> It is better if we do not promote a fashion of 160-hour work weeks
If you disagree with the substance of what I'm saying, I'll happily discuss the finer points and think about my arguments vs the ones you're offering. I'm here to actively learn, share, and find motivation -- not really to just howl and argue by using fallacious reasoning and cheap debating tactics.
If all you can do is throw up straw men[1], then I'm going to have to challenge you to show where I've made any such arguments. You'll need to show where anyone is advocating 160 hour work weeks, much less "forcing" others to work 160 hour work weeks. That you're distorting the facts of easily-referenced articles[2] is troubling.
Seriously, I'm happy to concede a point and learn from my mistake... but if you think I'm making one, you'll need to provide better arguments.
> You have caricatured people you disagree with
right next to this:
> It is better if we do not promote a fashion of 160-hour work weeks
If you disagree with the substance of what I'm saying, I'll happily discuss the finer points and think about my arguments vs the ones you're offering. I'm here to actively learn, share, and find motivation -- not really to just howl and argue by using fallacious reasoning and cheap debating tactics.
If all you can do is throw up straw men[1], then I'm going to have to challenge you to show where I've made any such arguments. You'll need to show where anyone is advocating 160 hour work weeks, much less "forcing" others to work 160 hour work weeks. That you're distorting the facts of easily-referenced articles[2] is troubling.
Seriously, I'm happy to concede a point and learn from my mistake... but if you think I'm making one, you'll need to provide better arguments.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
[2] http://www.entrepreneur.com/blog/223723?Source=Taboola