Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KMA-628
I have to say that is a new one in a debate.
"its true and I don't even have to back it up"
wow, even when someone refutes your assertions?
so........if I make a claim and someone disagrees with me......can I pretty please use your argument instead of actually having to bring any facts into the discussion?????????
The tax cut affected many different levels of wage earners. It also affected people in a way not related to their income.
"The tax breaks primarily went to the rich".
I am telling you that I dispute this assertion. This statement basically says that rich people got tax cuts while the "working class" and the "poor" got very little.
show me the facts. Don't give me some childish, playground, wimp-out answer.
If, for some reason, you decide to actually research the topic and provide some "proof" to bakc up your claim.....I will apologize. Until then, did you really think a silly answer like "I don't have to" would work?
|
You're getting a little close to insulting. Actually, you're right there, and you know it. Otherwise, you wouldn't have to offer to apologize under some circumstances. Please moderate your language to continue being a good citizen of the Titled Forum.
As it stands, I did dig up a corroborating article in response to another post. It's a couple of posts up from this one.
And what I meant by "I don't have to" is that I felt that the logic behind my argument was clear for everyone to see. Apparently I was wrong.
I've been too much the enabler in this conversation. I've dug up some info. Rather than say, "I'm tired of hearing this," dig up some facts of your own, if you can.