On Tuesday 07 March 2006 22:02, Maluvia wrote: >I assume, (perhaps erroneously), the following things: > >1. Everyone, unless they are independently wealthy, living on a > pension, or a hobo, has a job or self-employment income by means of > which they are enabled to pay their bills and purchase the goods and > services they either require or simply desire. > >2. All said individuals are actually being *paid* a wage, salary, or >receiving some form of income for this work - else they could not pay > the rent with it, so to speak. > >3. All these same individuals believe they *deserve* to be paid for >whatever work they do for their employer - or if self-employed - for >whatever goods or services they offer for sale. > >This being the case, how on earth can such individuals make the case > that they deserve to be paid for what they do for a living, while an > artist, programmer, or individual in some line of work other than > their own - does not? > >Just asking. Don't apologize girl, its not required. > >I find the degree of hypocrisy underlying such a premise utterly >dumbfounding - not to mention the conceit. Its a puzzle to me too, and all I can add is a hearty Amen. >- Maluvia -- Cheers, Gene People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word 'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasses vz's stupid bounce rules. I do use spamassassin too. :-) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
