On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:43:07 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 14:36:11 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 11:36:14 +0000, Mike Mitchell
wrote:



Okay, then. Try t-h-e-f-t. Understand that? Taking something that is
not rightfully yours. With six slices in a pie, the greedy person
always wants TWO slices, even if it means that someone gets NO slice.
It's all the same to the greedy person. Two slices seem totally fair.
Of course, most of us know different, as did our mothers if we had had
the benefit of a good and decent upbringing.

The trouble with this notion is that it is thinking only in a
simplistic way.

The more sensible approach would be to make the pie larger.

If the pie is not made larger then the greedy ******* always take two
slices
and still doesn't care if someone gets nothing.

So the focus should be on making the pie larger, not scrapping over
who gets the big bit.

If it can't be made larger the greedy ******* has to be curtailed.

The conflict shouldn't arise in the first place because that is a
complete waste of everybody's time and effort, when that effort could
be more productively directed.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl