Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
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.
|
I think it would be more accurate to say that 1) I understand your view but that I can't seem to see how it applies to the real world, and 2) you understand my view but disagree with it.
If you need me to clarify my view, let me know. I'll try to keep it simple. Maybe I'll use an example with cats.
Quote:
|
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.
|
But you made it sound as though your buy-in was of absolutely no consequence. Do you care to elaborate?
Quote:
|
In contest 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.
|
Why didn't it happen? Because today's Republicans are more tax adverse than Reagan?