Not This Maps - PRESS CONFERENCE (11.24.2009)

[OkieCarpenter]

Yeah, great plan. Tear down the cotton seed mill and the auto parts yard, kill those jobs so they can create some minimum wage jobs renting out kayaks.

[RefutingStupidity]

"Yeah, great plan. Tear down the cotton seed mill...kill those jobs so they can create some minimum wage jobs renting out kayaks." - OkieCarpenter

On January 31, 2009, The Oklahoman published an article entitled: "Downtown Plant Buys Former Bridgestone/Firestone Dayton Tire Factory for $14 Million". In this composition, author Richard Mize illustrates how the giant operation will open its doors, fully staffed, at its new location in west Oklahoma City. Your statement is demonstrably wrong.

[OkieCarpenter]

Tell me, did you chose the handle "stupidity" on purpose?

A plant that has spent 61 years building their equipment, including massive mill buildings, is being forced to sell their land and move. Just so a property development company can make some bucks on land they bought cheap years ago, knowing that the good old boy network would spend a billion bucks improving the neighborhood around their cheaply aquired property.

And the dozens of other businesses that are forced to close?

[RefutingStupidity]

"A plant that has spent 61 years building their equipment, including massive mill buildings, is being forced to sell their land and move." - OkieCarpenter

This plant is NOT being forced to move! Regardless, for sake of argument, let us evaluate such a prospect. Even *IF* the plant was forced to move, this would not support your previously refuted implication that jobs would be lost. Your response is a perfect illustration of the logical fallacy known as "moving the goalposts".

[RefutingStupidity]

"And the dozens of other businesses that are forced to close?" - OkieCarpenter

"Moving the goalposts" when your previous implication has been refuted is fallacious. If you wish to discuss "other businesses", you may introduce that as a separate issue for consideration - not one that is meant to reinforce the dismantled failure you advanced previously.

[RefutingStupidity]

"Tell me, did you chose the handle "stupidity" on purpose?" - OkieCarpenter

If you are capable of engaging me in rational debate, do so. I recommend you forgo the temptation to address me, rather than my arguments. However, if you wish to become the focal point of my attention, thus ensuring the complete obliteration of any argument you may promote in the future, I suggest you continue down your current path of irrelevant discourse.