The Deer Population Is Devastating Maui. Hunters Want To Help (transplants, license)

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by TAM1972

You ought avoid further attempts at cleverness or wit.

Just speak plainly, and avoid further strawboys.

I did speak plainly. There was no straw boy.

You advise that assistance to people in need teaches them to remain poor.

You did not specify circumstances. You generalized: “them.”

An example of one kind of needy person who plainly benefits from assistance in absence of ability to compete was given.

You cast yourself as some sort of debate logician and labeled that correction as a strawman. It wasn’t. The reality that I could list many circumstances under which assistance is clear benefit without diverting recipients from personal responsibility and development would demonstrate that your generalization was glib and vacuous.

There are lots of needy people: kids, elderly, disabled (both permanent and temporary), sick, refugee arrivals, disaster victims … and more.

You broad stroked … you got called on it … you tried to reframe what you wrote … you got called on that … and then doubled down.

You are welcome to your opinion, of course. And readers are responding to its shallow arrogance.

[TAM1972]

Originally Posted by Grassyknoll

You are correct, your original statement: "You're not really helping them, except teaching them how to stay poor.".

So no, you didn't advocate starving the elderly, just that we should allow them to remain poor.
Come on Grandma, you want to eat? Get out of that wheelchair and get a job you freeloader!

You have gone past the point of foolish. My statement stands, and not one iota of your hyperbole has not put so much as a scratch on it. Perpetual hand outs decrease independence and increase dependence not only in the benefactor, but also in current relatives and future generations.

[TAM1972]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

I did speak plainly. There was no straw boy.

You advise that assistance to people in need teaches them to remain poor.

You did not specify circumstances. You generalized: “them.”

An example of one kind of needy person who plainly benefits from assistance in absence of ability to compete was given.

You cast yourself as some sort of debate logician and labeled that correction as a strawman. It wasn’t. The reality that I could list many circumstances under which assistance is clear benefit without diverting recipients from personal responsibility and development would demonstrate that your generalization was glib and vacuous.

There are lots of needy people: kids, elderly, disabled (both permanent and temporary), sick, refugee arrivals, disaster victims … and more.

You broad stroked … you got called on it … you tried to reframe what you wrote … you got called on that … and then doubled down.

You are welcome to your opinion, of course. And readers are responding to its shallow arrogance.

My statement stands without so much as an iota of contradiction, all your slithering notwithstanding.

[Grassyknoll]

Originally Posted by TAM1972

You have gone past the point of foolish. My statement stands, and not one iota of your hyperbole has not put so much as a scratch on it. Perpetual hand outs decrease independence and increase dependence not only in the benefactor, but also in current relatives and future generations.

I love a guy who doubles down on a bad position

Nobody was discussing the effectiveness of assistance programs. The original comment you replied to was about local efforts to use game animals to feed poor and elderly local families.

You stepped in it, maybe unaware of local needs and traditions (ever live in Hawai'i, particularly rural areas?).
And to be clear, my wife formerly worked in the welfare fraud department in Califoirnia, so I probably have a greater understanding of the rampant levels of fraud than do you, and a equal to greater level of dislike for welfare leeches. But communities in rural Hawai'i donating game to locals in need ain't that.

But feel free to try to defend your initial position further, it's entertaining.

[Futuremauian]

How about those deer in Maui, eh?

[staystill]

I just don't understand why they are not taken to other areas where they are needed. Like India there was a child taken by a predator that would normally eat deer. Why aren't there organizations that can help with this problem. many wildlife are dyeing from lack of food and many deer are starving to death or overpopulating. This would help more wildlife instead of just hunting them for sport.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by TAM1972

My statement stands without so much as an iota of contradiction, all your slithering notwithstanding.

Lol. “Slithering,” eh? That wasn’t ‘slithering.’ That was a polite analysis, right on the money.

[TAM1972]

Originally Posted by staystill

I just don't understand why they are not taken to other areas where they are needed. Like India there was a child taken by a predator that would normally eat deer. Why aren't there organizations that can help with this problem. many wildlife are dyeing from lack of food and many deer are starving to death or overpopulating. This would help more wildlife instead of just hunting them for sport.

$$$.

[TAM1972]

Originally Posted by Grassyknoll

I love a guy who doubles down on a bad position

Nobody was discussing the effectiveness of assistance programs. The original comment you replied to was about local efforts to use game animals to feed poor and elderly local families.

You stepped in it, maybe unaware of local needs and traditions (ever live in Hawai'i, particularly rural areas?).
And to be clear, my wife formerly worked in the welfare fraud department in Califoirnia, so I probably have a greater understanding of the rampant levels of fraud than do you, and a equal to greater level of dislike for welfare leeches. But communities in rural Hawai'i donating game to locals in need ain't that.
But feel free to try to defend your initial position further, it's entertaining.

:
Nobody, not you or mutt has so much as laid a glove on what I said. You haven't even tried because you know it's overwhelmingly true. Instead, you guys have created and attacked a strawman (or strawboy as the case may be).

Good job!!

[Grassyknoll]

Originally Posted by TAM1972

:
Nobody, not you or mutt has so much as laid a glove on what I said. You haven't even tried because you know it's overwhelmingly true. Instead, you guys have created and attacked a strawman (or strawboy as the case may be).

Good job!!

LOL, maybe there's a reason nobody is taking your side. But hey, lots of flat-earthers are adamant in their convictions too (oh no, I hope I didn't offend you as you strike me as a FE type).