this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
63 points (98.5% liked)

Australia

3636 readers
315 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Lol, because that's the arbiter of truth amirite?

Now they'll have more budget for their own escorts.

Not what a strawman is, btw, but don't worry your pretty little head about it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm sorry that you have to pay 100% of your income

Hmmm looks like that’s an argument I never made, let’s check the definition of a straw man argument.

A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent

Nothing about the straw man fallacy excludes hyperbole.

Under examples we can see

Exaggerating (sometimes grossly) an opponent's argument, then attacking this exaggerated version.

Oh you thought I was talking about the very real possibility of someone wanting to commit suicide due to disability…. Tsk tsk.

As I said right from the outset, if there is no science to say that paying for hookers is a more effective use of money than other support methods then it shouldn’t be paid for by public funds.

No evidence, no funds, Im a happy man.

Do try to keep up.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You're literally complaining how a tiny fraction of your tax that ends up in the NDIS might pay for fulfill the sexual needs of someone who otherwise wouldn't have them fulfilled is lowering your quality of life.

You really don't have the grounds to fling accusations of logical fallacies around here.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You haven’t refuted my argument in the slightest.

Every cent I pay in taxes that are spent on something I don’t benefit from is literally money I no longer have to improve my own quality of life.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ah yes. Fuck everyone, I want mine.

Disgusting.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

No the point was less fucking. Though I have got mine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Lol, I love when clowns own themselves.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

You’re amusing enough but I wouldn’t call you a clown.