https://media4.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTZjMDliOTUycDY4cHVlZjNhZTlnbHZwOGgwZTNodHAyZzFpeWxxamk4Z2VscGFyZyZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/7JgYv9FobG1HzAO8BA/giphy.gif

Wow I’m old.

Food cutbacks (voluntary or involuntary) due to finances is likely contributing too.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study

There is no news. There’s the truth of the signal. What l see. And, there’s the puppet theater the Parliament jesters foist on the somnambulant public.

This is a privileged take. There are plenty of people that cannot wait.

Superseded. From the Latin -sede.

In agreement with ublock origin though

There are settled court cases that should cover this kind of situation. I’m sure there are witnesses and a paper trail. The problem is whether there’s any interest in actually pursuing a conviction.

He claimed to negotiate and just generally be there in the name of the US. Who cares about a president? We have lots of people that operate in an official capacity to other countries that aren’t remotely close to the president. You simply cannot state you are operating with US authority in foreign relations unless you are specifically authorized.

Just like it says: Rodman went in an official capacity but wasn’t given the authority. He did it on his own. It wasn’t officially sanctioned so he either lied or was just oblivious.

Rogers would be victorious over all, as proven by the ultimate showdown.

I don’t understand how having things and being well off means a person has nothing to lose. Have none of y’all seen Trading Places? People value different things.

I’d be curious to know if the whistleblowers of the last 25 years or so match this description of the “most ethical person”. I doubt it.

I can agree more with this statement.

And I’m saying it’s a point based on no evidence. History is riddled with people making sacrifices for the greater good. It’s also riddled with the people that own things doing nothing. Financial comfort does not increase the likelihood that someone will rock the boat and become a whistleblower. There is no factual basis for that statement.

I’m still stuck on why you think someone with money has more ethics. Do you think someone financially stable is more prone to being altruistic? Being a whistleblower is about doing something beyond yourself. What if the person with a fully paid off house and savings has family? Are they still going to make the same decisions? How did that person obtain wealth?

I don’t disagree with your list but I very much disagree with your conclusion. Honor and altruism do not correlate with owning property and having money.

What do ethics have to do with saving money and owning property? Do poor people not have ethics?

Man, I thought my statement was so ridiculous that no one could take it seriously. My bad.

I don’t quite understand your response but maybe my sarcasm wasn’t understood? Otherwise I’m at a loss.

Nepotism is fine because other people do it.