The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
I'm scratching my head at how someone could conclude that poverty and homelessness don't really exist in our societies just because he or she hasn't experienced it first-hand.
Well, that would be puzzling. Now who are you referring to exactly?
This debate is now edging into to the world of underhand accusations and straw men. I'm not gonna go there. I will not defend positions I have never had and I will not stand for being accused of opinions that have nothing to do with what I said.
Thank you for debating seriously.
That is not my definition of "most".
First of all those numbers relate to not having a permanent home, not the people living on the streets or in shelters. Second of all one third + one half = five sixths, and 5/6th is indeed "most".
Now who are you referring to exactly?
You were the one who brought up your experience, as if it had some relevance to your argument.
Second of all one third + one half = five sixths, and 5/6th is indeed "most".
Only an idiot or an ideologue would argue that the one-third and the one-half could not possibly overlap and must therefore total five-sixths. Have you heard of a Venn diagram? Or are you just being intellectually dishonest?
I will accept no barbs from you about debating seriously, thank you. Study some basic math, then come back and chat.
The third and the half does not exactly overlap, which is rather obvious. Thus it must in total be more than one half, and hence, it is "most".
You are not debating seriously, you are rude, and asking me to study mathematics is seriously stupid.
I'm sorry that what I'm going to say now is gonna sound as rude as what you said. But the difference is that it's true.
I was invited here by a friend to discuss politics. Unfortunately, this place is full of people with preconceived idea who gets angry when reality comes knocking on the door. It's rather pointless to continue debating with those people since it prevents all serious debate, since the only thing that is accepted is sucking up and agreeing to your fantasies of how you want the world to behave, even when that is not how things are.
You want the poverty in the US to be horrid. No, you need it. The US must be a horrible place for poor, because the US politics must be evil, because the US is the most powerful country in the world, so if they aren't evil, everything would be fine, right?
Sorry, you have no idea of how things work, you don't understand a pluralistic society and as a consequence you are afraid of freedom, and instead grab comfort in collectivistic myths.
I wish I understood how to make people like you understand. But I guess I never will.
Just so you know, you are responding to an American person, and probably close to half of the regular readers of this site are Americans.
Unpatriotic ones, presumably. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Unpatroticism is good.
Let's just talk about my hometown
She is taking about stuff she saw with her own eyes, it's you who clings to myths six thousand miles away. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 3 2 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 2 2 comments
by gmoke - Nov 28
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 21 10 comments
by gmoke - Nov 12 6 comments
by Oui - Dec 5
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 32 comments
by Oui - Dec 214 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 22 comments
by Oui - Dec 26 comments
by Oui - Dec 112 comments
by Oui - Dec 14 comments
by Oui - Nov 306 comments
by Oui - Nov 289 comments
by Oui - Nov 276 comments
by gmoke - Nov 26
by Oui - Nov 268 comments
by Oui - Nov 26
by Oui - Nov 2513 comments
by Oui - Nov 2318 comments
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 222 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 2110 comments
by Oui - Nov 2120 comments