What I said was, if 9/11 had not happened there would be no problem.
False. Yet another dishonesty.
What you said is:
If we weren't spending billions to prosecute the war on terror, including Iraq, etc., the budget would not be unbalanced as revenues would be covering the expenditures.
This statement says that without the spending we'd have revenue sufficient to cover expenditure.
And like I said that's wrong to the tune of hundreds of billions.
Now you want to practice intellectual deceit and claim you were talking about revenue reduction and not spending. It's an odd lie to tell, given that your clearly worded post illustrates this falsehood. You very clearly state that the revenue would cover the expenses absent the spending. Now you are trying to revise it and pin revenue reduction on 9/11 so that you can issue a new more inclusive statement instead of having the intellectual honesty of retracting your false claim.
Spending on the war on terror, including Iraq, is one aspect of it.
I disagree, but the thing is, when I said you were wrong to the tune of hundreds of billions I took this into account.
So even if this is correct, you were still wrong to the tune of hundreds of billions.
To think that the U.S. did not undergo a severe recession as the result of 9/11 is just plain naive or pure denial. You pick.
I am in a discussion wherein my opposite does not demonstrate intellectual honesty and revises her statements in lieu of retracting demonstratable falsehoods.
Furthermore she creates loaded questions such as the above in what is one of the most simple debate fallacies there is.
I can but conclude that you are not interested in intellectual honesty in this discussion and prefer intellectual dishonesty to having to retract false claims you make.
Retractions apologies and whatnot might eventually come, as part of a "I'm not wrong, I'm a victim" exit that faults a nefarious "out to get" on the part of others instead of a recognition of intellectual dishonesty and revisionism in arguments.
Hell, pointing out the lies will probably even be called an "attack".