So you want better paying jobs?

[Correll]

I have guesses about what you mean. YOU NEVER ANSWER REQUESTS FOR CLARIFICATION, NOR RESPOND TO ANSWERS TO YOUR POSTS IN A FASHION TO LET ME KNOW IF MY GUESS WAS RIGHT.


It is always a tangent off into la la land.

Nothing but diversion due to a lack of a clue and a Cause?

I asked you a specific legal question. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

And back to la la land.

no, clue, no Cause, no Standing. Thank you for ceding the point and the argument due to your social, slack.

Not really feeling the motivation to interpret your language at this time.


I have pushed and discovered enough for now. I will probably take another swing at it against some time in the future.

Why not read up on the concept of employment at will; so we can discuss it.

It's your pet, you tell me in two sentences, only use normal dictionary meaning for words, and no made up phrases.

I challenge you to try.

 

[Correll]

Nothing but diversion due to a lack of a clue and a Cause?

I asked you a specific legal question. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

And back to la la land.

no, clue, no Cause, no Standing. Thank you for ceding the point and the argument due to your social, slack.

Not really feeling the motivation to interpret your language at this time.


I have pushed and discovered enough for now. I will probably take another swing at it against some time in the future.

It's as if it has a big box full of words and phrases and shakes a few out at random.
It has never made sense, answered a direct question or attempted to answer a point.
Life is vastly more pleasant with it in ignore.

why not learn how to acquire and possess a clue and a Cause.

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

 

[danielpalos]

i would like to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but repeal, instead of a Good argument.

 

[Correll]

i would like to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but repeal, instead of a Good argument.

Was that you not answering my question?

You couldn't just say "no"?

<sigh> like I said, I done with you for now.

 

[danielpalos]

Nothing but diversion due to a lack of a clue and a Cause?

I asked you a specific legal question. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

And back to la la land.

no, clue, no Cause, no Standing. Thank you for ceding the point and the argument due to your social, slack.

Not really feeling the motivation to interpret your language at this time.


I have pushed and discovered enough for now. I will probably take another swing at it against some time in the future.

Why not read up on the concept of employment at will; so we can discuss it.

It's your pet, you tell me in two sentences, only use normal dictionary meaning for words, and no made up phrases.

I challenge you to try.

Why not read up on the concept of employment at will; so we can discuss it.

In any Case, simply reserving labor at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage that clears our poverty guidelines, will engender market based conditions conducive to capitalists seeking efficiency gains from capital investment rather than simply lowering costs through cheaper labor.

 

[danielpalos]

And back to la la land.

no, clue, no Cause, no Standing. Thank you for ceding the point and the argument due to your social, slack.

Not really feeling the motivation to interpret your language at this time.


I have pushed and discovered enough for now. I will probably take another swing at it against some time in the future.

It's as if it has a big box full of words and phrases and shakes a few out at random.
It has never made sense, answered a direct question or attempted to answer a point.
Life is vastly more pleasant with it in ignore.

why not learn how to acquire and possess a clue and a Cause.

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

simply resorting to fallacy is an "abomination" against philosophy if not religion.

 

[Correll]

no, clue, no Cause, no Standing. Thank you for ceding the point and the argument due to your social, slack.

Not really feeling the motivation to interpret your language at this time.


I have pushed and discovered enough for now. I will probably take another swing at it against some time in the future.

It's as if it has a big box full of words and phrases and shakes a few out at random.
It has never made sense, answered a direct question or attempted to answer a point.
Life is vastly more pleasant with it in ignore.

why not learn how to acquire and possess a clue and a Cause.

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

simply resorting to fallacy is an "abomination" against philosophy if not religion.

So, that's you failing to answer my question.

Given your behavior, and the consensus on it, I think my question is very fair.

If you are somehow unaware that you are being rude, that goes back to my suggestions that there is really something wrong with you.

I do not believe that is the case.

IMO, you are likely just a very pretentious communist who is trying to cloak his real agenda with unclear jargon and poor sentence structure.

With various rationalizations as to why it is ok of your to be dishonest in avoiding real dialog well trolling those few who are willing to talk with you.

 

[Ernie S.]

And back to la la land.

no, clue, no Cause, no Standing. Thank you for ceding the point and the argument due to your social, slack.

Not really feeling the motivation to interpret your language at this time.


I have pushed and discovered enough for now. I will probably take another swing at it against some time in the future.

It's as if it has a big box full of words and phrases and shakes a few out at random.
It has never made sense, answered a direct question or attempted to answer a point.
Life is vastly more pleasant with it in ignore.

why not learn how to acquire and possess a clue and a Cause.

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

WTF is a clue and a cause?

 

[Correll]

no, clue, no Cause, no Standing. Thank you for ceding the point and the argument due to your social, slack.

Not really feeling the motivation to interpret your language at this time.


I have pushed and discovered enough for now. I will probably take another swing at it against some time in the future.

It's as if it has a big box full of words and phrases and shakes a few out at random.
It has never made sense, answered a direct question or attempted to answer a point.
Life is vastly more pleasant with it in ignore.

why not learn how to acquire and possess a clue and a Cause.

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

WTF is a clue and a cause?

JUst gibberish he puts out there to avoid real discussion.

I think he is a communist who on some level realizes that he cannot defend his position.


Oddly, this puts him several steps AHEAD of most lefties who have several layers of rationalizations about what they believe and who really think they are smart enough to win debates defending their bloody ideologies.

 

[Ernie S.]

Simply click on his avatar and then click on "ignore" in the pop up box. Your quality of life will improve immediately.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

WTF is a clue and a cause?

its drooling from an 10 year old illiterate liberal speaking English as second language while thinking he's a genius!!

 

[danielpalos]

Not really feeling the motivation to interpret your language at this time.


I have pushed and discovered enough for now. I will probably take another swing at it against some time in the future.

It's as if it has a big box full of words and phrases and shakes a few out at random.
It has never made sense, answered a direct question or attempted to answer a point.
Life is vastly more pleasant with it in ignore.

why not learn how to acquire and possess a clue and a Cause.

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

simply resorting to fallacy is an "abomination" against philosophy if not religion.

So, that's you failing to answer my question.

Given your behavior, and the consensus on it, I think my question is very fair.

If you are somehow unaware that you are being rude, that goes back to my suggestions that there is really something wrong with you.

I do not believe that is the case.

IMO, you are likely just a very pretentious communist who is trying to cloak his real agenda with unclear jargon and poor sentence structure.

With various rationalizations as to why it is ok of your to be dishonest in avoiding real dialog well trolling those few who are willing to talk with you.

dude; argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. why not argue the point, unless you want to cede the argument.

 

[Boss]

dude; argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. why not argue the point, unless you want to cede the argument.

Dude, no one can understand the point or argument you are trying to make. You keep repeating strings of terminology pieced together out of context and it doesn't make rational sense. No one knows what you mean or what you're trying to say.

...We must eat more organic foods because the climate change initiative creates real jobs in expansion of energy independence with regards to private sector growth without the national debt in accordance with a rising GDP and current capital gains tax rates. It's Simple!

 

[Correll]

It's as if it has a big box full of words and phrases and shakes a few out at random.
It has never made sense, answered a direct question or attempted to answer a point.
Life is vastly more pleasant with it in ignore.

why not learn how to acquire and possess a clue and a Cause.

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

simply resorting to fallacy is an "abomination" against philosophy if not religion.

So, that's you failing to answer my question.

Given your behavior, and the consensus on it, I think my question is very fair.

If you are somehow unaware that you are being rude, that goes back to my suggestions that there is really something wrong with you.

I do not believe that is the case.

IMO, you are likely just a very pretentious communist who is trying to cloak his real agenda with unclear jargon and poor sentence structure.

With various rationalizations as to why it is ok of your to be dishonest in avoiding real dialog well trolling those few who are willing to talk with you.

dude; argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. why not argue the point, unless you want to cede the argument.

I have repeatedly explained why I cannot argue the point. Because you do not present your point in a understandable manner.

I am not attacking you personally. I am seriously and constructively pointing out that either your communication skills or your purposeful obtuseness is making communication difficult if not impossible.

For example. From what you have presented, it appears to me that you are a communist.

I have repeatedly asked you if this is true.

Your response has, at best, been incoherent gibberish.

I ask again, are you a communist?

 

[Ernie S.]

Preserve your sanity. Ignore him.

 

[danielpalos]

dude; argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. why not argue the point, unless you want to cede the argument.

Dude, no one can understand the point or argument you are trying to make. You keep repeating strings of terminology pieced together out of context and it doesn't make rational sense. No one knows what you mean or what you're trying to say.

...We must eat more organic foods because the climate change initiative creates real jobs in expansion of energy independence with regards to private sector growth without the national debt in accordance with a rising GDP and current capital gains tax rates. It's Simple!

dude, Everyone but the clueless and the Causeless know what i am saying; it is why your "shillery" is so annoying, but for the practice.

 

[danielpalos]

why not learn how to acquire and possess a clue and a Cause.

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

simply resorting to fallacy is an "abomination" against philosophy if not religion.

So, that's you failing to answer my question.

Given your behavior, and the consensus on it, I think my question is very fair.

If you are somehow unaware that you are being rude, that goes back to my suggestions that there is really something wrong with you.

I do not believe that is the case.

IMO, you are likely just a very pretentious communist who is trying to cloak his real agenda with unclear jargon and poor sentence structure.

With various rationalizations as to why it is ok of your to be dishonest in avoiding real dialog well trolling those few who are willing to talk with you.

dude; argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. why not argue the point, unless you want to cede the argument.

I have repeatedly explained why I cannot argue the point. Because you do not present your point in a understandable manner.

I am not attacking you personally. I am seriously and constructively pointing out that either your communication skills or your purposeful obtuseness is making communication difficult if not impossible.

For example. From what you have presented, it appears to me that you are a communist.

I have repeatedly asked you if this is true.

Your response has, at best, been incoherent gibberish.

I ask again, are you a communist?

It has to do with employment at will; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law. If you refuse to be responsive, that is grounds ending your Standing in any serious discussion, but most especially, in legal venues.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

simply resorting to fallacy is an "abomination" against philosophy if not religion.

So, that's you failing to answer my question.

Given your behavior, and the consensus on it, I think my question is very fair.

If you are somehow unaware that you are being rude, that goes back to my suggestions that there is really something wrong with you.

I do not believe that is the case.

IMO, you are likely just a very pretentious communist who is trying to cloak his real agenda with unclear jargon and poor sentence structure.

With various rationalizations as to why it is ok of your to be dishonest in avoiding real dialog well trolling those few who are willing to talk with you.

dude; argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. why not argue the point, unless you want to cede the argument.

I have repeatedly explained why I cannot argue the point. Because you do not present your point in a understandable manner.

I am not attacking you personally. I am seriously and constructively pointing out that either your communication skills or your purposeful obtuseness is making communication difficult if not impossible.

For example. From what you have presented, it appears to me that you are a communist.

I have repeatedly asked you if this is true.

Your response has, at best, been incoherent gibberish.

I ask again, are you a communist?

It has to do with employment at will; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law. If you refuse to be responsive, that is grounds ending your Standing in any serious discussion, but most especially, in legal venues.

In a capitalist system jobs pay the most possible and pay rises as new inventions lead to greater efficiency and more productivity.

 

[danielpalos]

simply resorting to fallacy is an "abomination" against philosophy if not religion.

So, that's you failing to answer my question.

Given your behavior, and the consensus on it, I think my question is very fair.

If you are somehow unaware that you are being rude, that goes back to my suggestions that there is really something wrong with you.

I do not believe that is the case.

IMO, you are likely just a very pretentious communist who is trying to cloak his real agenda with unclear jargon and poor sentence structure.

With various rationalizations as to why it is ok of your to be dishonest in avoiding real dialog well trolling those few who are willing to talk with you.

dude; argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. why not argue the point, unless you want to cede the argument.

I have repeatedly explained why I cannot argue the point. Because you do not present your point in a understandable manner.

I am not attacking you personally. I am seriously and constructively pointing out that either your communication skills or your purposeful obtuseness is making communication difficult if not impossible.

For example. From what you have presented, it appears to me that you are a communist.

I have repeatedly asked you if this is true.

Your response has, at best, been incoherent gibberish.

I ask again, are you a communist?

It has to do with employment at will; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law. If you refuse to be responsive, that is grounds ending your Standing in any serious discussion, but most especially, in legal venues.

In a capitalist system jobs pay the most possible and pay rises as new inventions lead to greater efficiency and more productivity.

maybe if we end the capital gains distinction whenever Firms report unfilled positions due to wage issues.

 

[Correll]

Yes or no.

Are you aware you are being a jerk?

I want a one word answer. NOthing else.

Yes. Or No.

simply resorting to fallacy is an "abomination" against philosophy if not religion.

So, that's you failing to answer my question.

Given your behavior, and the consensus on it, I think my question is very fair.

If you are somehow unaware that you are being rude, that goes back to my suggestions that there is really something wrong with you.

I do not believe that is the case.

IMO, you are likely just a very pretentious communist who is trying to cloak his real agenda with unclear jargon and poor sentence structure.

With various rationalizations as to why it is ok of your to be dishonest in avoiding real dialog well trolling those few who are willing to talk with you.

dude; argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. why not argue the point, unless you want to cede the argument.

I have repeatedly explained why I cannot argue the point. Because you do not present your point in a understandable manner.

I am not attacking you personally. I am seriously and constructively pointing out that either your communication skills or your purposeful obtuseness is making communication difficult if not impossible.

For example. From what you have presented, it appears to me that you are a communist.

I have repeatedly asked you if this is true.

Your response has, at best, been incoherent gibberish.

I ask again, are you a communist?

It has to do with employment at will; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law. If you refuse to be responsive, that is grounds ending your Standing in any serious discussion, but most especially, in legal venues.

And you failed to answer a simple yes or no question.

You are either messed up, or very rude.

The non answer you did post is nothing but gibberish and self serving blather.

What do you think you are doing?