Facebook Follies of Friends and Families

[HVC]

Such is the moral of the Capitalist.

Trusting the state not to screw you will it screws over others is a pretty entrenched commie belief, too, to be fair.

[Admiral Yi]

Mono was autistic and thus resisted change and hated disruptions to his routine. Yi still has faith in the American judicial system and the checks and balances. I think its extremely naive, verging on fatelism, but its nothing like mono. Only similarity is that they're both Asian

Mono was a realist and a pragmatist.  He assessed the likelihood of the umbrella demonstrations succeeding in fundamentally changing the political situation in Hong Kong as zero and protected his self interest. It turns out he was right.

[Admiral Yi]

If I get Yi's "logic" on this, if that's legal you should ignore it. And if it's not legal you should also ignore it because the courts will conjure their magic to make it stop.

You don't get my logic.  I've never suggested anyone ignore anything.

[HVC]

Mono was autistic and thus resisted change and hated disruptions to his routine. Yi still has faith in the American judicial system and the checks and balances. I think its extremely naive, verging on fatelism, but its nothing like mono. Only similarity is that they're both Asian

Mono was a realist and a pragmatist.  He assessed the likelihood of the umbrella demonstrations succeeding in fundamentally changing the political situation in Hong Kong as zero and protected his self interest. It turns out he was right.

He was a realist in so far as that he understood no one would back up the HK demonstrators and they were doomed to failure, sure, but he opposed them because of the disturbance it caused. He wanted the status quo not because of some grand calculation  on his end but because he needed it. Just like he needed the same soccer teams to win the World Cup or to eat the same breakfast everywhere he travelled.  I firmly believe that if the government was the one on the street ICE style mucking with his train schedule he'd be anti government too (quietly )

[DGuller]

If I get Yi's "logic" on this, if that's legal you should ignore it. And if it's not legal you should also ignore it because the courts will conjure their magic to make it stop.

You don't get my logic.  I've never suggested anyone ignore anything.

Yi, I'm often on your side, but I think one difficulty here is that you frequently are stating what you're not saying, but rarely are stating what you are saying.  It makes it easy for others to fill in the gaps, especially when frankly it's not clear what your thinking actually is.

[mongers]

Mono was autistic and thus resisted change and hated disruptions to his routine. Yi still has faith in the American judicial system and the checks and balances. I think its extremely naive, verging on fatelism, but its nothing like mono. Only similarity is that they're both Asian

Mono was a realist and a pragmatist.  He assessed the likelihood of the umbrella demonstrations succeeding in fundamentally changing the political situation in Hong Kong as zero and protected his self interest. It turns out he was right.

He was a realist in so far as that he understood no one would back up the HK demonstrators and they were doomed to failure, sure, but he opposed them because of the disturbance it caused. He wanted the status quo not because of some grand calculation  on his end but because he needed it. Just like he needed the same soccer teams to win the World Cup or to eat the same breakfast everywhere he travelled.  I firmly believe that if the government was the one on the street ICE style mucking with his train schedule he'd be anti government too (quietly )

[grumbler]

If I get Yi's "logic" on this, if that's legal you should ignore it. And if it's not legal you should also ignore it because the courts will conjure their magic to make it stop.

You don't get my logic.  I've never suggested anyone ignore anything.

Yi, I'm often on your side, but I think one difficulty here is that you frequently are stating what you're not saying, but rarely are stating what you are saying.  It makes it easy for others to fill in the gaps, especially when frankly it's not clear what your thinking actually is.

Agree. Yi can have a position that's contrary to the opinion of the majority here, and that's perfectly okay, but he needs to state what that position is, and answer questions with answers, not with questions.

I( have no idea what his position is on the legality or morality of the Trump Administration's tactics are, because he won't say.

[Admiral Yi]

Yi, I'm often on your side, but I think one difficulty here is that you frequently are stating what you're not saying, but rarely are stating what you are saying.  It makes it easy for others to fill in the gaps, especially when frankly it's not clear what your thinking actually is.

I'm very happy to answer any direct, good faith question. I'm less enthusiastic about responding to bad faith statements like straw men or false dichotomies or accusations of repeating Trumpian talking points, except to deny them. I'm less  enthusiastic about responding to apparently good faith questions when the interlocutor does not reciprocate by answering my question.  I think those are all the wrong way to do it and I don't want to encourage it.

[bogh]

Do you think ICE is behaving in a reasonable and productive manner in Minneapolis overall?

[Admiral Yi]

Do you think ICE is behaving in a reasonable and productive manner in Minneapolis overall?

The first shooting to me looks unreasonable. Not following the court's order in Joan's latest link sounds unreasonable. Detaining the second guy in Joan's first link sounds unreasonable.

I don't know what you mean by productive.  Arrests per man hour?  I don't have a  comparison to judge against.

[bogh]

You didn't answer my (direct good faith) question.

You responded on a couple of specific cases, not the sum total of it and deflected with a question back at me for the second part.

[Admiral Yi]

You didn't answer my (direct good faith) question.

You responded on a couple of specific cases, not the sum total of it and deflected with a question back at me for the second part.

I answered the question to the best of my ability.  Unreasonable consists of discrete, concrete acts or it's meaningless.  Do you want my opinion based on mood, or feeling, or aesthetics, or taste?

I asked for clarification because I didn't know what you meant.  If you ask me whether a certain factory worker is productive, I can form a judgement if I'm given the room average production of widgets per hour.  When it comes to arresting suspected illegal immigrants not already being detained by law enforcement, I don't know the room average.

[Maladict]

I think on Languish we're ok with opinions not being based on 100% verifiable facts.

[Tamas]

I think on Languish we're ok with opinions not being based on 100% verifiable facts.

That is a fact.

[grumbler]

You didn't answer my (direct good faith) question.

You responded on a couple of specific cases, not the sum total of it and deflected with a question back at me for the second part.

I answered the question to the best of my ability.  Unreasonable consists of discrete, concrete acts or it's meaningless.  Do you want my opinion based on mood, or feeling, or aesthetics, or taste?

I asked for clarification because I didn't know what you meant.  If you ask me whether a certain factory worker is productive, I can form a judgement if I'm given the room average production of widgets per hour.  When it comes to arresting suspected illegal immigrants not already being detained by law enforcement, I don't know the room average.

I think that you are defining "unreasonable" in a needlessly narrow manner.  Policies can be unreasonable. Laws can be unreasonable. Beliefs can be unreasonable. Lots of things beyond mere acts can be unreasonable.

Ditto for "productive." There are meanings beyond your narrow economics viewpoint.