By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Neodegenerate on 04 August 2016
Edit Thread
ArnoldRimmer said:
Neodegenerate said:

And here you are still resorting to name-calling while attempting to make a viable point.

That observation is correct, I still use the name Killary because I like it, and so far don't intend to stop doing so.

Neodegenerate said:

There is a difference, by the way, in the style and structure of economics that Trump has used (again, the bankruptcies) to gain and maintain his wealth, and the economics needed to run a government.

I consider this factually correct, but I seriously wonder why you're pointing this out. Did I write something that suggested I believe otherwise, or what's your point, why do you mention this?

Not sure if you are aware though, but if I wanted to play devil's advocate once more, I could now state that by making this point, you are ironically somewhat invalidating your own point about Trump allegedly not being good with economics. Because if you point out that running a company (business economics) is completely different from running a country (macroeconomics), you are at the same time pointing out that Trump's economic flops in the field of business economics don't prove that he is bad in the field of macroeconomics, which is the relevant field if he were POTUS.

Neodegenerate said:

Not sure if you are aware though, that Hillary is also a millionaire and has an understanding of both government and economics.

Well, I've admittedly never been interested in Killary's financial situation so far, but I would have been very surprised if she wasn't a multi-millionaire. I mean, when was the last time an officially chosen party candidate running for POTUS wasn't a millionaire? Plus, I assume she and her husband probably earned several millions with expensive speeches and writing books alone...

But this kind of money making is of course not what people think of when they consider someone to be good with economics, because It's exclusive to the few famous and very influential; it's completely different from the usual from-dishwasher-to-millionaire ideal. So if you have a good point to believe that Killary has a good understanding of economics (for example if she has her own business as well or something like that), just mention it, I'm seriously interested.

The implication of your posts has been "Trump will be better economically than Hillary" so everything you said thusfar is why I am pointing out that Trump's economic background may not actually make him fit to be POTUS.

Also, you can't play Devil's Advocate when you present as so anti-Hillary by continuing to use a juvenile approach like Killary.