Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (187341)	4/30/2004 12:13:29 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571536

Tenchusatsu, RE: "the matters of the heart are totally separate from the matters of society" Why should matters of the heart be different than society? If the two are aligned, so much the better, right? Or, are you saying that humans don't have the ability to rise above greed, etc.? If so, I would agree with you that some individuals don't. Which is why I think there needs to be taxes rather than charity. Charity is too much dependent upon the individual being good. Some are good (Gates, Moore, etc.) but some aren't, so is it possible society is collectively better than the individual? The group being better collectively? I do think charities are better in terms of their efficiencies and performance, but believe it shouldn't replace taxes that fill the gaps, because charities tend to be focused, not broad breadth. Regarding my question on sensitivity and religion, doesn't your religion tell you to act in accordance with your religion? If so, why wouldn't that include promoting a system that is caring to others? Am asking because I'm curious to understand your POV. You are sparse in your description, so your POV isn't coming out clear to me. On an unrelated note, in one of your posts (can't find it now), you said something about "overly sensitive people." Another way to make a point but without judgement, is to say, "the more sensitive people". This is because there will always be someone either more sensitive or less sensitive than you - and that's not a negative. All types are needed and we all fall somewhere on the curve. It's not a negative to be less sensitive. Just like it's not a negative to be more sensitive. But the word "overly" sensitive casts negative judgement, whereas the word "more" sensitive does not. One of my sisters isn't sensitive. Opposite of me. Not a bad thing at all. Our differences are very useful. Regards, Amy J