You're not going to argue me out of my feeling & you can't exactly prove it wrong either. ... I agree that the OP should consider the risks, so on that important point we agree.

Thank you for realizing this.

Maybe our communication styles are just so different that it is tough to grok one another in a satisfying way.

I think the problem might just be that I think it's likely the OP will be discriminated against with an employment gap and you don't, or that IMO the consequences are more likely to be severe (being jobless for a long time or ending up in some horrible workplace).

neither of us is really qualified to, based on our anecdotal evidence, produce a true estimate of the likelihood of the OP having a problem finding employment due to a gap in his employment history

I agree with this and I think I see where you're coming from - you just don't feel that these problems are as likely as I think they are. Maybe all your experiences support it. That's understandable. It can be hard to determine the exact probability of things. I didn't see any research on this, so unless there is some that I failed to locate, there's not a good way for either of us to support our side.

I said I'm not interested in arguing anymore, but I'm still going on, so who knows. How are you feeling?

It seems like you want a conclusion and perhaps to end on a friendly note rather than an argumentative one. I also feel like not arguing further, and I'd prefer to end friendly than unfriendly. My reasoning for not wanting to argue is that you don't seem to be very familiar with logical fallacies. It always takes a lot more energy for me to disagree with a person if they're not. Often, I won't bother to argue at all after I see enough logical fallacies. I made an exception this time because not defending my point might have meant that someone was influenced to do something risky without really considering the risk.

I feel pretty satisfied that I have supported my "be careful" point adequately, so I am content to stop arguing.