1/ Strawman argument. The ban is actually not on all cash payments>10,000, but for payments to businesses for goods and services. Personal financing/banks won't be affectedpic.twitter.com/yBS6ujgEkX
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Let's play some logical fallacy bingo this morning, courtesy of a libertarian opinion piece in the paper (shocker)pic.twitter.com/eXZ8egq08S
1/ Strawman argument. The ban is actually not on all cash payments>10,000, but for payments to businesses for goods and services. Personal financing/banks won't be affectedpic.twitter.com/yBS6ujgEkX
2/ False dichotomy. Either the ban works as the government says it does, or it's "ineffective and unenforceable". In reality, it's likely to work sometimes and not others, but that depends on the legislationpic.twitter.com/x2srnI6N7M
3/ Begging the question. Why is the government doing this to law-abiding citizens? What is their ulterior motive??? Which brings us to...pic.twitter.com/DN7uOTag6Y
4/ The Slippery Slope! If the government passes this law, it's all Big Brother from there What. Utter. Nonsense.pic.twitter.com/uDU6ZcczkY
5/ Appeal to emotion. The quote from Orwell is an obvious ploy to distract from the fact that this is wild conjecture and the author has no real basis for this claim at allpic.twitter.com/hYVW5kTPYK
The slippery slope goes on for a while. If we ban cash payments now, in a few years' time the government will be monitoring everything you do!pic.twitter.com/0iUhLtTMSc
7/ Appeal to emotion/Special pleading. Yes, the ban ~might~ effect some domestic violence survivors who are buying cars with >$10,000 cash. Maybe. This would almost certainly be the extreme exceptionpic.twitter.com/oVtVnlhdwx
(I'm not a DV researcher, but if anyone wants to note how often DV survivors are making >$10,000 cash payments I'd be really interested to know the stats)
I could go on. The piece has at least 1 logical fallacy per paragraph Here it is in all its logically-problematic glory https://amp.smh.com.au/politics/federal/measures-to-tackle-black-economy-are-suspiciously-totalitarian-20180511-p4zero.html?__twitter_impression=true …
I do not need this shit today, Gideon
I usually save my logical fallacy bingo for the weekends, but this piece is such nonsense I thought I had to share
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.