Are things (Australia/society/the world) getting better or worse?

[clogged]

clogged Am I to infer that you are implying that I am in any way like your vegan 'mate'?

If so, I would wonder why you would resort to an ad hominem attack on me rather than addressing the arguments I have presented.

You have presented two completely polar opposite arguments within the space of 18 months. At one point you mocked those who thought the world was turning to shit, now you mock those who think the world is OK. Why should anyone address your arguments when you will most likely bump this thread in 18 months time mocking those who agreed with you this time around?

Next time you want to cry foul about ad hominem, look in the mirror:

Much easier to denounce anybody who points out these elephants in the room and then get back to Australia's Got Talent and commenting on friends' selfies on facebook.

 

[nicky]

Ok SB, I probably agree with what you're saying about Big 4 banks but delivering the info in a thread where you've just told us that we have failed to acknowledge the "golden era" is like punching us twice.

You WANT to deliver us bad news and tell us we're doing everything wrong.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

You have presented two completely polar opposite arguments within the space of 18 months

Firstly, that's rubbish. Here is what I said 18 months ago:

In the 'world' sense, tensions between the US and China will only rise, and declining cheap oil will have serious effects; In Australia, a widening gap between rich and poor in absolute terms will eat away at our relatively egalitarian ideals; socially, the consequences of the breakdown in the family unit will continue to permeate throughout society. And so on.

However, these will be more than offset by the advances made elsewhere.

So it is my view on the last part of that line of thinking that has changed. Hardly 'polar opposite'.

Secondly, you are focusing on the presenter of the argument rather than the argument itself. This is what first-year philosophy students are taught not to do, as it is ad hominem. It is irrelevant to the case being made.

Thirdly, as a bloke named John once said, when the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?

Again, if you can find fault with any of the information provided in the piece I wrote, or the logic underpinning the overall narrative, then please present it. I will look into it and if necessary amend my work. I am open to the possibility of being wrong, as we all ought to be. In the meantime I go with best evidence at hand and right now that evidence suggests that things are about to get a lot worse.

I would dearly love to be proven wrong and will not be too proud to admit it should this happen

 

[clogged]

Firstly, that's rubbish. Here is what I said 18 months ago:

So it is my view on the last part of that line of thinking that has changed. Hardly 'polar opposite'.

Dunno bro, think you're quoting yourself out of context there. Further on:

The world is not getting worse and if you truly believe that it is, I feel sorry for you. May the cosmos have mercy on your soul.

FD

 

[Hot Pocket]

Income inequality means we're pretty much ****ed.

 

[nicky]

Dunno bro, think you're quoting yourself out of context there. Further on:

That must have been right in the middle of the golden age which he had the awareness to acknowledge.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

Dunno bro, think you're quoting yourself out of context there. Further on:

And as I have said, my overall position on that has changed.

Have you never changed your opinion?

Do you even have opinions?

Anyhow, why are you so fixated on me, rather than the more than 100 pieces of evidence I have supplied to back up my contention?

 

[clogged]

And as I have said, my overall position on that has changed.

Have you never changed your opinion?

Mildly over the years. Can't recall a revolution in my thinking.

Do you even have opinions?

Yep.

Anyhow, why are you so fixated on me, rather than the more than 100 pieces of evidence I have supplied to back up my contention?

I probably agree with some of your evidence. But not all.

 

[nicky]

SB, the content of what you're saying is probably on the mark but your delivery is shit and throws people off. Like the quote clogged just posted where you are pitying anyone who doesn't see the world is a positive way. The sub text being that we're idiots and you're superior because you have the ability to acknowledge the golden age.

Now the same sub text exists, (we're all idiots and you're superior), but for opposite reasons.

The only consistent thing in this thread is the sub text.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

I probably agree with some of your evidence. But not all.

Cool, let's focus on that, then.

Point out the parts you disagree with and why.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

SB, the content of what you're saying is probably on the mark

Then why don't you do your own research and work out just how 'on the mark' it is?

Instead of attacking the man carrying the message, why don't you focus your energies on the message itself?

I'll give you and everybody else reading this the hot tip: I could die tomorrow and the truth would remain the same.

This isn't about me. It is about the facts. And for some reason, people like yourself and clogged want to focus on me rather than on the facts.

We can all do so much better.

 

[clogged]

Cool, let's focus on that, then.

Point out the parts you disagree with and why.

Shall we take it to your thread?

 

[nicky]

Yes i'm happy to do that