China is not a warmongering country. Neither is Iran. I’m not sure your point here.

Other countries should be jumping at the opportunity to shed their american shackles.

The fact you have so many down votes is astounding to me. People really dont like to face that they may be wrong or biased about something. Easier to tap the down vote and scroll on.

Essentially you have it right, although I wouldnt say charities should dissolve as a rule. If there aren’t enough people to do the work with the right goal in mind though I dont think the answer is to pay more and get capitalists in the door.

I have a strong aversion to greed minded people in general though so I’m very biased here.

Its not simply people doing what’s best for the selves, its greedy parents who have raised greedy children who grow up thinking their job title and bank account number represent who they are. They could choose any other values to pursue in life but actively choose greed each day.

The catalyst to change oneself comes from within, so I hold people responsible who refuse to learn or change.

Its not a few. America is full of scams and exploits at literally every turn. Its in advertisements, news stories, popular TV and movies.

The point I’m making is that people think at least charities will be the exception to that rule, but they aren’t. You’d be better off donating to a non-american organization IMO.

Competent people who don’t care about the cause shouldnt take the job at all. People earning 8 figures shouldnt expect to make the same at a charity. Greed and altruism are values or qualities a person can possess and I dont think they can exist in the same person.

The United Health CEO thought he was altruistic, his family does as well. Its pretty clear the vast majority of people see greed there, not altruism.

Greedy people simply shouldnt be in charge of helping people.

You are assuming the highest paid ceos are the best choice for a charity as well. Running something with a goal of making as much money as possible is not the same as running something with a goal of helping with something as much as possible.

Its only the same if you think money accomplishes both, which is a valid take on things, I just dont agree with that myself.

If the only reason a ceo wants to work for a charity is the huge paycheck, they have the wrong set of values to run a charity.

Being a CEO of a charity is not about prestige. This is why a lot of american charities come across as grifts in my opinion.

You should ask why a person would accept that much money to do that kind of job, they could ask for an appropriate amount but instead take what they can get.

Plenty of non-american charities dont over pay people. You would expect people who work in charity to not be greedy. Greed is when you take more than you should because you think you deserve it.

Cool, so americans will do anything for money. Even in charities. Is that what you want to hang your hat on? Its awful behavior and the OP is right to highlight the hypocrisy of a charity CEO making over 10 times the cost of living.

A person leading a charity shouldnt have such an ego that they think they deserve so much more than anyone else. How could they possibly understand the concept of charity?

They are saying they are all greedy.

Thats an insane scene to watch completely out of context. Is Jason statham the bad guy in that movie?

I meant what you are saying, I think I worded it poorly. Cheaper deals are done in relatively shady places where you could get caught by chance. Bigger deals are more secure using any number of methods.

There are just bad dealers too though, its like any other job.

Are you implying you would be teaching that man how to walk?

When you help someone on a computer, they come along with you too, just like the blind guy. And just like the blind guy, them coming along with you does not mean they will be able to do it themselves next time, or that they want to do it alone next time.

This sounds a lot like “only my perspective is correct” type stuff.

I think what you are describing is teaching not helping. Helping someone is just doing the thing they need help with and thats it. Its not a prerequisite that someone learn something if your goal is just to help them but it is if your goal is to teach them something.

It is nice when people share your interests and want to learn but everyone’s got their own stuff going on and sometimes can’t make room for something new like that.

The trolley argument was always nonsense with regards to the presidential election.

In a hypothetical trolley problem, you will know the consequences of each choice. That is not something anyone is able to say when it comes to which president will cause most harm. They clearly wanted to harm different people, but noone will know which one would have hurt the most of those people.

So the trolley problem changed to one track with one set of victims, and another with a different set of victims, and people would argue back and forth that each other got the set of victims wrong.

Arguing over nothing in my opinion, and I did it myself.

As for this assassination, its as simple as feeling good when your enemy is hurt/loses/dies/fails. Its a reaction and is entirely reasonable for it to happen. I do think though, that the best thing that could have happened was that the CEO realized his mistakes and spent his time and money thereafter working vigorously to fix them.

He had amassed quite a lot of money and power, it could have been used for a tremendous amount of good if he had the will to do it suddenly.

My more liberal and diverse of a state allows open carry but the last time someone did it with a rifle the police followed them around until they stopped.

Not all, quite a lot of fireworks stay on the ground. The big mortars usually go in the air though like you said, usually.

Any successful getaway would surely involve leaving false evidence all over in public places though.