birdog1960 Posted August 3, 2012 Author Share Posted August 3, 2012 Stop it with this claptrap. Again, there is no such thing as economic rationing. That's just marx-speak for supply and demand. hmmmm...wonder why you object so strongly. and, while not attributing it to marx, why would that attribution make it untrue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) hmmmm...wonder why you object so strongly. and, while not attributing it to marx, why would that attribution make it untrue? I object because I primarily use the English language to communicate, and you are mangling it by intentionally misusing words to describe something those words don't represent in order to create the false appearance of similarity. Or, in other words, useless people who say stupid things to faux-bolster their ideology offend me. Edited August 3, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 3, 2012 Author Share Posted August 3, 2012 I object because I primarily use the English language to communicate, and you are mangling it by intentionally misusing words to describe something those words don't represent in order to create the false appearance of similarity. Or, in other words, useless people who say stupid things to faux-bolster their ideology offend me. Being ranked 37th offends me. we all have different thresholds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 Being ranked 37th offends me. we all have different thresholds. That's fine. I take no issue with that, and find the desire to improve to be laudable, regardless of how flawed I might find your prefered methods. If you'd simply stop creating new meanings for words because you find them convenient to your argument, I might even be willing to reenter the discussion with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 3, 2012 Author Share Posted August 3, 2012 That's fine. I take no issue with that, and find the desire to improve to be laudable, regardless of how flawed I might find your prefered methods. If you'd simply stop creating new meanings for words because you find them convenient to your argument, I might even be willing to reenter the discussion with you. i didn't create the term (see "definition"). seems to me you've already entered a debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 i didn't create the term (see "definition"). seems to me you've already entered a debate. I'm not concerned with the coiner of the phrase, I'm concerned with the intentional misuse of the English language in order to appeal to an emotional base using word association. The ideological fool who first misappropriated the use of the word "rationing" is wrong for the exact same reason you are,and appealing to his fallacious usage doesn't in any way bolster your arguments. Rationing implies centralized and unescapsble administration of scarce resources, intentionally restricting access. Market economies don't do this. There is no central governing body controlling and overseeing administration. There are no artificial regulatory limits placed on who may consume or how much they can consume. There is no intentional or permanent restriction of access. The market simply responds to supply and demand. As for me being in a debate? I'm not. I quietly excused myself when people started incorrectly using words because trying to communicate with !@#$s who can't even agree to use the same language is like trying to drive on a road made of jello. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 3, 2012 Author Share Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) I'm not concerned with the coiner of the phrase, I'm concerned with the intentional misuse of the English language in order to appeal to an emotional base using word association. The ideological fool who first misappropriated the use of the word "rationing" is wrong for the exact same reason you are,and appealing to his fallacious usage doesn't in any way bolster your arguments. Rationing implies centralized and unescapsble administration of scarce resources, intentionally restricting access. Market economies don't do this. There is no central governing body controlling and overseeing administration. There are no artificial regulatory limits placed on who may consume or how much they can consume. There is no intentional or permanent restriction of access. The market simply responds to supply and demand. As for me being in a debate? I'm not. I quietly excused myself when people started incorrectly using words because trying to communicate with !@#$s who can't even agree to use the same language is like trying to drive on a road made of jello. wasn't aware you were a high ranking member of the word police. when were you appointed? i really don't much care what words you're concerned with. couldn't you find something of a bit more gravity to direct your concern on? you know: like that snap hook that's creeping into your game causing you to hit a couple shots ob in your rounds with the docs. oh, and while technically acceptable, "coiner" seems awkward and contrived. it concerns me. Edited August 3, 2012 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 wasn't aware you were a high ranking member of the word police. when were you appointed? Last week. I deputized him. And while he's not wrong ("economic rationing" is a bull **** term that people use for market economics when they want to imply that markets are oppressive), neither are you: you didn't invent the phrase. You're just using it in its proper bull **** manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 ra, ra, ra ! we're number 37. just behind costa rica and dominica! yeah!!! Not to worry. If/when Obamacare hits, we'll be in the top-10, like all the other socialized medicine countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 wasn't aware you were a high ranking member of the word police. when were you appointed? Kindergarten, when I began to learn the proper use and structure of the English language. The classes weren't exclusive. You should have attended. i really don't much care what words you're concerned with. couldn't you find something of a bit more gravity to direct your concern on? you know: like that snap hook that's creeping into your game causing you to hit a couple shots ob in your rounds with the docs. It's fascinating to know that you aren't concerned with communicating in the English language, yet you continue to attempt to do it in a medium which is 100% dependant on it. Perhaps you should revisit that thought. oh, and while technically acceptable, "coiner" seems awkward and contrived. it concerns me. From Merriam-Webster: coin·er noun /ˈkoinər/ coiners, plural 1.A person who coins money, in particular a maker of counterfeit coins 2.A person who invents or devises a new word, sense, or phrase Anything else you'd like to be terribly wrong about today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 3, 2012 Author Share Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) Kindergarten, when I began to learn the proper use and structure of the English language. The classes weren't exclusive. You should have attended. It's fascinating to know that you aren't concerned with communicating in the English language, yet you continue to attempt to do it in a medium which is 100% dependant on it. Perhaps you should revisit that thought. From Merriam-Webster: Anything else you'd like to be terribly wrong about today? i always felt that the purpose of communication was, well, to communicate. it appears i did that. you discerned my meaning. you didn't like it. that's a different issue entirely. if you are at all perceptive, i'd assume you've noticed that i'm not a big fan of convention. i'v certainly noticed that you are. different strokes... i said that the use of the word was technically correct. i had a problem with it stylistically. that's subjective so i don't know how i could be terribly wrong. and if you weaken that grip a bit you might cure that duck hook. Edited August 3, 2012 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) i always felt that the purpose of communication was, well, to communicate. +1 Yes, that is the goal. it appears i did that. -1 No. You said some stupid **** that doesn't make sense, and left it to the reader to do the real work of actually communicating your ideas. you discerned my meaning. +1 Yes, I did, but I'm a bright guy with a background in economics and philosophy; and it took awhile. It shouldn't. Words have meaning. Semantics matters. you didn't like it. -1 No. What I didn't like was the fact that you mauled the English language, and laid the responsibility of the speaker at the feet of the reader. that's a different issue entirely. -1 No. That's exactly the issue. if you are at all perceptive, i'd assume you've noticed that i'm not a big fan of convention. -1 No. What a perceptive person notices is that you lack the skill to articulate your thoughts, and that you are an intellectual prisoner of your limited language. i'v certainly noticed that you are (a big fan of convention). +1 Yes, I am skilled with words, but not overly so. You shouldn't be so awed. different strokes... -1 No. If we're competeing in the same race we all need to be using the same strokes. Debate is much like swimming in this manner. You've nearly used up all your faults, and are about to be disqualified. i said that the use of the word was technically correct. i had a problem with it stylistically. that's subjective so i don't know how i could be terribly wrong. -1 That's because you're an idiot who intentionally misuses words, but has issues with words used correctly. Total score: -3 Edited August 3, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 3, 2012 Author Share Posted August 3, 2012 -1 No. If we're competeing in the same race we all need to be using the same strokes. Debate is much like swimming in this manner. You've nearly used up all your faults, and are about to be disqualified. actually, not true. i've seen it happen in a medley relay in high school. the freestyle anchor for 1 team started in fly and had to finish in fly. still won. wouldn't admit to it being intentional. i've always favored freestyle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 actually, not true. i've seen it happen in a medley relay in high school. the freestyle anchor for 1 team started in fly and had to finish in fly. still won. wouldn't admit to it being intentional. i've always favored freestyle. Who's side are you on, anyway? His or yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 Who's side are you on, anyway? His or yours? Amazing who can become a doctor these days. Perhaps a pharmacist should translate his posts for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) Amazing who can become a doctor these days. Perhaps a pharmacist should translate his posts for us. Becoming a doctor isn't hard at all. It's becoming a good doctor that's difficult, and that's where he fails. You can't be a good doctor when your stated goal is to make care worse and to create scarcity for the majority of patients. Edited August 3, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 3, 2012 Author Share Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) Amazing who can become a doctor these days. Perhaps a pharmacist should translate his posts for us. competitive swimming: fly=butterfly. freestyle usually means crawl but literally means any stroke. get it? watch the olympics. so far they've done the im (individual medley) but there is also a relay race with four swimmers on a team each doing adifferent stroke. the anchor (last swimmer) does freestyle. in the meet i described the last swimmer started in butterfly rather than crawl. fly is gnerally slower than crawl, especially in high school. his team still won. some thought he was showing off. the point is that not all racers in an event must do the same stroke as tasker incorrectly said. whew, that was so worth it! Edited August 3, 2012 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) Becoming a doctor isn't hard at all. It's becoming a good doctor that's difficult, and that's where he fails. You can't be a good doctor when your stated goal is to make care worse and to create scarcity for the majority of patients. It's neither easy becoming a doctor NOR a good doctor. Edited August 3, 2012 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 Judge of Stroke not, lest ye be judged! /golfclap It's neither easy becoming a doctor NOR a good doctor. It's certainly not easy, but that isn't what I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 Amazing who can become a doctor these days. Perhaps a pharmacist should translate his posts for us. You'd be surprised. Some of these guys must be savants because some of them require long and extensive explanations, delivered very slowly with examples & explanations just to understand very basic concepts that your average Joe gets right off the bat. Granted, it isn't all of them; some are very smart, but too high a % are functionally retarded for it to be a coincidence. If you refer to him as Mr. Douche Bag & he corrects you with Dr. Douche Bag you're probably dealing with a moron who got a degree so he'd have plausible deniability to accusations of idiocy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts