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

On 8/1/2026 7:38 PM, Dude wrote:
> 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?

It doesn't happen from Nick or from Noah. Both frame things in black and 
white. While claiming that everyone else is so ideological.