Decree that it be split equally among all invested parties, Judgment of Solomon style.
(Though in this case, they may end up having to follow through, i.e. cutting their baby into equal parts.)
(Though in this case, they may end up having to follow through, i.e. cutting their baby into equal parts.)
Tbh I don't care where the rock is or who owns it. Regarding the crown I just wish investments were transparent on par with sovereign wealth funds (Norway's Global Pension Fund is gold standard imo).
Where are they investing, is it ESG? Whats the structure for tax purposes. Etc.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Kings%203%3...
>They argued back and forth in front of Solomon, 23 until finally he said, “Both of you say this live baby is yours. 24 Someone bring me a sword.”
>A sword was brought, and Solomon ordered, 25 “Cut the baby in half! That way each of you can have part of him.”
>26 “Please don't kill my son,” the baby's mother screamed. “Your Majesty, I love him very much, but give him to her. Just don't kill him.”
> 27 Solomon said, “Don't kill the baby.” Then he pointed to the first woman, “She is his real mother. Give the baby to her.”
Maybe it was a ploy to see who cared more.
The scenario is obviously not the same - that's the joke. (Which apparently did not land.) The critical difference is: It's better to get part of the diamond than nothing at all. Thus, when any party is presented with the option to take part of it, their only sensible action is to take it. Either it's going to be split anyway, and no one would want to give away their share to the other scoundrels, or all parties are going to come together and refuse to allow it to be split - which leaves us back at the beginning.
The same cannot be said for babies. Who wants part of a baby? Not me