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

On 7/30/26 8:43 PM, Dude wrote:
> 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!

is that ur way of agreeing dud???

> 
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>>
> 


-- 
why are we god?
let's end war 🙃