[lbo-talk] Von Hayek was wrong

Mark DeLucas mkdelucas at gmail.com
Mon Apr 4 18:11:25 PDT 2011


"any time phrases like “I am talking to a baby boomer” appear in counter-“argument”s, it is pretty much an admission of unwillingness (or inability) to engage with the content."

Does it happen a lot Ravi? Very high-minded of you though; very much to be respected. And indeed I was bowled over by Joanne's extremely detailed and well-evidenced "argument" that free-workers are necessarily creatures of privilege, which is why literally the only words I wrote were "Of course you're a boomer".

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:05 PM, // ravi <ravi at platosbeard.org> wrote:


> On Apr 2, 2011, at 7:08 PM, 123hop at comcast.net wrote:
> >>>
> >>> But I wasn't arguing against social security and pensions. I was just
> saying
> >>> that working for free is a luxury most can't afford.
> >>>
> >
> >> One doesn't argue about a fact. But your 'argument' suggests that it is
> >> better to sit in the park and starve rather than spend some of the day
> at
> >> work where it's warmer.
> >
> > No it doesn't. It wasn't an argument, it was an observation that workers
> who are already privileged in some way can afford to work for free. I mean,
> one of the workers described in the article worked for free for one year
> after which he/she got some kind of executive position.
> >
>
>
> (a) “one doesn’t argue about a fact” assumes facts hang around in the air
> waiting to be plucked and archived.
>
> (b) any time phrases like “I am talking to a baby boomer” appear in
> counter-“argument”s, it is pretty much an admission of unwillingness (or
> inability) to engage with the content. There was a wise gent who used to say
> that a lot, around these parts.
>
> —ravi
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list