I thought the Bush tax cuts only benefitte dthe rich?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by fishbones

Seems to me that he's pointing out what he does for a living to explain his point. I'd consider an actuary a subject matter expert when it comes to tax discussions.

Do you think RIRockhound is being pretentious when he's explaining things having to do with science? To me, he's an SME because of what he does for a living.

There's a whole lot of ribbing that goes on around here as we bust each other's chops. However, RIRockhound doesn't try to lift himself up by demeaning another person's career throwing out comments like "You need a refresher course. I'm sure you can find some continuing ed seminar somewhere...when you get your next issue of Pravda or "The Daily Worker", check the classifieds... ", and if so, I've missed them.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

There's a whole lot of ribbing that goes on around here as we bust each other's chops. no, there are many here that LOVE to take their own shots and then whine indignant when responded to in kind, and particularly when shown to be wrong...this is a good example However, RIRockhound doesn't try to lift himself up by demeaning another person's career throwing out comments like "You need a refresher course. I'm sure you can find some continuing ed seminar somewhere...when you get your next issue of Pravda or "The Daily Worker", check the classifieds... ", and if so, I've missed them.

actually it's Spence that throws the "Brian is a scientist so he can't be wrong" thing in you face...not so much recently given the state of the global warming debate....ahhhhh...climate change.......ehhhhh......ummmmm......errrrrr....no oooo....wait for it........YES....the new and improved term to scam the planet...GLOBAL CLIMATE DISRUPTION...we'll try that for a while and see if it catches on

hope it fares better than "man caused disasters"...a term that most aptly describes Obama

Jim, don't worry about these clowns, when they start insulting you at the end of an argument it means they lost miserably on substance and they hope you'll go away so you won't be around to continue to prove them wrong...note that the quality of the insults were pretty pathetic and unintelligible in JD's case...which isn't unusual

it's a little sad that you even have to explain some of these things

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

Jim, don't worry about these clowns, when they start insulting you at the end of an argument it means they lost miserably on substance and they hope you'll go away

Thanks, that's usually how I take it.

I can be smug too, and I need to work on it, because it takes away from the dialogue. I just got pretty frustrated when a CPA tried to pull, WHAT I THOUGHT WAS, some numeric "slight-of-hand" on me. Posting my profession wasn't bragging (being a number cruncher isn't exactly a line I use at singles bars), I said that to establish that I know what I'm talking about when it comes to math, finance, and statistics.

I concede that not "every single democrat" said the cuts only benefitted the rich. I was using hyperbole to illustrate the point, and only one or two of you took that literally.