The New York Times published today an inspiring story about charity, but missed its moral. the NY Times tell us about the obstacles Madam Soula’s charity encountered in her homeland. She is a business woman who, perhaps more than any respectable businessman I read about, enjoys giving back to the community. Unfortunately, her giving is not always welcome, because she makes her living by charging a percentage of the money her prostitutes earn, rather than pocket it directly from taxpayers, as the bailout banks and their bankers recently did in the United States – Goldman Sachs and its CEO Lloyd Blankfein are among them- for example.
Now, why would an elementary school spurn Madam Soula’s donation, when I am sure they would accept it from Blankfein’s? Why is it morally acceptable to engage in Blankfein’s prostitution (he is fucking us rather roughly, isn’t he) but not in Soula’s?
These are questions I hope the Colbert Report will address soon, so I am going to wait and see.
