[quote=SK in CV][quote=harvey]You responded with the semantic and legal nitpick that I predicted in my previous post.
And you are dancing around the issue, which I said – and you know – is the deferred obligation that is at the core of pension programs.
If you really want to discuss these issues as if you know what you are talking about, quit focusing on irrelevant semantic details and make an attempt address the crux of the issue.[/quote]
I responded with exactly what you asked for. You suggested that all deferred comp plans needed to be stopped. I asked if you were aware that 401K’s are deferred comp plans. You then redefined deferred comp. I told you that definition was innacurate. You asked for the correct definition, and the same time repeating your incorrect definition. You know know what deferred compensation means. Words are important. Semantics are not irrelevant.[/quote]
This is Pri’s M.O. in almost every debate. There is no way to debate with him because whenever you show proof for your position, he changes the debate and/or (wrongly) redefines terms.
