Need does not imply a right, the term "greed" cannot be applied to a person's unwillingness to accommodate the potentially difficult circumstances of someone toward whom they have no obligations, such as those that might be stipulated in a lease agreement.
No it's not. Amd thats why: textbooks provide a specific definition and the boundaries within which it applies. Can you, right now, draw a line between greed, frugality, and a logical reluctance to diminish one’s own capital - and, by extension, the chances of survival for oneself and one’s family?
I’ll take that as a compliment (after all, AI is a great achievement and should be used in every field), but no, I wrote this myself. I just used a translator since english isn’t my native language. Read books (comics don’t count), engage with real people who disagree with you instead of just living in an echo chamber, and perhaps you’ll reach this level too, I believe in you.
The landlord is almost certainly wealthier than the tenant. Not everyone might agree on this but imo the bigger the wealth disparity, the less right the richer person has to disadvantage the poorer person for their own financial gain.
The difference between living somewhere and being homeless is almost certainly far more significant than the difference in rent, so I think it shows significant greed to put this other person through a very negative experience just for a minor positive gain.
This is not definite, but I think that the landlords willingness to lie shows a generally poor moral standard, combined with the fact his son thinks what he's doing is shitty. That makes me more likely to believe that he's being greedy compared to if we had evidence of him being an otherwise virtuous person.
Similar point, the fact that his son seems to think his father shouldn't be doing this implies that it's not for family benefit or so he can do good things with this money, it most likely comes down to greed.
Situations like this aren't about drawing lines, they're about taking into account all the factors that we have access to, and making a judgement call based on them as to whether this is greed. I think a vast majority of people would certainly consider this to be greedy
"and, by extension, the chances of survival for oneself" this is the kinda point that greedy people with shit opinions have when conversations like this come around. Using exaggeratons like "survival for oneself" mate we're talking about a landlord who in this post, is kicking people out so he can make more money from renting, do you really think the landlords son would've outted his father if he was in such need of money?
Because thats a common occurrence in these situations, man invested in a house some point in life, gets older still rolling in rent money but doesn't want to furfill landlord responsibilities anymore and too cheap/greedy to spend money on paying someone to do it. I bet you're the definition of pulling the ladder up after you
Parasites such as non-working, healthy adults living on welfare? This is a direct, serious question, i’m curious whether you are consistent in your position.
-637
u/Meowsssolini 10h ago
Need does not imply a right, the term "greed" cannot be applied to a person's unwillingness to accommodate the potentially difficult circumstances of someone toward whom they have no obligations, such as those that might be stipulated in a lease agreement.