Yuki already pointed out your factual mistakes which you have not been able to admit to because you are a partisan hack. This is open and shut. You are trying to assign some special guilt to the cali legislature over the taxation of gas because of this change which does not match reality. Your argument fails on a factual basis.


The other part of your argument which is more general also fails. That given the assumption that democrats are responsible for gas taxes, in cali and other places, they are hypocrites because they are against regressive taxation but support gas taxes. This argument also fails on multiple levels but mostly because it requires black and white thinking. It is based on the premise that if you are against regressive taxation that you have to have a zero tolerance policy towards any regressive tax or you are a hypocrite.


I am not aware of many liberals who have stated they have a zero tolerance policy for regressive taxation. This makes your claim that they are hypocrites a straw man.


I am aware of my own argument against regressive taxation and I fully support gas taxes despite the fact that they are regressive. I am more than happy to argue the merits of the gas tax and the problems with flat taxes & regressive taxes I don't like. I am not a hypocrite for having these opinions. You don't need to try and attach this issue to the cali legislature.

 

-----signature-----

Which was completely corrected by substituting one word: 'voted' for 'instituted'. Even that is me being magnanimous about the importance of the semantic difference... which is zero, by the way. The action of the Cali Dems is clear cut hypocrisy. Regardless.




Uhm... yes. That would be the definition of hypocrisy, numbnuts. "Degrees" of hypocrisy aren't measured by me in this thread, nor ever stated. That's for politicians and their apologist patsies like yourself to spin, in your attempt to mislead the less intelligent. See below, because your statement makes no sense without the word I inserted to clarify.




But you and I are both aware of hundreds of leading liberals who are 100% against PERVASIVE, UNIVERSAL regressive taxation. Which is what a regressive gas tax is, for everyone within the state it is instituted. Driver or no.

In conclusion... do you understand? Or do you remain willfully ignorant?

 

-----signature-----

In conclusion, you're stupid and you've convinced yourself that you're smart.

 

-----signature-----

AA your factual errors remain. The idea that changing the word matters is hilarious.


I don't really care that much about that issue though beyond the fact you are making a fool of yourself. I will gladly admit that I am both for a gas tax and against regressive taxation. If you want to argue that holding these two positions makes one a hypocrite you can argue with me.


You have failed to make an argument that goes beyond black and white thinking. In order to be a hypocrite one has to not actually have the belief they say they have. It does not mean that one cannot not have competing beliefs or that a belief has to be absolute. Your argument fails on both of these points.


Do you understand that someone can have two beliefs that compete and one wins out over the other? For example being against lying and against hurting people's feelings?


Also the belief of being against regressive taxation is most certainly an issue that can be on a sliding scale. All discussions of tax policy require you to understand this rather basic idea.


These two things are obvious IMO and you have made a fool of yourself by ignoring them. Your factual errors and your blindness to them are just icing on the cake of your failed argument.

 

-----signature-----

Got it.

 

-----signature-----

Why are you still talking about being an apologist for other people? I am putting my own position out there.


Your position is so weak that you have spent 4 pages trying not to talk about it. I happen to enjoy watching fools squirm for pages so keep it up.

 

-----signature-----

At this point I think Abaddon might be mocking himself... if you read his posts as pertaining to himself they make way more sense.

 

-----signature-----

yeah was gonna save that one for someone else but honestly - I think it's more appropriate right here...

 

-----signature-----

On the contrary. I have talked at length. But, only about my own position and the facts relevant to the observed case of hypocrisy... not the half dozen "look over there" distractions you want to insert.

Too bad. So sad.

 

-----signature-----

Actually pretty much every post, including the original, amounts to factual claims that are blatantly false followed by your claim of victory.


I enjoy each one since they so clearly demonstrate who you are. Full of ignorance and poor reasoning.

 

-----signature-----