Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (57089)	7/30/2004 11:56:39 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) of 793696

<<< The question is instead about the nature of the obligation--whether it is a moral obligation or a legal one--and likewise whether the largess is offered as charity or entitlement. The distinction is critical because the choice implies two different systems. We have to look at which system produces the best sustainable results all things considered.>>> Like most situations in life, the choice and the answer is not always binary in nature. I don't care whether the receipient of the largess feeding her hungry children feel that this is an entitlement and not a charity. I don't care (feel hurt) whether these people will try to cheat and get more than their legal limits. In any system, whether charitable or legal, largess will get into the wrong hands. Rather than do away with the largess, we have an obligation to make sure this largess does not get in to the wrong hands. I admit that is not an easy task. But, I think we are obligated to keep trying.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next