Bias Analysis**- **Tone:** Dismissive, sarcastic ("Broken record against gold records"), and ad hominem ("worthless as a pregnant man").- **Cherry-Picking:** Ignores cases where tax cuts **did not** boost revenue (Bush 2001, Kansas under Brownback).- **False Dilemma:** Implies tax cuts **always** work and critics are always wrong.- **Appeal to Authority:** "I have personal memory of Kennedy's accomplishment" substitutes anecdote for data.- **Straw Man:** Attributes exaggerated failures to "Shoofly" without evidence.### **Conclusion**The argument **overstates the certainty** of tax cuts increasing revenue, **ignores counterexamples**, and relies on **rhetoric over evidence**. While tax cuts **can** stimulate growth, their impact on revenue depends on broader economic conditions—not a guaranteed outcome. The CBO’s role is analytical, not partisan, and dismissing it entirely is unsound.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ultracrepidarian
First situation you are probably the only person who can save the kid and kids fate seems certain. There are billions of people with $50 dollars in the second situation and theres a lot less certainty that the decision will actually save the child.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
David is literally who rn thinks already agrees with him anyway
Ok. Well this isnt letting him choose the voters. What you said wasnt accurate there. Why would I assume that what youre saying now is accurate?
Created:
-->
@WyIted
He allowed RM to choose the voters though
I see this:
- I’m open to letting David be the sole voter, or we can leave it to an open vote.
- If either of us lobbies or messages people for votes, we forfeit by default.
This doesnt seem like him choosing the voters. Am I missing something?
Created:
-->
@Mikal
Youre saying you care here but in other posts youre making plenty of insults. Youre saying that its about showing him that hes acting like an asshole but in the original post youre talking about having a real debate about the issues. The lack of consistency is damaging to credibility.
In the other thread that linked to this post you said that users should just link to this thread to shut down conversations with AR. The site also stickied this thread. You dont have any debates on this site. Im imagining they probably asked you to come here. You like to win and heres the challenge. So youre here to beat him so that he feels like a loser and maybe shuts up. Thats probably why youre here.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I can see that but Im assuming hes this user from DDO - ddo.fandom.com/wiki/Mikal
So, Im sizing him up based on what I see there. Unless I am mistaken ?
Created:
-->
@Mikal
Suffice to say your position is that he's an asshole. Im not denying that. I dont really have a position on it. More about how its being handled.
If he is violating the CoC then why is not the recourse reports, bans and the like? Pinning his challenger's challenge operates as tacit approval to the challenger's position from the site staff which may very well lead users to vote against him. Of course, you are a very good debater and popular user and AR not so much. Too many voters would be liable to vote their preformed opinions or other biases shrouded in rationalizations which makes ARs loss inevitable no matter how well he argued. Its a setup so that if he refuses the rigged challenge he gets branded a coward.
But I doubt you really want to debate the subject. This isnt about debating the subject. Its about making him look like a loser or a coward in the eyes of the community so that he turns tail and runs. In other words, humiliate him.
Maybe it would work. Maybe you think its worth a shot. Yet humiliation can be dangerous thing, more so here because his already unstable state may make him more susceptible to it. (ie hes already so close to the edge, you risk pushing him off)
Created:
-->
@Savant
Offering someone a chance to debate is shutting them up?
The moderators pinning it is what I was talking about, not the challenge itself. Read about humiliation:
Ingredient 1: The Status ClaimIngredient 2: The Public Failure of the Status ClaimIngredient 3: The Status of the Degrader to DegradeIngredient 4: Rejection of the Status to Claim a StatusDamaging Consequences of HumiliationSuffering severe humiliation has been shown empirically to plunge individuals into major depressions, suicidal states, and severe anxiety states, including ones characteristic of posttraumatic stress disorder.
By pinning the debate challenge it is a communication from site admins (who are obviously in a position of superiority within the community) that there is an endorsement of Mikals challenge. This flows in to the "public" nature of it also.
AR is obviously having some issues. Frankly I have my own issues from time to time. What is being done here is not going to help his mental state. It is part of a humiliation that may risk further damage to it.
This is not the way.
Created:
-->
@Mikal
It’s literally a monkey with a machine gun. I just don’t don’t like grandstanding, fake religious people, or hypocrisy so I don’t mind not backing down from it. But when you punch enough people and one punches you back. You are not a victim, you are an instigator and a recipient of the blowback.
That somebody deserved something doesnt make them not a victim. Hypocritical perpetrators of various offenses have not forfeited their rights. This, of course, is something contingent on an understanding that there will be somebody who has a monopoly on the creation of justice and who will make justice. If that somebody consistently fails to make justice then people will begin to make their own.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
They're trying to use humiliation to shut you up.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Do you have any supporters? I havent seen anybody.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Because if the argument is sincere than there is the opportunity for productive discourse. When it isnt then the only thing that matters is what the proponent wants and its a lot harder to change what somebody wants than it is to change their mind.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
a SCOTUS 6-3 decision determined that abortion cannot be funded by Medicaid after 6 weeks beyond conception
No. What happened was SCOTUS determined that the private Plaintiffs lacked standing to enforce a federal statute which arguably would require south carolina's medicaid program to pay planned parenthood providers for services provided to medicaid recipients.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
What is your position on the treatment of prisoners?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Yeah this is the kind of shit that should be purged from the CoC. Personally, I wouldn't invest any time into a website that had 'hate speech' anywhere in its CoC in this day and age, seeing as how broadly it can, and has been, interpreted. CoC should ban repeated targeted harassment in a precise way. And even that could be eliminated by making a block feature that actually works (all user's posts are hidden by default, maybe can unhide them by clicking on them. No @ing both ways).Personal attacks are also part of debate. The founding fathers were calling one another hermaphrodites. Didn't Douglas call Lincoln like a hatchet-faced nutmeg peddler or something like that? They should be embraced as part of a long and noble tradition.
I think what happens is the sites generally are influenced by their advertising customers who don't want to have their brands associated with user generated hate speech. There aren't any ads here, though I'd imagine that owners would want to grow the site and eventually monetize it with ad money.
Personal attacks often suffer from a relevance problem but in a lot of debates they are very relevant (e.g. Presidential debates because the issue is who to pick for the next president; Or where somebody's being used as a source of information then their credibility is very relevant)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
The Machiavellianism is strong with him.
Created:
Posted in:
Unwarranted systemic vulgarity and invectives, which may include off topic personal attacks and/or hate speech, are subject to disciplinary actions.
The account violates this part of the CoC. Ban is within the scope of CoC.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Just because Iran declared war on the USA 45 years ago doesn't mean USA has to recognize it.
I didnt say anything like that?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
They provided aid, comfort, financing, and transport of at least 8 of the 9/11 terrorists in the US.
TBH Im not really convinced POTUS needs congressional authorization as I regard the war powers act etc as probably a congressional overreach by unconstitutionally conflicting with POTUS commander in chief authority. I dont think that issue has ever been resolved by SCOTUS though and probably should be to get some clairty in the legality of orders.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
You are wrong.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
The best age is around 30 for wisdom. If you are not this age, you should be irrelevant.No, old people lose desire for knowledge and become stupid as a result.Average 8 year old knows how to use smartphone well. My parents dont know how to use a smartphone basic functions even after 10 years of using it every day for hours.So intelligence of an old person is lower than that of an 8 year old. Old person is about as capable of learning as a 4 year old is, if not much less.The problem with old people is that they think they have become all wise, and thus they lose curiosity. Once they lose curiosity, they are less able to learn new things. My parents only became dumber in past 10 years. Now they are incapable of even thinking logically. They literally just repeat what they hear on news.
Dude. The guy's like 75 or something. You're just being mean. That stuff's not even true.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.-2001 AUMF
I don't think Iran had much to do with 9/11. I don't see how it applies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
But did he even attempt to fulfill his promises?
From what I know it sounded like a bunch of bologna to increase popularity of the party without any real intention of following through.
Created:
Posted in:
Idk what the point of it is anyway. His electability is moot now. He cant run for a third term and even if he could hes liable to lose his marbles or drop dead before that would happen because hes so old now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 by 2.2% and 4.5% in 2020, but won it by 1.5% in 2024. It was in PA MI and WI where he won by 0.72%, 0.23% and 0.23%, respectively, that gave him the electoral votes to win in 2016.
Created:
Better if these things didn't clock out but went to a limbo period where they would end instantly upon a single vote, allowing for a reasonable period of time (eg 72 hours) for the vote to be reported and taken down. If the vote remains then it finishes the debate. If it gets removed then the debate returns to the state where it waits for a vote.
Or perhaps theres some other solution.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
OK. Evidence ignored. Experiences ignored. Conclusory statements. No evidence. You can do better than that.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
I dont believe you.
And the other things I showed you? You dont believe them either? What about your own experiences? Poverty sucks IMO.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
I dont, money doesnt help.
This is contradicted by ny own life experiences and also studies. (eg https://www.cbsnews.com/news/money-happiness-study-daniel-kahneman-500000-versus-75000/ ) Further, it is very importent for men in dating if they want to have kids as the overwhelming majority of women consider a man's ability to support a family to be essential to being a good partner https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/09/20/americans-see-men-as-the-financial-providers-even-as-womens-contributions-grow/
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Cleaners.
I have mucho respect for this guy
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Not in toilets.
Plumbers can make good money.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Nor self respect.
It is normal to work.
Created:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Anyone who works is idiot. Hard work makes you age faster, makes you dirty, dumber, and you make someone else very rich. I see people who worked hard their whole life and died in poverty and misery. They are idiots.
It about the money not the work. Got rent and other responsibilities. Maybe if I had a trust fund or section 8 I could just not work but even then being poor sucks and monetizing my time seems to be the way.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Do you want your sister and you as well as her children to be saved, souls especially?
I do want better lives for the people I care about. I dont believe in souls though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LucyStarfire
It was a long time ago. It doesnt really bother me much anymore.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
No. They dont care. Sister (single mom got laid off) and her kids ended up homeless after they went to the richer ones for help when they were getting evicted. Fam dont give a shit so I dont bother asking. They talk about the problem being people having a "sense of entitlement" and how "society is setup for the business owners"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@21Pilots
Probably after my first love dumped me and got with somebody else, my dad died, disinherited me and left everything to my little brother, and I was living out of my car and working 80 hours a week.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
"We want nuclear power" is such a thin excuse that I wonder why they even bother.
I dont know either. Electricity obviously isnt it because they get nearly all of it from oil and natural gas. Maybe the whole thing is to just cause trouble and problems. Maybe it helps maintain internal stability by antagonizing external threats. (ie internal revolution threat is reduced when the people fear external powers)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
The US was working with Iran to come to a nuclear agreement but Satanyahu thought it was a better idea to strike Iran.No, it wasn't justifiable.
They've been negotiating for what 20 years or something. Iran still enriching uranium to near weapons grade. They will keep doing it probably.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
Remember that one of Trump's professors said that Trump was the dumbest student he ever had.
The argument is so stupid and, given Trump's track record, I think its more likely to be a bad faith claim of authority rather than a good faith mistake.
Created: