why didn't the videographer give them money for a cab?
why didn't the videographer give them money for a cab?
Or how about any of us? When we see folks like these, do we go out of way to help them?
pscion12 said:`because, he was trying to highlight the crux of the matter - That a country where the ministers are one of the highest paid in the world, there are people like them that are barely surviving.
And it is not about compassion, it is about the truth of that moment. And yes boys and girls, it is ugly. And it is partly what journalism is all about (though the video can be construed as self-serving)
The fact is, why isn't anybody else helping them? Why should the videographer help them? Or how about any of us? When we see folks like these, do we go out of way to help them? Do we pretend not to see them (you know, look down and walk straight) ?
I commented on another post, .....about the Bromptons, yeah I know, it is a cheap shot. But tadaaaa...... 2k on bromptons but no transport for these folks.
pscion12 said:`because, he was trying to highlight the crux of the matter - That a country where the ministers are one of the highest paid in the world, there are people like them that are barely surviving.
And it is not about compassion, it is about the truth of that moment. And yes boys and girls, it is ugly. And it is partly what journalism is all about (though the video can be construed as self-serving)
The fact is, why isn't anybody else helping them? Why should the videographer help them? Or how about any of us? When we see folks like these, do we go out of way to help them? Do we pretend not to see them (you know, look down and walk straight) ?
I commented on another post, .....about the Bromptons, yeah I know, it is a cheap shot. But tadaaaa...... 2k on bromptons but no transport for these folks.
And the next 100 times the elderly couple have to go and see doctor, no one will be there to give them money to take taxi home.
ps In fact, it just occured to me, the very premise of the statement "high pay to prevent corruption" assumes that all people are corrupted and are paid highly so that they are less motivated to do so.
cks2k2 said:It is a somewhat sad way to think of things, but that is reality isn't it? Humans are inherently weak and easy to succumb to temptation.
Again I say, we have to do better because we will all get old someday, and if we don't do something about it now, we're all in deep doodoo. We cannot just hope to get hand-outs from random strangers that may or may not come.
That first statement's rather absolute, isn't it? There are many more factors than just "corruptible or not". Even corruptibility has different degrees. I would go so far as to say that everyone possibly has his price, and it may not be in terms of money - but having a high pay probably does play a role (not clear how significant though) in dissuading corruption in the form of bribery. Putting it into a rather simplistic framework - the choice a highly paid person faces when say, he is offered a bribe is going to be rather different from a person receiving less pay:Nope, I'm saying that if a person if corruptible, he will be corrupted no matter what you pay him or her, it is greed, simple as that.
Which of course brings to my next question. Would you have someone that is motivated by money(among other things)? or by someone who is genuinely concern for his country?
then of course we also have to question the competency of the person. Do we want someone who is good at his job but motivated by money or bad at his job but sincere?