>>>But that doesn't make you right. It doesn't make you noble. It doesn't make you insightful.
>
>Nor does it prove your premise, any more than my loaded question about your beating your wife proves anything. Basically it's impossible to discuss if people keep using sophist ad hominem conversions,

Well, let me back up and be more objective then.

It occurred to me your comment about revolution insurance and giving people a change at pursuing happiness meant that, by and large, people are not given a chance at pursuing happiness.

Am I way off base?

Look, it's all a competition. To have money. To have happiness. So much so that people get upset at the idea they might be unhappy. "No Way! Not me! I'm way happy!"

This is because for someone reason its wrong to be sad, by today's ultra-competitive social norms.

This is VERY unhealthy. People competiting to be happy, going as far as asserting they are happy just so they aren't judged poorly by society even when they are not means they don't process sadness, and ultimately have no frame of reference for what happiness is.

This leads to clinical depression. The number of people on anti-depressants out there is no fluke.



> e.g. to an unseemly story about unhappy wealthy people wanting more, more, more. Perhaps I should respond by constantly diverting to your exploitation of the poor every time you eat a mouthful of food you did not produce yourself, but that's equally useless sophistry and I can't be bothered.

The Super Bowl was on Sunday. As part of my semi-regular tradition, I fasted.

The idea of mountains and mountains of food being prepared consumed, and then largely wasted is simply not easy for me to take part in while kids are dieing from diharrea because they couldn't good a clean glass of water.

By the way, I took a shit this morning. In clean water. I hate that, but then the police hate it when I shit in public.

So, of course, I'm not perfect.