That is an appeal to authority, but not a fallacious one. Lawmakers know a lot about how and why people steal. Fallacious appeal to authority is when the authority you’re talking about has no knowledge of the topic, for example quoting a psychologist on nutrition advice.
Lawmakers don’t know shit about fuck. Sometimes they have experts available they listen to. Otherwise it’s whoever spends the most, who they’re buddies with, or what just feels like it will jive with their base at the time.
lol, fallacy fallacy
I’ve actually had this dispute on Lemmy.
Dude kept insisting I tell him my income but refused to say how or why it would be relevant.
Ed: no joke, it was flyingsquid too which is a bit more funny tbh.
It’s a very sensible conclusion when I’ve asked you how rich you are multiple times and you refuse to answer. Even after I told you my economic situation.
You’re rich and you are embarrassed about it because it makes you look just as callous and dismissive of the poor as Elon.
To be fair, you did call them a petty tyrant for making a joke about trolling the sovcit posts as an IRS agent.
Also made me curious if you do enjoy some light tax evasion or are into the whole “I don’t pay taxes because I am the only citizen in my own nation inside your nation” thing
Correct, that’s both petty and tyrannical which makes them a petty tyrant ie. Someone who would abuse their power to amuse or benefit themselves. It’s only worse that it’s on sovcit shit because that’s their actual claim ie that government is abusing them.
Also made me curious if you do enjoy some light tax evasion or are into the whole “I don’t pay taxes because I am the only citizen in my own nation inside your nation” thing
How? I’m literally pointing out their wish to abuse their power. Why would I dodge taxes if I give a shit about the government working as intended?
Your first mistake was choosing to debate one of the most argumentative people on Lemmy. Can only get weird from there
Not a mistake. I like arguing and getting them to abuse their mod power and admin connections to try to win arguments just makes it more entertaining for me.
Keep going. While people like you troll each other, at least you can’t annoy others.
That’s such a low bar for “rich”. The difference between a millionaire and a billionaire is about a billion dollars.
“No.”
…
Why do people deflect instead of just saying no?
I was struggling to understand that for a long time too. It seems like it’s a mix of being told that just saying no is not polite and an aversion to conflict. Especially when stating needs.
Some parents actively discourage their children to state their needs clearly and concisely from a very very young age.
Companies that give personality tests in the hiring process are largely looking at your “agreeableness” score. We’re constantly taught (from an early age, as you mention) that the default answer should be “Yes.” If you’re creative, you might push it to “Yes, and…” But a plain “no” from anyone who isn’t explicitly labeled as a “leader” is a non-starter in systems obsessed with hierarchy.
There are really only three options. Try to climb an existing hierarchy. Make your own hierarchy and place yourself atop it. Or operate within and between hierarchies without unnecessarily validating their existence. That last one’s increasingly difficult by design. And honestly, the second one usually requires exploiting others.
The best answer to that question avoids all fallacies.
“No”
I think gigachad could argue that it’s Invincible Ignorance.
That’s a single authority falacy, in this case there is only one opinion, the person who’s protecting their financial information, to promote the idea of not looking into someone’s bank account. When there could be a legitimate reason to look into a person’s finances.
In all seriousness in so far as the meme is presenting itself single authority is prudent. Like what if every decision about yourself everyone was always a stakeholder? That would be hell.
