Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
To make your example more relevant, I will make some adjustments:
.
.
.
tl;dr: your examples are oversimplistic binary choices that don't reflect the real-world topics we're discussing. My examples are a bit closer.
|
I repeat I don't understand your view and you don't understand mine. I saw nothing in what you added that clarified anything. I am not being judgmental, am not saying I am right and you are wrong. I just don't get it. For example if my wife wants another cat, my buy-in is contingent on my issues being addressed to my satisfaction. And I don't suggest my wife or anyone is obligated to satisfy my issues or concerns, however getting my buy-in requires what I stated. If my wife got a second cat without my "real" (that term again) buy in, it would be pretense to believe those issues go away just because she acted without my buy-in.
In context of the debt issues. I can easily support closing loop-holes in the tax code. All that is needed is an honest discussion regarding my concerns and issues and "we" could get a deal done that includes tax reform. There is a reason this did not happen, and you don't understand the reason. You just think I (again not literally "you" and "I" but people who hold our views and share our personality type) am being unreasonable.