[jaguar]

juju, read a few pages, back, just before dham's first post, by nature taking advantage of the need of others is exploitation, if I see (to use that old example) heroin on the streets to junkies at inflated prices - its exploitation, no? If I sell sun dried tomatoes to yuppies at inflated prices, it’s also exploitation, see my point? Whether both think they're getting a good deal is irrelevant.

So...let's sum up your position as you've laid it out in this thread so far: business is immoral, but when it's "done well" you have respect for those who do it, and you do it yourself, and you would do even more of it except for a selfish purpose of your own: extracting as much as possible from your parents so you can get into a good school toting that shiny new Powerbook you want.

Please Maggie, all I ask is you READ what I say, I said I'M SAVING UP FOR A POWERBOOK WHIT MY OWN MONEY EARNED BY MY OWN WORK....

IN the first sentence yes - you managed to understand what I’m saying, I still have respect for something done well, even if I don't like what it is (take for example businesses like Microsoft). Now if only you could simultaneously hold that concept and the one that we often do things we know are immoral.

If you were in a position where you had to depend on your own financial efforts to survive, I'd be more inclined to let it pass when you prate about the selfish immorality of being in business. But probably not a lot more...it just seems more egregiously hypocritical in your current situation.

Well I can't see my views changing in a year, and in a year that is exactly what ill be doing, I already pay for my own expenses, its only household stuff I don't. Once again - please read what I say instead of knee-jerk reactions after half-skimming my posts.

Um...which "we" was it who said that? As I said,*I* don't think Jonson had an editor (he certainly didn't have a spell-checker; he even had to write his own dictionary, as I recall). I don't think he took a year to write it the passage I quoted. I think he probably *did* read what he'd written a few times, and reflected on whether his words conveyed his thoughts well. He might even have gone back and changed a phrase or two; which took a bit more effort with quill and parchment than we expend in this text widget here.

You still are not getting my point, this is more like a conversation than an essay and is written as one, and I’d say Johnson did have an editor - unless he published all his books himself. It really is a matter of time, just I’d love to spend all day fixing up my language, every tiny mistake, as I would with a full essay form school, but I don't have all day to do that so people like you can pretend to have read it that post uninformed replies based on what they think I wrote. The way i write the two is fundamentally different, and wanyway i'm not goign to start using more complex language to try and make myself feel ebtter than the rest of the peopel ehre unlike some - i'm not trying to alienate people. I mean I could discussion the discussing the profound implications of multitude of padigram shifts in sinoamerican politics in the last decade, which have results in unequivocal tergiversation of american forign policy, but what's the point.

Isn't this debate worth enough time for your input to be well-constructed and convincing? Maybe your words don't need to survive "the linguistic test of time" on a four-century scale, but they *do* need to pass muster in the debate here, and survive the trip from your mind to your reader's mind (a short but perilous journey), for the reasons described eloquently in the Jonson quote. I'll boil down the quote to "sloppy speech implies sloppy thinking", if it must be sloganized into a sound-bite.

First of all, where the fuck are you pulling this slogan shit from, its starting to get on my nerves, as for one word that varied from the dictionary version (which I did at 10am about half an hour after I got up, Christ talk about nitpicking, you've used that one example about 6 times). As I said, and once again you choose to ignore, have you ever been to a live unplanned debate? I've seen people contradict themselves in one sentence, thinking on your feet is not easy at all. Oddly enough you are the only one that seems to have a problem grasping the concepts I put up, if anyone else does - raise your hands.

Bluting out a proposition and then asserting that "it's obvious" just won't cut it.

When did I do that? Pardon? Huh? Reality please. Oh btw – I’ve never “bluted” anything, try a spellchecker hypocrite.

And when you and your Powerbook get into that better Uni, the faculty will insist that your discourse toe that line, too. If they don't, you will have been dissed much severly than anything you've suffered at *my* hands here.

Once again you've shown you don't understand my key point - this is not an essay, this is a conversation. If you want I can post some of my essays I’ve done in the past, maybe that'll clear things up because nothing else seems to be to get though to you.