I'm about 25% of the way through, more than long enough for you to have said anything worth reading. I'm not going to waste any more time on what I could have written before I got out of high school.

i can write something concise, but it doesn't display my full in-depth understanding of a subject. I need a bigger stage so the speak to truly display my full knowledge of a subject, and not that I am only considering a few points here and there.

This particular one only gets more interesting. The first section is just an introduction really. It just explains what many intelligent people may already be aware of. The other sections offer far more interesting insights.

It is written for someone who knows nothing about the subject. Sorry it is not college-level peer-review...once again..shit no one ever will understand or read outside of people like you and I.

This post was edited by RUSSiABANK on Oct 20 2014 11:21pm

And this post perfectly encompases what you were trying to do. Show off. If you can't explain something concisely and simply, you don't understand it.

You don't have a full in-depth understanding, if you did your ramblings would have more substance to them. It requires orders of magnitude greater effort to refute bullshit than it does to spew it.

But I can. It is just that it would not do this very complex subject justice. Most subjects are far more complex than most people are willing to give them credit for. I INTENTIONALLY try not to water down their complexity when writing things like this. I do just the opposite in other papers when I feel like just getting a point across (don't care if it is assailable without further explanation).

If you still feel this way after reading the entire thing, not just the introductory section about what I believe money is (primary function), I will take your thoughts into consideration. Deal?

And you are right. I'm just someone that takes those magnitudes of effort to refute bullshit. It does take a great deal of effort though. 10 pages of it.

This post was edited by RUSSiABANK on Oct 20 2014 11:24pm

Writing concisely is the opposite of watering down. Narcissistic personality disorder much?

The only issue is that you ARE watering down the complexity in the way you are writing. You aren't touching on the actual complex issues, you're skimming the surface at a sub high-school level and trying to pass it off as an enlightened piece of work. In the end you're not aware of what you don't know, so there's no real use in trying to explain it. And using my favorite example, I'm not going to sit here and explain to somebody who can't do addition why the general integral of 3x isn't 9x^2 + 4

Lolz at the spin nicely played?