Subject:
|
Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 1 Dec 1999 18:00:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1438 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.loc.uk, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > I don't think that is "wrong" for some people have more than others, but
> > > that it would be "good" if things were more equal; it's an important
> > > distinction.
> >
> > Before I'm pounced upon, that statement isn't meant to be an
> > all-encompassing answer for the worlds ails - I'm not quite glib enough to
> > say that,
>
> This NEEDS to go to off-topic.debate, followups set there.
Ooops - yep, thanks!
> Suffice it to say that I'd not care to live in a world where everything
> was "equal".
Agreed - equality doesn't have to be applied universally to make some things
more "equal". I don't think that I implied that everything in the world should
be "equal".
> To me, "equal" means taking away from those of ability and
> giving to the undeserving.
"Undeserving" is a very ambiguous term, do you mean those who don't work hard,
or those who didn't have the educational or environmental chances that would
have enabled them to enter a career where they have the opportunity to gain
above average financial reward?
Richard
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc)
|
| (...) The former. Those who work hard make their own chances and get their own opportunities, therefore don't need help from some sort of scheme to make things "equal" as long as the government they're under isn't actively suppressing rights. There (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
163 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
