$11,680,000,000

[SailKing1]

Originally Posted by Cruisingdad

Sway,

I will go ahead and make this public, though I will likely still stay out of this debate. First of all, my reasons for staying out of this debate were influenced well before Ragnar came back with the posts Cam deleted. It is the same reason I have not posted back to you on the Bakken thread - I feel like my involvement in it will cause frustrations and nasty responses - which is exactly what happened. It had NOTHING to do with me feeling I would lose the argument or was losing the argument.

My side of the story, and certainly he and you have your side, is that about post 93 he crossed the line. It was a fine conversation until then and though we strongly dissagreed, it was focused on the issues. I was NOT trying to get personal with him. When have I ever done that??? I was trying to point out that he was a product of the very free system that he deplores and what if he would not have had the funds to go to school? I was trying to make a point in general, not point him out. But he must have seen that as an attack on his person, because that is certainly what he did to me. He started calling me a lefty, and straw man... and whatever else. If he even thought I was going to turn it personal, he was going to make sure to get in the first shot. My response up until that point, and even after that point, was still focused and I tried to explain why I was asking what I was asking. I will also say that I was a bit shocked that you would start off, or even mention, that part about bitting off a chunk...etc. I am still not sure why you would do that. That seemed pretty uncalled for.

So I responded to a few threads afterwards, then finally decided that the frustration levels on the thread would be better off if I just left. I PM'd Cam about it and asked him to review the threads to see if I was going too far. THen I realized that if I have to do that, I should just leave it. So I did.

Cam felt a warning to Ragnar was warranted, so he did. Ragnar then decided to come back on and try to inflame me and the situation further with a couple more posts... even after I had bowed out and after he had been warned by Cam.

I did not ban him, Cam did. But I would have certainly been provoked given what he wrote. That was certainly his intention. Nah, it is just best that I stay away.

That has long been my frustration with getting into debates here - I feel like I need to walk a different line. And you know what, I should. Leaving the discsussion was smart and I should have done it earlier. In that respect, I was wrong and please accept my apologies - all involoved.

I think we all (me included) get too emotionally involved on what happens here. I think it is because many of us are very passionate about these issues. There is nothing wrong with that. But I still believe that it is VERY unlikely that there is anything we will say here that will change the course of the future... especially in off topic.

I am not a vengeful person and I hope that has been evident over the years I have been here and in my many responses. But just like anyone, I do not like being proded and provoked. My replies back to him could have (and maybe should have) been different, but in the end I walked away and even now wish him no ill-will.

Brian

CD, I got involved with this site because of my love for sailing and all the knowledge that the good people on this site have to offer. I also found myself attracted to the off topic threads because of the debates over real issues.

I am sorry that it became personal between Rags and yourself. And even though I might not agree with you on this issue I find your input an important contribution to the continuation of the debate. To me the difference in opinion between two sides and the dialog that ensues brings thoughts and questions to those listening. It may not even change the minds of those debating the issue but can be opening to the minds of others.

Do myself and I'm sure a lot of others a favor and don't bow out.

[sck5]

chuck

give me a break! all I said was that they all take federal money and not insignificant amounts but big amounts. Its hard to see where that statement is wrong, but hey, its all in the eye of the beholder. On the bigger topic, I actually think the USA has not only the best universities in the world, but the best public ones also. (Our best public ones may not be our best but still better than theirs). The problem is they are hideously expensive. (the private ones)

[PBzeer]

Then you should do some research on the effect of government tuition assistance.

[sailaway21]

Just for the record. A straw man is a reference to intentionally setting up a weak argument just so you can knock it down. It's generally done by presenting either a simplistic or incomplete version of one's opponent's argument and then blowing it over like a straw man.

My perhaps unwise alliteration in the opening of my post was merely intended to convey that I thought Rag's arguments regarding CD's posts were persuasive. Nothing more, nothing less. I have the highest respect for both posters although I do like to think that CD's butt belongs to me! (g)

[RAGNAR]

del

[RAGNAR]

del

[RAGNAR]

Deleted

[knothead]

Originally Posted by RAGNAR

I just want to say that, given CD's status on this site, I will no longer post here.

Alright boys, Take it to the Fight Club.

[Stillraining]

Maybe you guys could add to my CharlieCobra thread...Lots of love here today...

[lynn1120]

like most peole when the number of zeros gets too high even my eyes glaze over-- so I often look for articles that give context and perspective, I thought this was interesting-- From the Dennis Gartman letter:

ON TAKING ON THE LEFT
REGARDING OIL COMPANY PROFITS:
The Left has relied upon the fact that ExxonMobil's profits
for the last quarter were the largest by any company in
history as a reason why a windfall profits tax is necessary.
The sheer size of XOM's profits do seem, on their face, to
be large, making it hard for those of us who are free
market capitalists to argue when the Left brings this up.
However, continuing with Mr. Tillerson's interview with
ABC News last evening, Tillerson took on the Left's
arguments and dashed them on the rocks. He said

"I saw someone characterize our profits the other
day in terms of $1,400 in profit per second. Well,
they also need to understand we paid $4,000 a
second in taxes, and we spent $15,000 a second
in cost...We spend $1 billion a day just running
our business. So this is a business where large
numbers are just characteristic of it."