I am disputing the benefits of true open borders. And considering that no one has actually done this, there’s very little data to go on. If you have any that go beyond the theoretical, I would love to see it.
I am disputing the benefits of true open borders. And considering that no one has actually done this, there’s very little data to go on. If you have any that go beyond the theoretical, I would love to see it.
Like anyone gives a shit what you think.
I wasn’t cherry picking, I was showing that the article backed up my points. Notice how the pieces you quoted ALSO didn’t refute my points. Cherry picking means ignoring information that would be harmful to your argument, not JUST ignoring information.
Like anyone gives a shit what you think.
Like anyone gives a shit what you think.
Like anyone gives a shit what you think.
What in that wikipedia article refutes what I said? Here from the text:
Like anyone gives a shit what you think.
Ne truly is a special one, isn’t ne? Always has to ‘win’ to the point of being blind to obvious logical inconsistencies. Thinks if ne keeps on posting that I’ll eventually have an actual discussion about the topic, rather than string nyr along with the barest of engagement, as a form of amusement.
[...]you’re here too. Asking questions, giving opinions, generally stating your view of the world.
Up until this contrary statement, I haven’t been arguing at all. A response is not an argument. A dismissal is not an argument. A statement of fact is not an argument. And an agreement is certainly not an argument.
Agreed.
Considering there aren’t that many billions of people on the entire planet, I think we’d be safe to, yeah. But, obviously, I was making a point about your rhetoric. I really don’t understand why you’re trying to dodge the points I’m making by using literal understandings that make me spell it out for you, as if you’re…
Yeah, not to pile on, but ‘incognito mode’ should be understood as “People with access to my computer can’t see my browsing history”, but specifically NOT as “Interested parties can’t track me.”
Like anyone gives a shit what you think.
Like anyone gives a shit what you think.
Agreed.
Wait, what? A poem wasn’t legal doctrine?!! Has anyone told Emmerson!?!
I’m not here to answer your questions, comrade.
For the most part, yes. Closeable when necessary, but otherwise as wide open and acccepting as possible.