Dumb things conservatives say:

[Androidpk]

That moment when you're pretending not to be aware of when you're trolling and you continue to throw on insults. You're really seeming impartial and innocent.

You're coming off as trolling as well since you couldn't/wouldn't answer a simple question pertaining to the discussion.

[Warriorbird]

You're coming off as trolling as well since you couldn't/wouldn't answer a simple question pertaining to the discussion.

There's no point when it's clear the "answers" don't matter to someone. That's punctuated by his steady stream of insults. Other times it gets made clear that people don't have an actual clue and don't intend to have an actual clue about someone's POV. There's no point in answering that either.

Also "questions" that ignore other considerations are pointless to answer. They suggest complex situations are black and white when they often are not.

[Jarvan]

A bunch of Liberals and conservatives on a politics forum are totally there for legitimate discourse.

Fixed.

[Warriorbird]

Fixed.

I was referring to the particular set of folks who were responding to me. Of course most everybody on either side is there to troll.

On somewhat original topic:

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/...ky-high-rates/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...0TV5W620141212

[Jarvan]

I was referring to the particular set of folks who were responding to me. Of course most everybody on either side is there to troll.

On somewhat original topic:

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/...ky-high-rates/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...0TV5W620141212

So you are saying that Yes to both of the question's PB asked you.

Also.. the first article is kinda funny.. because it's the car dealer that is the shady fucking ass that is abusing the system. ALSO.. the stupid fucktard buyer who took it.

I mean seriously.. if the guy was out of work.. and lives on SS alone.. how the fuck did he think he was going to pay back a 16k loan? He didn't. He knew he wasn't. He is trying to sound like a victim, he isn't a victim, he is a criminal.

[Warriorbird]

So you are saying that Yes to both of the question's PB asked you.

Also.. the first article is kinda funny.. because it's the car dealer that is the shady fucking ass that is abusing the system. ALSO.. the stupid fucktard buyer who took it.

I mean seriously.. if the guy was out of work.. and lives on SS alone.. how the fuck did he think he was going to pay back a 16k loan? He didn't. He knew he wasn't. He is trying to sound like a victim, he isn't a victim, he is a criminal.

No, I'm illustrating my point because you just declared "answers" for me.

The buyer's obviously pretty damn dumb. It's an illustration of unbacked subprime idiocy though.

[Jarvan]

No, I'm illustrating my point because you just declared "answers" for me.

The buyer's obviously pretty damn dumb. It's an illustration of unbacked subprime idiocy though.

Well, YOU said they were rhetorical questions, which means the answer to both of them is yes, you just refuse to say it because it wouldn't fit your narrative.

As for the subprime idiocy... there has always been subprime idiocy, but NOW the banks know that if shit hits the fans, they don't have to pay for it, the Government (aka WE the PEOPLE) do.

The first article is an example of a shady dealer, and an asshole buyer.

The second is an example of the government doing it's job. Which they are supposed to. It doesn't draw any conclusions, or make any statements. It doesn't say the banks have done anything wrong. It's really a nothing piece.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/...blown-for-now/

A counter point.

[Warriorbird]

Well, YOU said they were rhetorical questions, which means the answer to both of them is yes, you just refuse to say it because it wouldn't fit your narrative.

As for the subprime idiocy... there has always been subprime idiocy, but NOW the banks know that if shit hits the fans, they don't have to pay for it, the Government (aka WE the PEOPLE) do.

The first article is an example of a shady dealer, and an asshole buyer.

The second is an example of the government doing it's job. Which they are supposed to. It doesn't draw any conclusions, or make any statements. It doesn't say the banks have done anything wrong. It's really a nothing piece.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/...blown-for-now/

A counter point.

Rhetorical questions can also mean questions with that are meant to make a point rather than to draw a real answer. They can be message questions. If one doesn't agree, there's not much point in "answering."

And yeah, I've seen that blog post before. One of the central points is that the New York Fed doesn't think it's a big deal, but the reason I posted the other article is that New York is investigating questionable subprime lending practices in the auto industry.

[Jarvan]

Rhetorical questions can also mean questions with that are meant to make a point rather than to draw a real answer. They can be message questions. If one doesn't agree, there's not much point in "answering."

And yeah, I've seen that blog post before. One of the central points is that the New York Fed doesn't think it's a big deal, but the reason I posted the other article is that New York is investigating questionable subprime lending practices in the auto industry.

.....

The Department of Justice is also still investigating Wilson for Racial crimes. Soo... yeah, unless they FIND something, investigations are meaningless. I would say more then 50% of the time they are either political pressure, or government pressure. Basically.. the gov saying.. look.. we can screw you over if we want, so play nice kiddies.

So you DON'T agree with the Yes answers to those questions? You think they are No answers? Seriously.. this is why people think your an ass for not answering. IF you really believe the answers are no, say so and explain. If you say yes, then admit it and explain why it doesn't matter. Trying to pretend your using Socratic method is just foolish. Because.. guess what, they can then not answer you and ask another question.

Anyway.. Subprime car is almost meaningless at this point. Not to mention.. 50% or more of the problem is the dealers. Not the banks.

[Warriorbird]

.....

The Department of Justice is also still investigating Wilson for Racial crimes. Soo... yeah, unless they FIND something, investigations are meaningless. I would say more then 50% of the time they are either political pressure, or government pressure. Basically.. the gov saying.. look.. we can screw you over if we want, so play nice kiddies.

So you DON'T agree with the Yes answers to those questions? You think they are No answers? Seriously.. this is why people think your an ass for not answering. IF you really believe the answers are no, say so and explain. If you say yes, then admit it and explain why it doesn't matter. Trying to pretend your using Socratic method is just foolish. Because.. guess what, they can then not answer you and ask another question.

Anyway.. Subprime car is almost meaningless at this point. Not to mention.. 50% or more of the problem is the dealers. Not the banks.

Nah, they're mostly instances of people having a particularly simplistic view of an issue. Answering is giving that view credence. Life isn't merely "Yes" or "No." answers.

We'll see what the investigation finds.