neither. You don't understand.
you are trying to spread a narrative of fear?
Poverty is a blanket word
it can cover many different types of topics.
what kind of Poverty are you talking about?
rich/poor: such a trite subject.
it's become a talking point of 'social justice' and speaks nothing to all the other debates about other types of poverty.
Poor in Spirit is good
Poor in money? is that good? not really but it does perhaps give people a reason to do something other than sit around and discuss philosophy.
they have to get going, get to work, make the donuts.
but then they find out that donuts, full of sugar, aren't really that great a food when eaten to excess.
so thin are the poor in donuts.
the rich in donuts, who eat them exclusively?
so we see it's not about money at all.
but the love or covetting not just of money but of material stuff.
can we make jokes trivializing the authority of the ADL profiteers who slander people for political effect?
Jonathon walked into a bar . . .
"you put this bar here so I'd walk into it, you're worse than Hitler"
'shill smackers'?
anyone who engages a shill who smack talks nonsense throughout a bread?
what do you mean by that?
often it deflects them from their attacks and obviates their effect.
sometimes people aren't aware that it's a shill.
and in terms of those who talk constantly about religion: some feel an obligation to debunk their horrible misinterpretations. It's almost a calling . . .
but I do understand that if you start in with the same methods that they do than you become as they are.
It seems that a lot of what those who are called shills do is training to make people use techniques of rhetoric that negate instead of augment concepts of philosophical or political importance.
People who spew out pejoratives are ignored no matter how rightous or holy their position.
admittedly this isn't always correct, and some beloved politicians are well versed in how to do the putdown in a way that still gets their message accross to the listening audience.
and of course strictures on speach tend to kill the free sharing of ideas.
please explain your term 'shill smackers'.
traditionally here people provide sauce.
traditionally when sauce is not provided it is merely an oversight, and when suggested that sauce is needed, it is graciously provided.
Thank you in advance for graciousness
no sauce
here we have an example as to why sauce is needed.
in this case one part says 'per year' but the other part says 'per month'.
and to figure out which is correct one could follow the sauce link and go and see who posted this stuff.
instead one needs to search for it and perhaps not find it, wasting time.
YOU KNOW SAUCE IS NECESSARY and yet you continue to not provide it.