Politics are always relevant. Anybody who can't see the connections is blind:
Obama poison word for word. Wealth redistribution to the undeserving simply believing they are deserving because they exist. The Obama promoted "entitlement" mentality of if you make more then me, you should give me some of yours so I can benefit from all your hard work and risk taking. Mossman believes Pete should give everyone some of his, because Pete's got too much.
I think what is irrelevant is when somebody tries to tell a business owner that they can't financially benefit from all their hard work and risk taking and they should pass along those rewards to people who have no rights or claim to them. That unfortunately is where we are in 2011, to the point that somebody can make a statement like Mossman did to Pete and almost nobody is shocked by it.
My father would have read what Mossman said and his comments would have been simple, he would have shaken his head and muttered "My my, the balls on this one."
Fin, I gotta say I think you are little off. First SB isn't really a business, per se. It's more like a thing that Netdoc would like not to lose money on. (And correct me if I am wrong.) So it is sort of in that gray area between for profit business and a non-profit.
And you Obama thing is WAY OFF. For that to work, you would have to go on the Invasion and find you paid more than other people and some people were there for free. The trip would also be partial financed by a loan which future invasions would have to pay back. And the dive shop would have to tell you the trip was going to run out of money before everyone got all their dives in. Further, someone would half to suggest cutting any afternoon dives you paid for, so everyone could dive all week, but you would also have to wait till your second day there to actually start diving. See that is totally different from what Moss said? (please enjoy the satire, ignore the politics...)
Last edited: