The Rebel Faction

If any of you wacko wackjob crazies ever has any part in shaping the future of this continent I will shoot myself in the head.

This includes, but is not limited to: Irtard, Telan "Javol" Desaria, Park Krackhead and Jan Donothing.

Beff Pike:

---

If any of you wacko wackjob crazies ever has any part in shaping the future of this continent I will shoot myself in the head.

Does voting count? Cause I always vote. The people I vote for haven't ever won, but I do vote.

Jan Donothing

Sadly more accurate that I wish it were.

Kach Thorton:

---

Do you have a PhD in economics, Zell? Then STFU.

Kach Thorton:

---

And do you think I'm just a stupid little shit who is spewing BS about the market?

Yes, that's exactly what I think and I might feel bad about it if every time you added anything to this argument it didn't reinforce my opinion 100%.

Kach Thorton:

---

Well I may be a little shit, but I'm certainly not stupid ,and I know quite a bit about the markets because I'm a successful commodity and stock trader (successful enough that my college is paid for). I know how markets move and react to these things.

Do you think I give a fuck that you know how to work eTrade.com? And the fact that you SUPPOSEDLY paid for you entire education based on being this super amazing day trader may be an amazing achievement, but does that in itself make you "right"? No, of course it doesn't. At BEST it means you have an above-average understanding of how to move stocks, it doesn't make you any more of an expert than anyone else.
Your argument is littered with fallacies. Here are two major ones that make you more or less retarded.

A) I can't speak with you because I don't have a PhD.

Well, as everyone else has already pointed out... neither do you. The fact that someone has a PhD in any subject does not automatically make them "right" when arguing on that subject. Get a room full of PhDs together and watch them all agree, I'm sure that'll happen. Having a PhD merely means you satisfied coursework to earn that specific degree, it does not mean that you are the end-all be-all of financial matters.

You have a few professors who agree with your position.

So because you have a few professors, let's say you've got a LOT of professors that all agree with you, OK? It's fallacious to say that because you're surrounded by educated people that agree with you that every educated person agrees with you. Do you disagree with that? Do you think that just because a few of your professors taught you that Obama is responsible for the shit heap we're in that every professor in the country agrees, and therefore you're right? Because that's the picture you're painting.

Let me ask you this, would you rather take the opinion of some professor at the University of Wisconsin, or would you like the opinion of someone who is... I don't know... let's say THE RICHEST MAN IN THE WORLD according to Forbes. Warren Buffet? Ever heard of him? Because he supported Obama, so based on that fact alone you're stupid and I'm right.

But just for funsies I'm going to point out something else that makes you look enormously stupid.

Kach Thorton:

---

Wes if you find something more solid to debate on obama about (for example the economy, which he happens to be crashing right now due to his anti-business stance) I'll support you, but they've got you on this whole Israel thing.

Kach Thorton:

---

Right now what you're seeing on Wall Street is not caused by the mortgage Crisis--the whole bailout thing cleared that up. What you're seeing now, Beff, is investors pulling out of the market because the most anti-business president in history is coming, and he's going to have a congressional majority to back him up.

Kach Thorton:

---

I stand by my belief that Obama's election is at least partially responsible for the falling market. This forum, however, is the wrong place to argue it.

Kach Thorton:

---

Nonsense, Kraken, there's plenty of good arguments. BTW, his comerades are responsible for blocking Bush's attempts to reform Fannie and Freddie, so even though Obama's not responsible for the big crisis we've had his party is, and not "secretly."

Well, which is it? You emphatically stated that this is all Obama's fault, not once but twice, then you shifted to "Obama's.. at least partially responsible" to "even though Obama's not responsible for the big crisis we've had his party is".
So which one of your well thought out arguments should we pay attention to Kach? That Obama's responsible, that he's partially responsible, or that the Democrats are responsible?

Y'all need to come down south and get a real education.

Yeah, my internet is down at my apartment for the most part. But I'm on frequently through University networks and those of my friends.