Ok, let me engage you on this. If it’s a good deed performed with blood money, or with money earned on the backs of a genocide, or with money earned by ripping thousands of families off over and over for a long time, is it a good deed?
In that question, you’ve proven my point. The deed is good even if the funds are not. The ends do not justify the means, but the means do not nullify the ends.
Oh cool, we’re all having problems reading.
At least one of us, yeah
Cool captain capitalism defender guy
No, you’re just wrong.
You said that a billionaire can’t do anything good.
The other guy said that billionaires can perform good actions but can’t truly be considered good people.
I made no remarks about billionaires at all - only tried to clarify your misunderstanding.
They were disagreeing with you, and you are making yourself look like an idiot.
You finally edited the “bever” out of your original comment, though, so good for you.
I have to tag you as “temporarily embarrassed billionaire”. Sorry you don’t get the point I was trying to make.
I know what you’re saying - no deed performed by a billionaire can be seen as good, because it was performed by a billionaire. But you’re wrong.
Ok, let me engage you on this. If it’s a good deed performed with blood money, or with money earned on the backs of a genocide, or with money earned by ripping thousands of families off over and over for a long time, is it a good deed?
In that question, you’ve proven my point. The deed is good even if the funds are not. The ends do not justify the means, but the means do not nullify the ends.
Agree to disagree, old man.
So theres no need for me to donate my blood money as that would be a bad deed right? Good for me.