This is a video of Celine Dion on Larry King Live. This interview is..... interesting? Her comment about the people stealing stuff because they had never touched expensive stuff before really blew me away. I heard this quote shortly after the interview, but came across it today and thought I would get your ideas on it. Can someone show me the fallacy in the logic she uses? If not, then there are quite a few things I feel very slighted about not ever getting to get my hands on. Anyone else feel the same?
The thing is very rich people tend to forget there are actually other people out there which can't afford that million dollar car or Gucci or Armani or that house in Miami or London which cost more that i'll ever see in my life. They live in a world of their own with toadies and sychophants catering to their every need. They do not lead a normal life. They do not live in reality of going to work every morning, slogging through the day and getting payed at the end of the month, paying bills and stuff . So in that case we (realitively normal people) can't really take them seriously. But there are some things I would like to buy but are not able to like a Subaru WRX STi but life's hard and we just have to live with that.
I guess she's not on tv because of her political and social awareness though- she doesn't make much sense, but her heart seems to be in the right place. Anyway, everyone knows that a prayer sung by Celine will solve most problems in the world.
She seems to have a problem connecting up trains of thought. She mentions the gunfire, but then she seems to be complaining about "helicopters going overhead" rather than coming down and rescuing everybody in sight - doesn't she realise that there would almost certainly have been more helicopters that people were willing to fly if they weren't being shot at? She does have the right idea on what the [i:e7425d004c]immediate[/i:e7425d004c] needs are after any disaster like this - she was talking about getting clean water in there - in an area which is flooded! Of course this was important and she recognizes the difference - but then she went on to say that her donation of money would be needed later rather than immediately - no - her donation would have paid for (and I hope did) getting that clean water to them. On the point that Redneck is really raising, then again, she is not connecting up - or at least, not thinking things through - if she thinks that being involved in a natural disaster entitles people to go and grab the things they cannot normally get any chance to get their hands on, then will she happily allow looters into her home if the next disaster is wherever she lives (OK, I may be putting my foot in my mouth here - maybe she does live there - but that only changes the question from "would she" to "did she")?
