> Sorry, I've been in a position where my ability to pay the rent was
> questionable. All the true glory in the world doesn't help. Tolerance
> is a virtue of the naive, or those who are in a position to afford it.
No, all the paying the rent in the world does not matter when you have no virtue.
> > Do you want to be Bill Gates? To you want to live your life as an insecure
> > whiney little nerd?
> > Who wrets and fumes over when all the grownups complain
> > about his poor play ground behavior?
>> He's a successful business man - is that why you don't like him?
>
No, I don't like him cause he is a whiney little nerd. Arn't you paying attention.
> > No, if you want to be that, then you've not analysed the system right, you
> > are trying to optimize the wrong system variables
>> Unfortuantely we've only been left with one two-state variable: play or
> starve. Ethics are for those who can afford ethics, not for those with
> responsibility for the welfare of others.
You have not looked at the system parameters, you have miss place priorities.
Rarely is the choice between starvation and sin. Mainly the choice is how much
more material possesion can I get versus how many others I have to hurt.
Been there, done that. Left it and found my soul.
