Wrong.
I responded to your post, which didn't include the example(s) you've now listed.
As for the steak, yes, it does impact your quality of life as you're eating it. The meal is going into your body, I hope Matthews isn't.
It sure did. I included the restaurant example, the steak is a common sub-example of something that gets sent back to the kitchen and a reason why (had to re-fire stuff all the time when I worked in kitchens). It's cold, it's undercooked, etc. According to the logic of the person I replied to: If the person eating the steak is not paid to cook steak, then their opinion about it's doneness doesn't mean anything. Which is utterly bullshit. That's me pointing out his logical fallacy.
There are only two ways you can argue that the steak impacts your quality of life:
1) Is it hazardous for your health (raw, poisoned)?
IE - you will suffer physically as a result of eating poorly cooked food.
2) Does eating an underdone steak make you feel bad about the taste and/or wasting money on the food?
IE - You will suffer mentally as a result of eating poorly cooked food.
Once again USING HIS LOGIC, if you aren't paid to cook steak, your opinion about it's level of doneness doesn't mean shit. So don't send it back, unless you are actually getting Botulism at the table, but if you aren't a doctor, then your opinion about botulism doesn't mean shit. That's his useless logic applied to situations.
Using the above logic - if the level of doneness makes you sad and negatively impacts your mental wellbeing, then you have a right to send it back, correct? But then how can you turn around and say - but Matthew's doesn't impact your life... by the same token if his #5-Centre placement makes someone sad because they feel their guy (Bergeron, Kopitar, etc) should be higher, then don't they have a right to complain if you have a right to complain about a cold steak? A cold steak won't kill you, but it will impact your enjoyment and therefore - quality of life. Matthews placement in the list won't kill you, but it may impact your enjoyment of TSN articles and therefore quality of life. So why do you say one impacts you and the other doesn't?
Taxes undoubtedly impact your quality of life and it's impossible to argue otherwise. Taxes pay for healthcare, education, infrastructure, and more. It also impacts your buying power on a day-to-day basis
(sales taxes, income tax). I have an accounting background, so in this case, I am qualified.
That's a good field. Yes taxes do improve your quality of life, I wasn't arguing otherwise. What I was arguing was that taxes should not negatively impact your life. Is the negative-impact from a decrease in buying power more than the positive-impact of all the benefits you listed? It shouldn't be. Therefore, people in general shouldn't complain about paying taxes. But they do, and b his logic, they shouldn't unless they get paid in one of those fields.
I worked with a group of people in a lower income job, we got paid on Friday, by Monday they had spent half their cheque. By Next Monday they had barely enough food to get through the week. Outside of their rent, their largest disbursement was Alcohol, Pot, and Powder. When the minimum wage increased (which should increase spending power) the situation didn't change... The increase of funds, was used to increase their supply of drugs and alcohol...Would paying less tax (on the new income) increase their quality of life? In their minds yes but in practice no, because they would spend even more money on dugs and alcohol. It would make them feel good mentally, but the physical damage should net below zero in this case (in the long run).
_____________________________________________________________________________
You are talking about an entirely different issue than he is and trying to quote what I said as proof that he was right... He used a blanket statement to say - "if you aren't paid for your opinion, then it's worth nothing". I think that people complain about Matthews because it does affect their quality of life,
as all forms of entertainment do. Does this argument/forum affect your quality of life? If it doesn't, then why do you keep posting?
I'll admit it affects mine, because it helps me form opinions about hockey related things. Which is why I value some posters thoughts more than others.
My opinions are a result of me looking at the presented data (this article) through the scope of my experiences and then trying to remove my bias (which doesn't always work). My experiences are direct product of things that impacted my life and my previous opinions...It would be no different than someone who recommends a restaurant based on their previous experience and opinion of the food....Are you going to follow that dudes logic and tell them to shut it next time, unless they are paid to give reviews?
