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: tejek who wrote (339946)	6/9/2007 4:17:05 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571045

"The irony is that Hilton is probably getting screwed over by the judge but people don't care.......they want her sentence to be longer." I don't want her sentence to be longer - just for it to equal what any black, penniless druggie with a public defender would get.

To: tejek who wrote (339946)	6/12/2007 9:24:20 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571045

To people who can barely make ends meet, it is offensive. You statement is inaccurate, at least as the universial statement you make it. Not all people who can barely make ends meet are prone to jealousy or support of socialism. And while some do find in offensive, very few find it as offensive, as strongly religious church goers would find half naked prostitutes trying to pick up business in a church. In any case my point was not as much about people's reactions, as it was about the offensiveness of the act. People can take offensive at all sorts of things, but it isn't always reasonable to do so. Driving a Bently isn't doing something wrong, or breaking the rules of a place. OTOH many would argue that prostitution is wrong, and even if it isn't, its illegal, and conducting it in a church is flouting the rules and moral connected to a someone else's private place, and rubbing people's face in it, in a way that driving a Bently is not. (Also I thought she drove a Porsche, not that it reallty matters) I'm afraid you don't understand the mood in this country. I think your wrong about the mood, or perhaps more accuratly I should say that your only talking about the mood of a minority. In any case I wasn't talking about moods so much, but about the nature of an action. Even if Paris "flaunting her wealth" is as worth of disdain as prostitutes "displaying their wares" and picking up tricks (and I don't think most people would agree with you on that), doing the action in public spaces is less offensive then invading someone's private space with it. .Edwards made money in lawsuits.......someone paid his winnings. As for athletes, we buy tickets that pay their salaries. Their money isn't coming from Mars......its directly related to us. Lawsuits are a complex issue. Certainly some of them our unjustified, on the other hand tort reform is really an entirely separate issue. So I'll deal with the 2nd example. When an athlete pays for something it IS his money. Sure it came from somewhere. So did your salary. But you get the money in compensation for your services (or return on investment or whatever) and then its yours. The same holds true for the athlete.