Quote from: NewLiberty on July 26, 2013, 06:20:04 AM

Quote from: crumbs on July 25, 2013, 07:34:42 PM

Non-sequiturs are always apropos of nothing, redundant. This, OTOH, was not a non-sequitur. Allow me to quote your earlier post:
"Andrew Carnegie, a century ago, declared it disgraceful to die rich." Unless you're suggesting he was poor (a pauper) when he died, he has died in disgrace. By his own standards. I thought it was cruel of you to speak ill of the dead, and called him "a great man nonetheless."

I wouldn't call it a failure (nor did I, you did). He was the richest man on the planet and managed to give away about 95% before sickness over trying to prevent WWI took his life. He founded over 2500 free libraries, and spent many millions trying to prevent the war. It was only in this last effort to which he gave his life that he could have been said to have failed, and there are few more noble efforts one could consider.

He's a disgrace by his own standards, what part of "[it is] a disgrace to die rich" don't you understand? When quoting from "Lives of the ~~Saints~~ Rich" leads to an untenable position, you break into a silly tap dance, in hopes that your fail gets lost in all the commotion. It doesn't.
"One can consider" many things, though i carefully stick to the edifying factoids you give me. As far as stereotyping, nowhere in this thread have I stated "All rich are X," while you... I have to quote. The line is too hideously appalling to type it myself:

"Min-wage mom vs Billionaire? They are not the same. At the risk of redundancy: They do not expect the same of themselves."

Slaves, too, are not the same as the slaver. At the risk of redundancy: They do not expect the same of themselves.

Congrats. Your reasoning justifies so much more than you have bargained for. U are winrar!