I'm firmly in the middle. However, Gil, your family metaphor is flawed (imho) because in this instance we're not talking children vs adults. The "they" are both adults in the original pondering. Truth is, some adults don't work and earn their keep. Another truth is that some people "earn" what we may consider to be more than their keep.
The difference to me is that it is empirically definable to establish which adults do not earn their keep.....while, to my(opic) eyes the fuzziness lies in determining who earns more than their keep. The latter determination seems subjective to me. What about a rich farmer who takes on huge risks, capital & otherwise, to accumulate and manage a large farm (Rockefeller) who makes his living on the labor of the farm workers (the poor)? I contend that each is deserving of their respective gains....for without the rich farmer the poor would have no job..and without the ability/willingness to incur the risk/liability of an owner the poor can have no farm....conversely, without the worker the rich farmer would have no farm. Outside this argument, but inherent in the larger discussion, are the people who do not or will not work. Have you noticed we're the only country on Earth where the poor people are fat? I'm firmly in the middle. Scott Nicholson, Director KW Commercial 512-947-2688 Discovery Realty Group www.DiscoveryAustin.com www.KWCommercial.com ----- Original Message ---- From: Gill Ediger <[email protected]> To: Fritz Holt <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; "Ashmore, Stephen C" <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; Chris Young <[email protected]>; Bob Rathbun <[email protected]>; Reed Moraw <[email protected]>; Dianne West <[email protected]>; Henri Childers <[email protected]>; Mandy Holt <[email protected]>; "Holt, Jenny" <[email protected]>; Becky Kruse <[email protected]>; Off Topic <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:43:40 AM Subject: Re: [ot_caving] FW: A short piece of wisdom At 09:56 AM 2/19/2009, Fritz Holt wrote: > This is probably the most insightful bit of reasoning that I have ever read > on this subject. That is an interesting outlook, Fritz. But I wonder how it would work in the government of, say, your family. Should the baby be held off the tit because it has no wealth it worked for; should the child be forced to go naked and barefoot because the adult producing wealth will not provide for it? I would further suggest that many people have obtained vast wealth without lifting a hand to earn it--i.e.: didn't work for it. John D Rockefeller and those thieves running the stock markets come to mind. They did not work for it; they got it, ultimately, from the poor. And "when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end...." It works both ways, my dear friend, now doesn't it. There seems to be some fuzziness as I gaze into this insightful bit of myopic reasoning. --Ediger --------------------------------------------------------------------- Give this to a friend: [email protected] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Give this to a friend: [email protected] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
