Quote:
|
Originally Posted by August
My response to Clarke would be to ask just how long we as a species would have survived without that intelligence, and while I opposed the bailout, I don't really get the connection between that and an oil company's quarterly profit.
|
In answering your first observation, consider the shark. A fish that has existed for millions of years virtually unchanged. How much intelligence does a shark have? I would say enough to survive the "natural conditions" with.
Now one might argue about the "quality of life" that a shark enjoys, or how many technological achievements the shark family has created, or that it's "Not Intelligent" when compared to Homo Sapiens. But that's moot. The shark is a survivor none the less because it is well suited to it's environment...
The only animal that seeks to change it's environment is Man... And by the looks of things, it's not going along too well...
As for the second: The connection is that I feel I've been screwed in both instances. Concerning Exxon, I've paid much higher prices at the pump while their percentage of profit skyrocketed. In the second, while perhaps not technically a "percentage" figure, I see the bailout as a vehicle whereby someone else will profit by screwing me, and I'm sure a huge number of Americans, over for their personal gain...
