Mike Godwin wrote:
Ray Saintonge writes:
I'm sure that Dante should have set up a
circle in hell where
plaintiffs
with more money than sense were forever litigating against defendants
with less sense than money.
"More money than sense" = "less sense than money",
n'est-ce pas?
Yes and no. It's self-explanatory for these plaintiffs, but these
defendants have little money and even less sense.
Without making any claim as to the absolute amount of
sense we have, I
think we probably have more sense than money, by some appreciable
margin.
Having both sense and absolute sense is an oxymoron... except perhaps in
theology.
(I am hoping Dante would not count that
self-assessment as a
sin.) We look forward to the day when we have a lot of sense and even
more money.
Do we? When money grows at a faster rate than sense it becomes subject
to the Law of Diminishing Returns.
Ec