socialist_n_TN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Nov-04-11 09:03 PM
Response to Original message
6. Actually your three look pretty doable for me
Edited on Fri Nov-04-11 09:04 PM by socialist_n_TN
Well the top two anyway. I already own a home or will in another 8 years, but I would give it up if it resulted in a better world. I've got pretty good insurance from my wife's work. I'd give that up for Medicare for All.
Actually the first one is probably the most important. As you said, it's ridiculous the amount of choice a market economy lays on us when there are people who can't afford the basics.
Can you spot the lies? Well, one is a lie. The other is just a show of ignorance. Let's look at the lie, shall we?
I would give it up[with it being his/her/its home]
if it resulted in a better world.At first reading it seems to be a most charitable thing, but we have to be a bit suspicious since it was said by a DUmmie. In order to better spot the lie we need to understand the DUmmies in general and this one in specific. The DUmmies, with their hive mind, view these "occupy movements" that are going on as world changing. They are allegedly working (somehow) to make the world better (so they claim). As the DUmmie Socialist_n_TN is posting on DU instead of joining the occupiers it would seem to mean that he/she/it isn't even willing to give up his DUmp time to go to the occupy sites to help make the world better. If he/she/it will not give up his time for a better world, do you really think that he/she/it would give up his home for a better world? Surely not. This means that he/she/it is lying.
But there's more...
One of the things that makes DUmmies interesting (other than their comedy) is their sneakiness and nuances. When you take this into account the DUmmies statement wouldn't be an outright lie, but it also wouldn't really be charitable. To make a determination we need to refer back to the last part of the DUmmie's sentence:
if it resulted in a better world, and we need to think about what "a better world" really is in the DUmmie mind. Based on previous evidence from the DUmmies "a better world" usually means more free shit for the DUmmie that is speaking. No one else really matters. In other words, if you were to plug the DUmmie statement
I would give it up [the DUmmie home]
if it resulted in a better world into the DUmmie to English translator the translation would most likely read:
I would give up my home if I got a better, bigger home for free and other free shit to go with it.So is the DUmmie lying? Is he/she/it demonstrating standard DUmmie greed? Or is it a combination of the two?