@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas;51705 wrote:Maybe nameless thinks they are evil-spirited, and that's fine I guess. A bit of emotional reaction should be expected against these people, especially at a time when so many of us are struggling, myself included.
It seems to me that if anyone wondered what I think about something, they'd ask me rather than imputing all sorts of 'meaning and implication' not stated. I do not use the term 'evil' because it is not a part of my reality. What is,
is!
Someone who takes more than their share is uncharitable, and selfish. There is no argument. Dem's the facts!
What they do with their wealth does not recompence those who must do without because they take more than their share in the first place.
There was nothing emotional. Hyperbolic and a tad dramatic? Maybe. Spices up the place now and then, no?
Personally, it makes no difference to me what a person has or doesn't have. We are who we are (and have no choices in the matter, anyway). I'm just reporting the score.
Quote:But he does have some important insight into the matter: accepting that much wealth is greedy.
That was the point, no? By definition! And while 'he' has it, you don't (maybe you can 'rent' it?)!