Was Malthus ever poor?

[garbon]

I knew it wasn't.

[Malthus]

This, though, is bullshit.

I never claimed that my experience was the same as those who grew up poor. In fact, if you read the thread, you would see that I consistently said the opposite - that a few years' stint of being (without money? Money disadvantaged? What exactly would you have me say here?) is not the equivalent of growing up poor. This whole fracas was started because I corrected CC on this very point - and myself said that I had advantages he lacked.   

I love how on Languish you can say one thing over and over again, but people will *still* claim you have said the exact opposite: "basically rendering rhetorically invisible" is right - what I actually said is being "rendered rhetorically invisible" here. His claim to heroism is quite safe from any alleged assault by me. 

Isn't this whole thread a discussion about whether by saying "poor" you are (CC's view) or are not (your view) making those claims?

No, the whole discussion was about whether I was wrong to have claimed I was "poor" for a few years after getting out of university, simply because I was earning very little money as a potter's assistant.

I never made any of those claims for "heroism" or whatever. In fact, I very specifically told CC I was *not* making those claims in the very first exchange. In fact, far from complaining about how I had it tough, I went further, and told him I had in fact had benefits available to few, such as free tuition as a "perk" of my dad's job as a prof.

That's why this whole discussion is highly annoying. CC's framed the debate based on a complete and utter fabrication and you are buying into it.

Again it is like the stroller meme. Some people knew it wasn't my stroller and others did not, simply because the meme got repeated enough times. If CC etc. repeat enough times that I was complaining about how hard I had it, people like you will believe it.

As Winston Churchill said, ""A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." He may have been imagining Languish. 

[Malthus]

We are well aware you did not actually have the stroller Malthus.

Apparently, not everyone was.

I am somewhat puzzled by the idea that being poor is a credential only gained once you have met a series of requirements.  Maybe Fiddler on the Roof was wrong about being poor not being a great honor.

That makes two of us.

Apparently, merely mentioning the word and you are "rhetorically" denying the dignity of poverty. Or something.

[OttoVonBismarck]

For the record I thought Malthus had an expensive stroller, but that the $2,000 stroller was a hyperbolic exaggeration.

[Razgovory]

Okay, but what about the insects?

[crazy canuck]

Okay, but what about the insects?

That is a different alt life best saved for another thread.

[crazy canuck]

That's why this whole discussion is highly annoying. CC's framed the debate based on a complete and utter fabrication and you are buying into it.

One last time then I am done with this thread.  You claimed to be poor.  I at first accepted that notion until you said you father was a professor.  I then said that you were not poor with a father like that.

You insist that you were poor because you had a few years between undergrad and law school where you earned, in your estimation, a small amount of money.  I tried to point out to you that being poor is more than that.  You failed to understand the point and lashed out.

Fine.  Take your narrative that your were poor if that helps you in some way.  But to those of us that really were poor, you just look silly.

[Jacob]

No, the whole discussion was about whether I was wrong to have claimed I was "poor" for a few years after getting out of university, simply because I was earning very little money as a potter's assistant.

I never made any of those claims for "heroism" or whatever. In fact, I very specifically told CC I was *not* making those claims in the very first exchange. In fact, far from complaining about how I had it tough, I went further, and told him I had in fact had benefits available to few, such as free tuition as a "perk" of my dad's job as a prof.

That's why this whole discussion is highly annoying. CC's framed the debate based on a complete and utter fabrication and you are buying into it.

Sounds like we're in agreement; the debate is about the framing of "poor". Neither you nor CC are ceding one inch on your respective readings.

[Admiral Yi]

Sounds like we're in agreement; the debate is about the framing of "poor". Neither you nor CC are ceding one inch on your respective readings.

That's not fair.  Malthus has objectively described his situation and expressed willingness to substitute any appropriate terminology for poor.

[Jacob]

That's not fair.  Malthus has objectively described his situation and expressed willingness to substitute any appropriate terminology for poor.

You're right. Malthus did concede the point somewhat earlier, but clearly CC was not satisfied with the particulars of the concession.

[sbr]

That's not fair.  Malthus has objectively described his situation and expressed willingness to substitute any appropriate terminology for poor.

You're right. Malthus did concede the point somewhat earlier, but clearly CC was not satisfied with the particulars of the concession.

Malthus conceded the point almost immediately.  He said he would be more than happy to use a better one word descriptor if someone came up with one.

[DGuller]

For the record I thought Malthus had an expensive stroller, but that the $2,000 stroller was a hyperbolic exaggeration.

I thought it was his stroller as well, and I thought that the $2000 was the real price, and that the higher prices mentioned were trolling exaggerations.  

[PDH]

I thought Malthus paid $2000 for the blood of gentile babies.

[garbon]

I thought Malthus paid $2000 for the blood of gentile babies.

I thought he was a gentle baby.

[Admiral Yi]

I thought Malthus paid $2000 for the blood of gentile babies.

That's a pretty good price.