(no subject)
May. 11th, 2007 06:22 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
labellementeusemust vent must vent must vent
oh my god, we just had a shit-hurling fight with one of my flatmates and her boyfriend and... arg. They kept saying stuff like "but you can't just give lazy people money" and then I'd say "but you can't call them lazy people and ARGH, you guys may know heaps about economics but you obviously don't know shit about the social sciences" and then they'd say "stop changing the subject." And, I'm sorry, but if you're making an argument and one of your key premises is flawed, then defeating your argument involves pointing out that flawed premise as opposed to responding to your flawed argument. Nnnngh. Some sample dialogue:
"Four weeks' holiday makes it too hard for small businesses."
(Erm, so people shouldn't have fair working conditions because it's too hard for small businesses to sustain? Not the workers' problem, sorry, since plenty of small businesses obviously *do* manage it.)
"But it's better to let rich people get richer because it gets spread around!"
(Hello, it's called the trickle down effect and it does not work, take a look at america, redistribution is necessary.)
and and and I can't keep talking about this because I'll have an aneurysm and get too pissed off (I already shouted a LOT.) So I'm stopping but nnnnnnnnngh, Mr Darwin, the stupid people are breeding and taking over the planet! And the worst bit is, they have a bit of economic theory under their belt so they think they know everything about it, these engineering students! You know what commerce and economics are taught by rich people. Take some sociology and then talk to me.
oh my god, we just had a shit-hurling fight with one of my flatmates and her boyfriend and... arg. They kept saying stuff like "but you can't just give lazy people money" and then I'd say "but you can't call them lazy people and ARGH, you guys may know heaps about economics but you obviously don't know shit about the social sciences" and then they'd say "stop changing the subject." And, I'm sorry, but if you're making an argument and one of your key premises is flawed, then defeating your argument involves pointing out that flawed premise as opposed to responding to your flawed argument. Nnnngh. Some sample dialogue:
"Four weeks' holiday makes it too hard for small businesses."
(Erm, so people shouldn't have fair working conditions because it's too hard for small businesses to sustain? Not the workers' problem, sorry, since plenty of small businesses obviously *do* manage it.)
"But it's better to let rich people get richer because it gets spread around!"
(Hello, it's called the trickle down effect and it does not work, take a look at america, redistribution is necessary.)
and and and I can't keep talking about this because I'll have an aneurysm and get too pissed off (I already shouted a LOT.) So I'm stopping but nnnnnnnnngh, Mr Darwin, the stupid people are breeding and taking over the planet! And the worst bit is, they have a bit of economic theory under their belt so they think they know everything about it, these engineering students! You know what commerce and economics are taught by rich people. Take some sociology and then talk to me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: Don't get me wrong, I agree, but...
Date: 2007-05-11 08:08 pm (UTC)Big steaming pile of BS, IMO! From my own experience of the world, I have come to the interim conclusion that people who have no clue what they're talking about are the most confident, stubborn sons-of-bitches you'll meet.
Which is not to say that I disagree that bright people can be real arseholes, but so can everyone. It's just that we, as bright people, choose to be around more bright people when we can, and so are exposed to their arsehattery more often.
Re: Don't get me wrong, I agree, but...
Date: 2007-05-11 08:20 pm (UTC)