I’m not sure it makes sense grammatically? “Against too much financial risk tolerance”, “Against many arguments for financial risk tolerance”?
I agree that (1) is substantial. (2) is not, and the response you give in the above comment doesn’t provide reasons to think (2) is substantial. It was (2) I was commenting on.
ETA: But perhaps now I’m nitpicking. I appreciate you acknowledging that you feel there was something to my other point. ETA2: I won’t reply further, because while I do stand by what I said, I also don’t want to distract from what seems to me the more important discussion (about substance).
You say two things.
The conclusions doesn’t seem to support that
I’m not sure it makes sense grammatically? “Against too much financial risk tolerance”, “Against many arguments for financial risk tolerance”?
I agree that (1) is substantial. (2) is not, and the response you give in the above comment doesn’t provide reasons to think (2) is substantial. It was (2) I was commenting on.
ETA: But perhaps now I’m nitpicking. I appreciate you acknowledging that you feel there was something to my other point.
ETA2: I won’t reply further, because while I do stand by what I said, I also don’t want to distract from what seems to me the more important discussion (about substance).