• For our 10th anniversary on May 9th, 2024, we will be giving out 15 GB of free, off-shore, DMCA-resistant file storage per user, and very possibly, public video hosting! For more details, check a look at our roadmap here.

    Welcome to the edge of the civilized internet! All our official content can be found here. If you have any questions, try our FAQ here or see our video on why this site exists at all!

Bad arguments people make about current events

Houseman

Zealot
Sanctuary legend
Messages
1,068
The argument:



Jacksepticeye's post is the argument here, where the implication is that people have always been this gay, it's just that widespread acceptance has led to record number of people "coming out".

The rebuttal:

There is no scientific consensus about whether people are "born gay", so there's no proof that people are just "being who they truly are". Not only that, ex-homosexual and ex-trans people exist, which couldn't be possible if they were "truly" were homosexual or trans.

We humans are social creatures and are, generally speaking, willing to conform to the behavior of others as we seek their approval. We are sheep. We follow the crowd, even when we suspect the crowd is wrong, or if it rings untrue in our heart. This, unlike the nature of homosexuality, has been proven through repeated scientific experiment. There are even cases of copycat suicides and copycat mass-shootings.

Many people do not think for themselves in many aspects of their life. I'm sure someone who agrees with Jacksepticeye would also accuse religious people of this same thing, that people are only religious and "bigoted" to fit in with their parents or community. They might also say that being gay is the opposite of fitting in, since you are just volunteering to be oppressed and bullied, so why would anyone ever "fake" being gay?

Again, look to the religious, who have been persecuted and killed for these "bigoted" beliefs on a scale far greater than homosexuals ever were. Why would anyone volunteer for that? Because they truly believe it. I am not accusing you, my hypothetical gay opponent, of "faking" your gayness. I am accusing you of being thoroughly fooled. You have caught a social contagion. Like they say with covid, you are infected without even knowing it.

Did you know that in societies where rape is more acceptable, more rapes happen? Wow! It's like people there are more comfortable being the rapists that they truly are, instead of having to suppress their natural urges! It's called progress, bigot!
 

Houseman

Zealot
Sanctuary legend
Messages
1,068
The argument:


The headline of the article reads: "Republican States Sue to Let Schools Block LGBTQ Children From Getting Meals"

The rebuttal:

That's just a straight-up lie.
What's going on is that lunches for children are being held hostage by Biden's administration. They're saying, in effect "comply with our LGBT inclusiveness rule (bathrooms, sports teams, etc), or you will no longer get federal funding, which includes money for lunches"

This is not "Republicans want the right to starve LGBT kids". This is "Democrats want to starve all children in the school unless the board complies with their demands".
 

Arnox

Master
Staff member
Founder
Messages
5,285
The argument:


The headline of the article reads: "Republican States Sue to Let Schools Block LGBTQ Children From Getting Meals"

The rebuttal:

That's just a straight-up lie.
What's going on is that lunches for children are being held hostage by Biden's administration. They're saying, in effect "comply with our LGBT inclusiveness rule (bathrooms, sports teams, etc), or you will no longer get federal funding, which includes money for lunches"

This is not "Republicans want the right to starve LGBT kids". This is "Democrats want to starve all children in the school unless the board complies with their demands".
True but some people would argue that's a good thing that the schools will be forced to adopt these rules. What is your take on that?
 

Houseman

Zealot
Sanctuary legend
Messages
1,068
True but some people would argue that's a good thing that the schools will be forced to adopt these rules. What is your take on that?
I don't care, so long as one's argument for it is not based on lies, false information, or fallacies.
 

Houseman

Zealot
Sanctuary legend
Messages
1,068
The argument:



From the front page of reddit, possibly influencing millions of people who see it.

The rebuttal:

"Productivity" is a measurement of the hourly output of a country's economy, based on the gross domestic product (GDP) produced by an hour of labor. What do workers produce? Food? Sewing needles? Bicycles? Guitars? Smartphones? Car engines? Jets? What is the value of all these things?

Oh, they're all different things, so trying to lump them all together, and then using that to base any sort of wage is ridiculous.

Money is not a reward for how productive you are, or for how much or how hard you work. It is an incentive to get you to work and participate in the economy. If you have your own little self-sustaining farm, nobody shows up and hands you money for all your hard work, no, you have to sell your crops, first. Does that farmer get a minimum wage for his daily toil under the hot sun? No. However, he can choose to sell his crops at a price that suits him, and people are free to buy or not, depending on whether it suits them.

Why should a McDonald's worker get paid more for doing the same exact job when McDonalds first started, 70 years ago? Is a burger worth more, because the country is more "productive" as a whole? Because a technological advancement made it twice as fast to create jet engines, or create concrete, does that mean that the teenager who scoops your fries is also similarly twice as fast, and should get paid more? No, that's ridiculous.

On the subject of "Wall Street bonuses", why do these people get such large bonuses? The answer is simple, because they produce EVEN MORE MONEY for their companies. A hypothetical broker on Wall Street can make their clients 100s of millions of dollars. If they get a bonus of 5-million dollars, that's a drop in the bucket compared to what they brought to the company. Same with CEOs and other top-level executives. You always hear "oh, these CEOs raise their salaries and get bonuses while the poor janitor is mopping the floors and can't even afford a new car"

Those salaries are what they are for a reason. They're to attract "talent". If you want a $100,000/yr CEO to run your billion-dollar company, then your billion-dollar company might well turn into a million-dollar company, and then that janitor, along with thousands of other employees, will be out of a job when downsizing hits. Money is not being wasted when a CEO gets a bonus, it's money spent on keeping the company profitable.

You, who flips burgers, are simply not contributing a comparable level of value as a CEO is. Your pay does not need to "keep up" with those who contribute more than you do.

By the way, why are you working a minimum wage job anyway? Are you 16?
 

Arnox

Master
Staff member
Founder
Messages
5,285
The argument:



From the front page of reddit, possibly influencing millions of people who see it.

The rebuttal:

"Productivity" is a measurement of the hourly output of a country's economy, based on the gross domestic product (GDP) produced by an hour of labor. What do workers produce? Food? Sewing needles? Bicycles? Guitars? Smartphones? Car engines? Jets? What is the value of all these things?

Oh, they're all different things, so trying to lump them all together, and then using that to base any sort of wage is ridiculous.

Money is not a reward for how productive you are, or for how much or how hard you work. It is an incentive to get you to work and participate in the economy. If you have your own little self-sustaining farm, nobody shows up and hands you money for all your hard work, no, you have to sell your crops, first. Does that farmer get a minimum wage for his daily toil under the hot sun? No. However, he can choose to sell his crops at a price that suits him, and people are free to buy or not, depending on whether it suits them.

Why should a McDonald's worker get paid more for doing the same exact job when McDonalds first started, 70 years ago? Is a burger worth more, because the country is more "productive" as a whole? Because a technological advancement made it twice as fast to create jet engines, or create concrete, does that mean that the teenager who scoops your fries is also similarly twice as fast, and should get paid more? No, that's ridiculous.

On the subject of "Wall Street bonuses", why do these people get such large bonuses? The answer is simple, because they produce EVEN MORE MONEY for their companies. A hypothetical broker on Wall Street can make their clients 100s of millions of dollars. If they get a bonus of 5-million dollars, that's a drop in the bucket compared to what they brought to the company. Same with CEOs and other top-level executives. You always hear "oh, these CEOs raise their salaries and get bonuses while the poor janitor is mopping the floors and can't even afford a new car"

Those salaries are what they are for a reason. They're to attract "talent". If you want a $100,000/yr CEO to run your billion-dollar company, then your billion-dollar company might well turn into a million-dollar company, and then that janitor, along with thousands of other employees, will be out of a job when downsizing hits. Money is not being wasted when a CEO gets a bonus, it's money spent on keeping the company profitable.

You, who flips burgers, are simply not contributing a comparable level of value as a CEO is. Your pay does not need to "keep up" with those who contribute more than you do.

By the way, why are you working a minimum wage job anyway? Are you 16?
Wait, so just so I understand what exactly you're arguing here, you're not opposed to a minimum wage increase per se, but you are opposed to absurd increases to the minimum wage?
 

Houseman

Zealot
Sanctuary legend
Messages
1,068
Wait, so just so I understand what exactly you're arguing here, you're not opposed to a minimum wage increase per se, but you are opposed to absurd increases to the minimum wage?
I'm not arguing for or against any position, I'm just pointing the ways in which arguments are flawed.
 

Vendor-Lazarus

Arch Disciple
Sanctuary legend
Messages
936
I'm not arguing for or against any position, I'm just pointing the ways in which arguments are flawed.
You are missing a part of the picture here though. At least when it comes to high-type salaries. Corruption, nepotism, collusion, insider trading, monopoly/monopsonism, lobbying, etc. I'd say money is the least part the most attractive work place, and just because they have talent doesn't mean they have passion.
 

Houseman

Zealot
Sanctuary legend
Messages
1,068
You are missing a part of the picture here though. At least when it comes to high-type salaries. Corruption, nepotism, collusion, insider trading, monopoly/monopsonism, lobbying, etc. I'd say money is the least part the most attractive work place, and just because they have talent doesn't mean they have passion.
That may be, but the politician didn't say anything about that. I'm not saying that "capitalism is fair" or "there's nothing wrong with wall street", I'm responding to his argument, and explaining why it is flawed.
 

Houseman

Zealot
Sanctuary legend
Messages
1,068
The argument:

(from reddit)

The rebuttal:

Have you ever heard of COINTELPRO? It was a program where J. Edgar Hoover's FBI committed illegal activities against citizens of the US, spying on them, harassing them, framing them for crimes, trying to discredit them, blackmailing them, forging documents, giving false stories to the media, wrongfully imprisoning them, even using violence and finally assassinating their targets.

They even funded, armed, and controlled a violent, right-wing group to be their agitators. Sound familiar?

Why did they do all this? Because the FBI deemed their targets "subversive", and therefore, dangerous. Because they disagreed with their viewpoints.
Was MLK a "subversive"? Well, he was on their list of targets.

So the next time you think the FBI is a shining beacon of justice, ask yourself why this organization would go after MLK.

Did Trump steal documents?
Or are FBI are up to their old tricks again?
 
Top