Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbugs
... The Villages is a great place to live and the Morse family has done a wonderful job of making this slice of Heaven available to us. Where else could you be so happy for such a reasonable cost. $135 monthly amenity fee is almost unheard of anywhere - and for all we get!!
Greed on the part of the developer? The Morse family happens to be wealthy but this is America, folks. They developed The Villages and keep it beautiful. ...
If you do not want to donate to the Moffit Center - don't donate. No one is forcing you to donate. ...
... You never had it so good as you do right now!!!
|
I agree with all of the parts of your post that I quoted, (other than the part that states that the issue is deciding whether "to donate to the Moffitt Center," since fund-raising in question doesn't do that.)
Indeed, deciding whether to donate to "The Mission for Moffitt" was the point of this thread. I'd been trying to decide, I got my questions answered and I shared the answers with others who are deciding.
I sincerely don't understand what this has to do with TV being a wonderful place to live, or the developer having done a wonderful job making this slice of heaven available to us. I don't see what it has to do with the fact that we've never had it so good. This
is about deciding whether to donate to "Mission for Moffitt".
I also struggle to understand the inability or unwillingness to distinguish among traits of genius, vision, acumen, ethics and personal integrity.
For example, it's possible to be a great businessman, produce a great product and be highly ethical. Bon Jovi and Warren Buffett pop to mind.
One can be a great business person, produce a wildly popular but flawed product and be highly ethical. Bill Gates comes to mind. One can be great business person, produce a popular, sought-after product and be highly unethical. Bernie Madoff and Ken Lay come to mind.
It is possible the Morse's possess all of these traits in abundance; it's possible they have great genius, vision and acumen and rate less well or even poorly or even pathetically on the ethics and/or personal integrity scales. Isn't it?
Or does it make more sense, as Tbug's and other posts in previous threads
seem to me to imply, to accept or acknowledge no distinction among traits of genius, vision, acumen, ethics and personal integrity.