▲ 660 ▼ "Earning a living" (infosec.pub) submitted 8 months ago by cm0002@infosec.pub to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.ca 96 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] the_q@lemmy.zip 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hapablap@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 8 months ago (2 children) Hardly worth engaging with someone who immediately starts with a strawman argument. I never said anything about worth or owned. But ironically I think most would consider the squirrel pretty hard working. I don't think many squirrels expect someone else to build their house. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] the_q@lemmy.zip 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hapablap@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 8 months ago Hard to argue one way or another with the one sentence statement in the original post. I mentioned that a social safety net is important but that there should be an expectation of work. Work doesn't necessarily mean toiling in a factory for some wealthy capitalist. Ideally it means work towards self-improvement, which can mean a variety of things, including toiling in a factory. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 point 8 months ago Alas, that's a misidentification of the strawman fallacy there, reading implication between the lines that was not there, as well as also mistaken about what was referred to on the lines. Good effort looking out for fallacies though. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hapablap@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 8 months ago (2 children) Hardly worth engaging with someone who immediately starts with a strawman argument. I never said anything about worth or owned. But ironically I think most would consider the squirrel pretty hard working. I don't think many squirrels expect someone else to build their house. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] the_q@lemmy.zip 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hapablap@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 8 months ago Hard to argue one way or another with the one sentence statement in the original post. I mentioned that a social safety net is important but that there should be an expectation of work. Work doesn't necessarily mean toiling in a factory for some wealthy capitalist. Ideally it means work towards self-improvement, which can mean a variety of things, including toiling in a factory. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 point 8 months ago Alas, that's a misidentification of the strawman fallacy there, reading implication between the lines that was not there, as well as also mistaken about what was referred to on the lines. Good effort looking out for fallacies though. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] the_q@lemmy.zip 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hapablap@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 8 months ago Hard to argue one way or another with the one sentence statement in the original post. I mentioned that a social safety net is important but that there should be an expectation of work. Work doesn't necessarily mean toiling in a factory for some wealthy capitalist. Ideally it means work towards self-improvement, which can mean a variety of things, including toiling in a factory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hapablap@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 8 months ago Hard to argue one way or another with the one sentence statement in the original post. I mentioned that a social safety net is important but that there should be an expectation of work. Work doesn't necessarily mean toiling in a factory for some wealthy capitalist. Ideally it means work towards self-improvement, which can mean a variety of things, including toiling in a factory. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 point 8 months ago Alas, that's a misidentification of the strawman fallacy there, reading implication between the lines that was not there, as well as also mistaken about what was referred to on the lines. Good effort looking out for fallacies though. permalink fedilink source parent