Re: oh, it's called a sweeping generalization retard ...

On 8/1/2026 3:01 PM, Tara wrote:
> On Aug 1, 2026 at 5:51:37 PM EDT, "Julian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On 01/08/2026 22:15, Tara wrote:
>>> On Aug 1, 2026 at 2:40:32 PM EDT, "Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/1/2026 2:10 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 13:40:13 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/1/2026 1:06 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> u literally justify overriding free market principles with closed
>>>>>>> borders because u profit from it!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> seriously, capitalists have no principles. it's all up for grabs when
>>>>>>> there is profit to be made!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it's fucking incredible you cried about how capitalism depends on people
>>>>>>> acting ethically ... while here you are in just a thread over shitting
>>>>>>> on basic principles of voluntary association because YOU benefit from
>>>>>>> doing so!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> god ur such a delusionally confused basket case wilson and ur wholly
>>>>>>> incapable of realizing it because the level of cognitive dissonance in
>>>>>>> just how much a shithead u've been for long would be too much for ur
>>>>>>> underdeveloped mind to handle,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My business actually profits more from open borders and no tariffs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Open borders means more customers. Over 20% of my customers are immigrants.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No tariffs means lower prices for my products.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I support restricted immigration and some tariffs because I think it
>>>>>> benefits the young and low pay workers. And in the end that will benefit
>>>>>> the country at large even if it works against my short-term interests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As to free association, that's been illegal in this country for 50 some
>>>>>> years. I'd support bringing it back as it empowers the individual
>>>>>> against the bureaucratic machine state.
>>>>>
>>>>> That sounds yummy.  But it does not square with what you have been
>>>>> saying here for the last ten years that I have been noticing.
>>>>
>>>> I've never once said that my opposition to mass immigration was because
>>>> it benefits me. Same with tariffs. That was solely your interpretation.
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me like you're hearing what you want to hear because it fits
>>>> your ideological biases. And because it's easier to deal with people
>>>> when you categorize them into boxes that have been predefined.
>>>>
>>>> "Boom, into that box you go Wilson. And never shall you be allowed to
>>>> escape!"
>>>
>>> True. This is why your view, if you want to be understood, when conversing
>>> with certain people, I think needs to be pretty well spelled out. maybe over
>>> and over again.
>>
>> It doesn't work with people who are so sure of their mind reading
>> ability that they believe they know your mind, thoughts, words and deeds
>> better than you do yourself no matter how many times you tell them
>> otherwise. If they respected you one correction would suffice.
> 
> Yeah!  Lets get some respect here eh. :)
 >
 From Nick?