Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:20:03 02/09/06
Go up one level in this thread
I once saw Jimmy Carter on TV building a house. Kind of a strange thing for a former President of the U.S. to be doing, but there he was, hammering away. He wasn't getting paid for the work (not that he would need it, as former U.S. presidents get a nice pension). The objective of the exercise in which a large group of workers took part was to complete the house and then give it away. Another man may build a house and sell it. Both the family that got the free house and the family that paid for their house were glad to get them. We do not say that Jimmy Carter did a bad thing to build a house for someone who could not afford it. And we do not say that the builder of the house that was sold did a bad thing because the people who bought it thought that it was worth the money. Both persons did something that made someone else happy. Both of them did some good for someone. Which of the men did the greater good? I guess it is a matter of opinion. But the house that was given away was not worthless. Neither did it devaluate the house that was sold. There is room in the world for both types of transactions.
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.