When you breathe, you inspire. When you do not breathe, you expire.

http://jyte.com/cl/the-first-transcendental-purpose-of-being-is-to-inspire

I like this claim. It is only half accurate, so I can't agree with it.

But I like it.

Translation:

"The first part of the claim is nonsense, so I can't agree with it."

Violaine, please do not try to translate for me. It is obvious that you and I have very different ideas on ... well, just about everything. Here's why I said what I said:

inspire |inˈspīr|
verb [ trans. ]
1 fill (someone) with the urge or ability to do or feel something, esp. to do something creative . . .
• create (a feeling, esp. a positive one) in a person . . .
• ( inspire someone with) animate someone with (such a feeling) . . .
• give rise to . . .
2 breathe in (air); inhale.

I like the claim because:
1) It plays on both definitions of inspire.
2) It plays on the juxtaposition of inspire and expire.

I can't agree with it because breathing is more than just inhalation.
"When you breathe, you inspire" is poetic, but inaccurate. "When you breathe in, you inspire", or " when you breathe, you inspire and exhale" would have been accurate, but not poetic.

When you hold your breath, you are a capitalist.