Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Protest: Demonstration to protest against Government bail outs of property developers

Options
13567

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    chump
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭chump


    plasmaguy wrote:
    I do approve of stimulating the housing market but not in the current way.

    plasmaguy wrote: »
    But different to you I am in favour of helping tens of thousands of ordinary tradespersons, ie ordinary human beings with kids and mortgages find employment again...

    You later suggest stamp duty 'reform' as a method of stimulating the housing market?
    What are you suggesting is stimulated?
    1. House building? (to help all the tradepersons) or
    2. House selling?

    My response to this is

    1. There are too many houses, maintaining the previous levels of construction is untenable. Construction will naturally return to sustainable levels when supply meets demand. Net result, tradepersons will lose jobs. This pain cannot be avoided.

    2. Reducing stamp would have the benefits of lowering the net cost of purchasing certain properties for certain people. The taxes would need to be raised elsewhere. I'd like you to outline this suggestion further as I can't see how this will fix things ... see below

    the fundamental reason for slowed property market IMO are

    a. unrealistic prices and concern that prices have not bottomed out
    b. restricted access to credit

    The way I look at this is

    b. Credit is still available. The requirements to access it have been restricted. I can not see these requirements changing any time soon, and quite frankly they appear perfectly reasonable in my eyes.

    a. Prices have not bottomed out and are not affordable. The media, EA's, vested interests are best served by accepting this. The sooner this is accepted the better for everybody.

    There is inevitable pain for everybody, with the obvious suspects suffering the most.

    The best way to resolve this is to first accept this. Let's not try to flog a dead horse and drag this out for everybody and drag the country through the gutter.

    Reduce house prices.
    Let the developers suffer.

    The best way to look after those people who lost jobs and will lose jobs is to offer education and create new employment for them. This is not in property related industries.

    We must let the property bubble die and try to patch together a sustainable economy from the fallout.


    SimpleSam06 wrote: »
    No you're using it to lend weight to your argument, an unoriginal and uninspiring tactic.
    [...]
    I present plasmaguy as an example of this. For the rest of the world, the market, and the economy, a correction would be prices around 1999-2000 levels or thereabouts. But you don't want to hear that.

    A really good post IMO. ^^^
    plasmaguy wrote: »
    You are a fool...

    Bad form.
    jackal wrote: »
    Yes, I was there.
    A success all round I think, hopefully it will be on the news later.

    Congrats lads.


  • Options
    #63
    Colonel Sanders
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,669 ✭✭✭Colonel Sanders


    I'd estimate 30-40 people. Got a lot of attention from passers by and a lot of motorists blowing their horns at us (did that sentence sound as bad as I think!!)

    Excellent idea and well done to everyone involved.


  • Options
    #64
    SimpleSam06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,048 ✭✭✭SimpleSam06


    20goto10 wrote: »
    Nobody can define a correction.
    I'll define a correction for you. A correction is what happens when things are not correct. When things become correct, no further correction takes place. In the case of the price of houses you're talking about houses that reach approximately true value for money.

    The only debate is what that point is. I myself tend towards the "rule of twelve", twelve times the annual rental value of the property or area. This would mean a much more drastic correction in house prices than we have seen so far, so I expect it has a ways to go yet.


  • Options
    #65
    plasmaguy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,683 ✭✭✭plasmaguy


    The problem with a board like this is....you have lots of people reading it, each one with a dfferenent interest and each one with a different opinion.

    If a hundred different people read this thread and read something I write, 50 might agree with me while 50 might disagree and express another opinion..

    I have stated my opinion, but unfortunately, given the emotive nature of the topic in question I don't have the time to answer each poster individually and if i did answer each poster individually another 10 posters would take me to task on what I say.

    There is only one of me and about 20 opposing me on this thread, now that doesn't make them right and me wrong, but it does mean they can post once and go off while I am supposed to answer what they say and the other 19 say as well.

    I will say this and yee can take it or leave it, I won't be answering any more posters for the reasons I just stated, ie too time consuming.

    You all think we should wait for the correction. Can anyone here predict with 100% accuracy when the prediction will be? Absolutely not, because that's like trying to predict what the weather will be like on this day in 3 years.

    The 'correction' might take place in 1 year, 3 years, 5 years or 10 years. If we wait for the correction, in terms of public finances then we could be waiting 10 years.

    Indeed we could be at the bottom of the market right now, and personally I suspect we are near the bottom of the market myself. I don't see house prices falling that much more, because you will always have high demand, high wages, greedy auctioneers and speculators in this country.

    If the fall in the market was related to the credit crunch, then the market/governments are correcting that now...that means a return to normal business and the availability of credit once more.

    I don't believe in terms of public finances, it's wise to sit on our hands and wait for an improvement in world markets. We have brains in this country so why not put them to good use? Should we as a nation be dictated to by the Wall Street moguls of the government we elect? I know which I prefer.

    Like I say anyone who thinks we can survive with a 10 billion deficit a year is deceiving themselves. It will mean cutbacks, pure and simple. Is anyone here old enough to remember what the cutbacks of the 80's were like?

    I just don't want to see our public finances and remember FF only manage them, but it's our money, not theirs, dragged through the mud like they did near the end of the 70's and which we were paying for decades to fix and if people think I'm dumb for saying that, it's water off a duck's back to me!


  • Options
    #66
    punchestown
    Registered Users Posts: 660 ✭✭✭punchestown


    plasmaguy wrote: »

    Is anyone here old enough to remember what the cutbacks of the 80's were like?

    I just don't want to see our public finances and remember FF only manage them, but it's our money, not theirs, dragged through the mud like they did near the end of the 70's and which we were paying for decades to fix and if people think I'm dumb for saying that, it's water off a duck's back to me!

    As a matter of interest, do you remember the cutbacks of the 80's? You speak in certain areas of somebody who lived through those times as an early adult rather than a young child. I can only concur then that you are in your 40's which would make it highly unlikely that you are a FTB. You sound suspiciously like a VI with an agenda to plug the bail out of the developers/bloated house prices and the argument relating to the healthcare system cuts little ice. If we could only manage a third world health service during the boom, how could we do any worse when finances are kept tight and budgets are in place?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    SimpleSam06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,048 ✭✭✭SimpleSam06


    plasmaguy wrote: »
    There is only one of me and about 20 opposing me on this thread, now that doesn't make them right and me wrong, but it does mean they can post once and go off while I am supposed to answer what they say and the other 19 say as well.
    If 95% of people are opposing you with rational, well thought out arguments, I would say that its your own position you should be reconsidering.
    plasmaguy wrote: »
    You all think we should wait for the correction. Can anyone here predict with 100% accuracy when the prediction will be?
    What are you talking about? We are in the midst of your "correction" right now. What you are talking about is a correction as a return to a property boom. I'll only say this once so pay close attention:

    The last decade or so of rampant property price growth and easy credit were the abnormality. Things are now returning to normality.

    plasmaguy wrote: »
    I don't believe in terms of public finances, it's wise to sit on our hands and wait for an improvement in world markets.
    Doesn't matter what you believe, we'll be affected by them anyway.
    plasmaguy wrote: »
    Like I say anyone who thinks we can survive with a 10 billion deficit a year is deceiving themselves.
    Oh we can survive alright. It won't be pretty, but we can come through it. The major problem is the utter unwilligness of the government to see the problems and deal with them, which is perhaps hardly surprising given that they helped to create these problems in the first place.

    The property boom is over, and I'd be very surprised to see another within our lifetimes.


  • Options
    #68
    chump
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭chump


    plasmaguy wrote: »
    I don't have the time to answer each poster individually and if i did answer each poster individually another 10 posters would take me to task on what I say.

    There is only one of me and about 20 opposing me on this thread, now that doesn't make them right and me wrong, but it does mean they can post once and go off while I am supposed to answer what they say and the other 19 say as well.

    I will say this and yee can take it or leave it, I won't be answering any more posters for the reasons I just stated, ie too time consuming.

    You won't be answering the posters because you can't answer them.
    You're full of bluster and rhetoric and have nothing whatsoever to backup anything you've said.

    You aren't arguing or debating anything. You're stating beliefs and refusing to engage in a discussion about your beliefs.

    Good day to you


  • Options
    #69
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    A few seconds footage of protest here thanks to BeTheHokey from the Pin.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNYb42-1q-0

    It was the lead story on 5:30pm TV3 news going into the hot topic of the day!


  • Options
    #70
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    SimpleSam06 wrote: »
    The last decade or so of rampant property price growth and easy credit were the abnormality. Things are now returning to normality.
    Come off it. The economy is in completely unchartered territory right now. Things now are as about as abnormal as you are ever going to see this century. You talk as if the housing problem is something completely separate.

    Obviously anyone who already owns a home does not want to see prices fall any further. Likewise anyone with a pension wants to see stability across the board. And seeing as their are millions of home owners in the country I think you are in the minority when it comes to the opinion that prices should fall much further. A turn out of about 30 at the protest would seem to back that up.


  • Options
    #71
    Colonel Sanders
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,669 ✭✭✭Colonel Sanders


    20goto10 wrote: »
    A turn out of about 30 at the protest would seem to back that up.

    I actually thought it was a decent turnout seeing as discussion forums were the only place it was advertised

    Look at how many members the property pin has to show that not just 30 people supported this demonstration.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Colonel Sanders
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,669 ✭✭✭Colonel Sanders


    20goto10 wrote: »
    Come off it. The economy is in completely unchartered territory right now. Things now are as about as abnormal as you are ever going to see this century. You talk as if the housing problem is something completely separate.

    So you're saying that our over reliance on construction for employment and government revenue is not making the situation far worse. The likes of the IMF have been warning of this for many years now
    20goto10 wrote: »
    Obviously anyone who already owns a home does not want to see prices fall any further. Likewise anyone with a pension wants to see stability across the board. And seeing as their are millions of home owners in the country I think you are in the minority when it comes to the opinion that prices should fall much further. A turn out of about 30 at the protest would seem to back that up.

    For people trading up lower house prices are also a good thing. They will sell their house for less but the property they will buy as a replacement will also be cheaper narrowing the amount they need to borrow to finance this transaction.


  • Options
    #73
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    Colonel Sanders wrote: »
    So you're saying that our over reliance on construction for employment and government revenue is not making the situation far worse. The likes of the IMF have been warning of this for many years now
    If something is booming the government is of course are going to dip its hand into the pot. And you can't stop people going to work where the money is good.

    What has made the situation worse is bad management of the finances. Its all been blown on public sector wages when it should have been spent on infrastructure and building up a knowledge based economy. And even where it was spent wisely it was over spent on a monstrous scale (the LUAS for example). If it had been managed well we'd be in a good position now and our "over reliance" on the construction sector would have been a smart thing. We'd be talking about how the government rode the wave of success.


  • Options
    #74
    Colonel Sanders
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,669 ✭✭✭Colonel Sanders


    20goto10 wrote: »
    If something is booming the government is of course are going to dip its hand into the pot.

    But the main benefactors were developers. They were given every tax break and benefit that could be given and the net result is generations of young people saddled with a lifetime of debt and in a lot of cases this is for the priviledge of living in sub standard accomodation, that was thrown up as quickly and as cheaply as possible, with the millstone of negative equity due to the "ladder mania" mentality driven by VIs, an aquiescent media and in some cases government ministers

    Sure new regulations are coming into place about apartment sizes, insulation etc but talk about locking the gate after the horse has bolted
    20goto10 wrote: »
    What has made the situation worse is bad management of the finances. Its all been blown on public sector wages when it should have been spent on infrastructure and building up a knowledge based economy. And even where it was spent wisely it was over spent on a monstrous scale (the LUAS for example).

    I don't disagree with you here, but i'd say "another thing that has made things worse"


  • Options
    #75
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    Colonel Sanders wrote: »
    sub standard accomodation, that was thrown up as quickly and as cheaply as possible
    Yes I agree, some. Shabby homes in shabby locations. And thats the real scandal in all this. Not all are bad though. Greystones is a good example. Small apartments yes but great location and a Dundrum style shopping centre on the way (I don't live in Greystones btw :))
    Colonel Sanders wrote: »
    the net result is generations of young people saddled with a lifetime of debt
    Name me a time in Irish history where you could buy a home without being saddled with what appears to be a lifetime of debt? I mean at the time of buying its a lifetime of debt but in reality with wage inflation it doesn't materialise as such (for past generations I mean). It remains to be seen with this generation.


  • Options
    #76
    Climate Expert
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,393 ✭✭✭Climate Expert


    Name me a time in Irish history where you could buy a home without being saddled with what appears to be a lifetime of debt?
    Any time before 2000.


  • Options
    #77
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    20goto10 wrote: »
    Obviously anyone who already owns a home does not want to see prices fall any further. Likewise anyone with a pension wants to see stability across the board. And seeing as their are millions of home owners in the country I think you are in the minority when it comes to the opinion that prices should fall much further.

    That's the funniest post i've read in a long while, it should be in the humour forum!
    Have you consulted those millions who you claim to support you about prices should not fall further, a petition perhaps? :D

    In case you didn't know, not everyone moves or buys a house. Housing transactions every year only affect a small minority. I know lots of people who are homeowners and they couldn't give two fingers about the value of their home as it will never affect them as they've put down roots already.
    20goto10 wrote: »
    A turn out of about 30 at the protest would seem to back that up.

    I knew a bull would try and come up with this. The forum(Pin) has about 1800 members spread around the country and the protest was organised at 1:30pm on a working day in Dublin city centre.
    I could not make it myself as i work several miles away and could not get time off, lots of others in same position.

    It sounds like you are against the protest and in favour of the developers, surprise surprise?:mad:


  • Options
    #78
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    Climate Expert wrote: »
    Any time before 2000.
    LOL. Well true to some extent. There was probably a sweet point just before the boom when the economy was healthy (EU funding, IT boom and general globalisation) but before the property inflation started.


  • Options
    #79
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    gurramok wrote: »
    It sounds like you are against the protest and in favour of the developers, surprise surprise?:mad:
    Change the record. I'm not an FTB so obviously when you take away the desire for prices to fall further you're going to get a different viewpoint. It doesn't make me a developer or an estate agent. My arguments are sound and a comment like this is proof of that, if thats all you can come up with.


  • Options
    #80
    jackal
    Registered Users Posts: 794 ✭✭✭jackal


    20goto10 wrote: »
    Change the record. I'm not an FTB so obviously when you take away the desire for prices to fall further you're going to get a different viewpoint. It doesn't make me a developer or an estate agent. My arguments are sound and a comment like this is proof of that, if thats all you can come up with.

    Its not in everybody's interests to see prices fall, thats fair enough. But when prices rise to a point where new customers cannot afford to buy the product, what happens next? The manufacturers price accordingly or go out of business very quickly.


  • Options
    #81
    SimpleSam06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,048 ✭✭✭SimpleSam06


    20goto10 wrote: »
    Come off it. The economy is in completely unchartered territory right now.
    Hahah, yeah its not like there has never been a boom-bust cycle in history before, ever.
    20goto10 wrote: »
    Things now are as about as abnormal as you are ever going to see this century. You talk as if the housing problem is something completely separate.
    What are you talking about?
    20goto10 wrote: »
    I think you are in the minority when it comes to the opinion that prices should fall much further.
    See, thats what you and a lot of people arguing that prices should stop falling are missing. Your opinion about what "should" happen doesn't matter a toss. What will happen is what matters.
    20goto10 wrote: »
    LOL. Well true to some extent. There was probably a sweet point just before the boom when the economy was healthy (EU funding, IT boom and general globalisation) but before the property inflation started.
    Good lord, are you people still trotting out this tired old chestnut? Pre-boom, a single person on average wages could afford a house for a family. Now, a married couple on fairly high wages can't afford a decent house. I mean, unless we start using crayons here, I don't know how this can be made any simpler.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    SimpleSam06 wrote: »
    Hahah, yeah its not like there has never been a boom-bust cycle in history before, ever.
    I know you're being sarcastic but you're actually quite close on that comment. There has never been a boom in which interest rates are lowered and there is never been a bust where interest rates are highered. And there has never been a property bust which coincides with a credit crunch which has a direct and devastating affect on home loans.

    Take the blinkers off for one minute and have a look at whats going on.


  • Options
    #83
    MG
    Closed Accounts Posts: 823 ✭✭✭MG


    Fair play to them for bringing the issue to the headlines. This would be one of the worst economic decisions ever and would cost the tax payer millions.

    Dressing it up as a boost for first time buyers is a sick joke.


  • Options
    #84
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    20goto10 wrote: »
    Change the record. I'm not an FTB so obviously when you take away the desire for prices to fall further you're going to get a different viewpoint. It doesn't make me a developer or an estate agent. My arguments are sound and a comment like this is proof of that, if thats all you can come up with.

    No they are not sound. A comment like 'And seeing as their are millions of home owners in the country I think you are in the minority when it comes to the opinion that prices should fall much further' is absolute Rubbish.

    You came out slagging the numbers at the protest so forgive me if one concludes that you are in favour of a bailout as that is what your point is coming across as.

    Look, you or I cannot stop the fall in prices. Its been proven in housing bubbles worldwide that when a govt throws money at it to try to stop prices falling, it never succeeds.
    The prices will only stop falling when the demand can afford to buy that house and that's when sentiment will be in positive territory.

    Prices will keep falling in Ireland Inc year on year for a few years yet as we are now in a construction lead recession where construction related activity was at 25% of economic output in '06 to about 17% now and needs to fall to about 10% like every other normal economy.
    That's the correction in the economy that is hurting and there is no tool available to reverse it so say goodbye to the days of high house prices as it will be many many years when they return.


  • Options
    #85
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    MG wrote: »
    Fair play to them for bringing the issue to the headlines. This would be one of the worst economic decisions ever and would cost the tax payer millions.

    Dressing it up as a boost for first time buyers is a sick joke.

    Its on the front page of the Indo now with a nice pic! http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/opposition-building-to-budget-boost-for-firsttime-buyers-1482603.html
    Indo wrote:
    A DISPARATE group, made up of financial advisers, academics and engineers, protested outside the Dail yesterday over plans to provide incentives in the Budget for first-time buyers.

    The group argues that a budgetary stimulus package for house buyers will end up being a bailout for builders and do nothing for want-to-be homeowners. Financial adviser Karl Deeter, who initiated the protest, said any housing package for first-time buyers would stop prices falling to their market-clearing level.

    "No lifeline should be thrown to first-time buyers. If there is a package, it will only end up being a bail-out for builders and will be of no benefit to first-time buyers."

    He added that an incentive package would cost taxpayers a fortune -- the money would be better spent on education and health.

    Mr Deeter said he and the other protesters were not politically affiliated.

    First-time buyers would be better served by allowing house prices find their natural level rather than giving prices an artificial and temporary lift, he added.

    "As long as there are people on trollies, the money would be better spent on health. Education is also hugely important. It is educated people who will get you out of a recession, not the housing industry."


  • Options
    #86
    SimpleSam06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,048 ✭✭✭SimpleSam06


    20goto10 wrote: »
    I know you're being sarcastic but you're actually quite close on that comment. There has never been a boom in which interest rates are lowered and there is never been a bust where interest rates are highered. And there has never been a property bust which coincides with a credit crunch which has a direct and devastating affect on home loans.
    Tbh that doesn't make the effects any less predictable. Regardless of the factors involved which might swing the compass one way or the other further than other such situations, the basic mechanism is the same.
    20goto10 wrote: »
    Take the blinkers off for one minute and have a look at whats going on.
    Oho, so your clarity of vision is going to save us all, is it? This has been said several times already in this thread, so I'm not sure why I am repeating it, but here goes:

    Short term measures will ease the pain (but not remove the pain), while crippling the mid and long term. Accepting the damage in the short term (damage which has been long predicted on this forum), you give the mid and long terms a fighting chance for decent recovery and growth.

    Its as simple as that. You many want to sacrifice the future for the present, for whatever personal reasons you may have, but its not a sane point of view.


  • Options
    #87
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    gurramok wrote: »
    You came out slagging the numbers at the protest
    No I didn't. I said the numbers were proof that you are in a minority. Where's the slagging in that?
    gurramok wrote: »
    Its on the front page of the Indo now with a nice pic! http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/opposition-building-to-budget-boost-for-firsttime-buyers-1482603.html
    And the article shows that this was a protest for FTBs made by FTBs.


  • Options
    #88
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    SimpleSam06 wrote: »
    Tbh that doesn't make the effects any less predictable. Regardless of the factors involved which might swing the compass one way or the other further than other such situations, the basic mechanism is the same.
    You haven't really addressed my point. Still got those blinkers on.
    SimpleSam06 wrote: »
    Oho, so your clarity of vision is going to save us all, is it? This has been said several times already in this thread, so I'm not sure why I am repeating it, but here goes:
    My clarity goes so far as to say that there's more to it than you are suggesting and if you want to talk about clarity then yes, you're looking at things through a kaleidoscope if you think everything that is happening is "normality".


  • Options
    #89
    SimpleSam06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,048 ✭✭✭SimpleSam06


    20goto10 wrote: »
    You haven't really addressed my point. Still got those blinkers on.
    So, with no reasoned responses, you are saying that haven't got a leg to stand on. Fair enough.
    20goto10 wrote: »
    My clarity goes so far as to say that there's more to it than you are suggesting and if you want to talk about clarity then yes, you're looking at things through a kalidescope if you think everything that is happening is "normality".
    Oh, by all means, feel free to enlighten us all on what more there is to it, please. I'm a big fan of details, me.


  • Options
    #90
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    SimpleSam06 wrote: »
    So, with no reasoned responses, you are saying that haven't got a leg to stand on. Fair enough.
    Your David McWilliams book says all booms go bust and all booms are the same (all booms go bust...what a genius :rolleyes:). Quite clearly we are in uncharted territory and it is not a text book scenario, and I have already pointed out the details of how and why.
    SimpleSam06 wrote: »
    Oh, by all means, feel free to enlighten us all on what more there is to it, please. I'm a big fan of details, me.
    ^and I have already pointed out the details of how and why.

    tbh, I've got a headache from banging it against the wall here. Credit crunch has nothing to do with anything....ok you believe what you want to believe.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    SimpleSam06
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,048 ✭✭✭SimpleSam06


    20goto10 wrote: »
    Quite clearly we are in uncharted territory and it is not a text book scenario, and I have already pointed out the details of how and why.
    No, all you've done is point out factors that will influence the boom-bust cycle, from which reasonable predicitions may be made. You just don't like the probable outcomes.
    20goto10 wrote: »
    ^and I have already pointed out the details of how and why.
    No, you haven't, you've made a series of unsubstantiated claims and then responded to the reasoned answers to your claims with vague handwaving and "you all know nothing" type comments. More tedious than convincing, really.
    20goto10 wrote: »
    Credit crunch has nothing to do with anything....ok you believe what you want to believe.
    Heh, are you familiar with the term "strawman"? Thats when you put words in your opponent's mouth and attack that position, rather than the actual position being taken. Haven't had that one pulled on me in a while.


Advertisement