Re: it's called a baserate fallacy ...

On 7/30/2026 6:53 PM, dart200 wrote:
> On 7/30/26 6:44 PM, Creon wrote:
>> At Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:42:44 -0400, Noah Sombrero <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 21:47:37 +0000, Creon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> At Thu, 30 Jul 2026 14:02:12 -0700, Dude <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Post your opinion here:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fine, I shall:
>>>>
>>>> I think there is too much "baseline fallacy" in the economics
>>>> discussion.
>>>>
>>>> And, I think the idea that the wealthy buy politicians is
>>>> a bit trite.
>>>
>>> And the reason certain ideas become trite is...
>>
>> $ dict trite
>> 2 definitions found
>>
>>  From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 
>> [gcide]:
>>
>>    Trite \Trite\ (tr[imac]t), a. [L. tritus, p. p. of terere to
>>       rub, to wear out; probably akin to E. throw. See {Throw}, and
>>       cf. {Contrite}, {Detriment}, {Tribulation}, {Try}.]
>>       Worn out; common; used until so common as to have lost
>>       novelty and interest; hackneyed; stale; as, a trite remark; a
>>       trite subject. -- {Trite"ly}, adv. -- {Trite"ness}, n.
>>       [1913 Webster]
>>
>>  From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]:
>>
>>    trite
>>        adj 1: repeated too often; overfamiliar through overuse;
>>               "bromidic sermons"; "his remarks were trite and
>>               commonplace"; "hackneyed phrases"; "a stock answer";
>>               "repeating threadbare jokes"; "parroting some timeworn
>>               axiom"; "the trite metaphor `hard as nails'" [syn:
>>               {banal}, {commonplace}, {hackneyed}, {old-hat},
>>               {shopworn}, {stock(a)}, {threadbare}, {timeworn},
>>               {tired}, {trite}, {well-worn}]
>>
>> ...and have I introduced you to the "panopticon" theory of media
>> dynamics?
>>
>> Media doesn't report what everyone thinks, it reports what it wants
>> everyone to think everyone thinks.
>>
>> Political corruption is a problem, but implying that _all_
>> wealthy people are part of that is...a baseline fallacy.
> seriously this group is literally just noah + a bunch of retarded cons 
> with their heads stuck up their butts, eh???
> 
> it's statistically provable that public opinion does _not_ influence 
> federal policy, and that only the opinion of the wealthy matters in us 
> federal policy. they do this by surveying groups of people, segmenting 
> them by wealth class, and comparing that to the result of public policy. 
> it's not a hard analysis.
> 
> in order to claim the /baserate/ fallacy u need some stats to back that 
> up, claiming it out of the blue is just a _bear_ assertion
>
That should be a wrap!
 >

>>
>>>
>>>> My biz partner has met with the FCC, along
>>>> with other representatives from regional ISPs that he
>>>> picked up along the way.  Can't afford lobbiests?  Lobby yourself.
>>>>
>>>> Someday I'll have to tell you our "coopetition" story.
>>>>
>>>>> Note: The opinions expressed by informants are their own and do not
>>>>> necessarily represent the views of all Usenet board subscribers.
>>
> 
>