Curious1 wrote:minnbills wrote:This criticism is unfair. What matters, at the end of the day, is whether or not his arguments and analyses have merit.
Ethos, logos, and pathos, in that order of importance.
If he is a hypocrite and a hack (which I happen to think he is), it absolutely diminishes the validity of his arguments.
He's calling for reform, and unless UC tries to adopt reforms and he acts against them I just don't think it's appropriate to call him a hypocrite. I think it begs the same kind of eye-rolling reserved for politicians who demanded Buffett give up a chunk of his income or else they wouldn't consider the Buffett rule.
Whether or not he's a hack is related to the quality of his analysis and all that, so that's separate.
And FWIW I get the sense he goes too far, so I'm not just white knighting here.