Idk,I think it's a slippery slope to start governing what is too much wealth,and what should or could be done with said wealth. I felt this same way during those ridiculous Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.So you go after the big money,who gets hurt? The ones at low end of that totem pole.
The notion that everyone should be equal is a pipe dream.Some people work harder and make better life choices then others.They should be punished and ridiculed for the same success most wish to achieve?Very Hypocritical.
What should be equal is the oppurtunity to succeed.What we do with it,is what separates us as a society.Sure there are those born lucky with a silver spoon and other who are born never to see life outside of squalor,but all in all starting from the same place I would want all to reach for the stars.
Gambs,who's to say the CEOof Rockwell isn't a fucking straight up great guy.Benevlent to the hilt.Founding hospitals,and charitable orginazations,donating time and money.To pass judgement without knowing him or her as individual is careless and equally as bad as saying everyone who is poor is a loser.
as to the part I bolded, I completely disagree. this goes back to how a good friend of mine who is a dentist, owns his own practice, has loads of money, and had his entire schooling paid by his parents while he lived at home rent free, thinks that he shouldn't have to tip a server because "he/she made worse life choices than I did".
working harder and making better choices very rarely equals more money. it's part of it, but you can't tell me that a CEO of a major corporation works harder or made better choices than the single mother who was abandoned by her asshole husband with 4 kids and 3 jobs. she works hard as fuck. he probably grew up in priveledge, or something close to it, to begin with.
it has more to do with how you started out. most people do not change their social class from birth to death.
But that dentist is a jerk - well, acts like one anyway. But for every one of him, I think there are many more who treat others decently because it's the right thing to do, regardless of success or wealth.
Also, I've found the ones who've worked their way up - or are in the process of doing so - tend to be more empathetic and generous.
Right on Hedo.They appreciate what they have,because it takes so much to get it.
And to answer your original question, brian, of why dont these rich people take care of the planet, etc, i think a certain amount of money and/or power can be incredibly corrupting to the point tgat you can justify your actions with things like "well i bought an electric car" or "i give x amount of dollars to x charity" or "i offset my carbon footprint by buying credits" or to even "i am single handedly driving the economy, creating jobs for x amount of people, putting food on the table for x amount of children". And to an extent, it is actually true. If there was no wealth, even extreme wealth, we wouldnt having a thriving capitalist society. The gap is widening, for sure, but how do you stop that from happening? It seems like a logical evolution of a capitalist society until it eventually collapses on itself, no?
There are some (I'm thinking of Derrick Jensen, right off the top of my head) who have stated that this is exactly what will and must happen- that the collapse of civilization as we know it will force what's left of us back (eventually) to a more stable societal situation and prevent further collapse of ecosystems. And these people believe the sooner this happens the better. From what I've read (Jensen's almost 900 page Endgame, for example) these arguments make logical sense. Maybe so, but who wants to be in the middle of that kind of chaos (not that we would have a choice)? I don't know what the answer is.
Interesting what you said about Bono. Some of the interviews I watched of him speaking outside of the realm of music are quite compelling. He seems very knowledgeable and compassionate.
you're right, I don't think anyone wants to be in the middle of an economic apocalypse, but at this point, I think it's a foregone conclusion.
the only scenario I can see our species surviving AND the Earth surviving, is a world with no governments, no currency, no major resources to exploit. but then you get back into the realm of no law, no human rights, etc. basically, back to being hunters and gatherers.
yeah, there was a time where every time I'd see Bono sitting with a government head, I'd think "oh jeez, there he goes again, trying to save the world....shut up and sing, Bono!". But then I came to believe that he honestly believes in what he is doing.
I'm sure brian can speak to this better than I can as he mentioned a book by Manning previously in this thread that builds on the premise that hunter gatherers were not the lawless, backwards society that we think they were. What if these societies were actually more egalitarian than anything we could accomplish in today's world? A major collapse of the world economy would create a very frightening situation but would the endgame really be that horrific? I'm not sure but I think we may find out at some point :(
Hugh, what you described is fairly close to what neo-tribalism suggests might be the way to go. If nothing else, its an interesting subject worth looking at and a much better choice for our future than random chaos.
I know we are veering strongly into speculation here and I think things will collapse more in slow-motion than quickly, but it might we worth thinking about as a way to prepare the next generation for what is to come. What concerns me most is what perhaps the kids being born today will have to deal with in terms of social upheaval. It seems like a wise choice to set into motion choices that will be less catastrophic.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Idk,I think it's a slippery slope to start governing what is too much wealth,and what should or could be done with said wealth. I felt this same way during those ridiculous Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.So you go after the big money,who gets hurt? The ones at low end of that totem pole.
The notion that everyone should be equal is a pipe dream.Some people work harder and make better life choices then others.They should be punished and ridiculed for the same success most wish to achieve?Very Hypocritical.
What should be equal is the oppurtunity to succeed.What we do with it,is what separates us as a society.Sure there are those born lucky with a silver spoon and other who are born never to see life outside of squalor,but all in all starting from the same place I would want all to reach for the stars.
Gambs,who's to say the CEOof Rockwell isn't a fucking straight up great guy.Benevlent to the hilt.Founding hospitals,and charitable orginazations,donating time and money.To pass judgement without knowing him or her as individual is careless and equally as bad as saying everyone who is poor is a loser.
as to the part I bolded, I completely disagree. this goes back to how a good friend of mine who is a dentist, owns his own practice, has loads of money, and had his entire schooling paid by his parents while he lived at home rent free, thinks that he shouldn't have to tip a server because "he/she made worse life choices than I did".
working harder and making better choices very rarely equals more money. it's part of it, but you can't tell me that a CEO of a major corporation works harder or made better choices than the single mother who was abandoned by her asshole husband with 4 kids and 3 jobs. she works hard as fuck. he probably grew up in priveledge, or something close to it, to begin with.
it has more to do with how you started out. most people do not change their social class from birth to death.
But that dentist is a jerk - well, acts like one anyway. But for every one of him, I think there are many more who treat others decently because it's the right thing to do, regardless of success or wealth.
Also, I've found the ones who've worked their way up - or are in the process of doing so - tend to be more empathetic and generous.
well of course he's but one. I was just illustrating the point that hard work doesn't equal economic status. he has loads of money, and sure he worked hard through school, but he was able to because of his personal situation.
Idk,I think it's a slippery slope to start governing what is too much wealth,and what should or could be done with said wealth. I felt this same way during those ridiculous Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.So you go after the big money,who gets hurt? The ones at low end of that totem pole.
The notion that everyone should be equal is a pipe dream.Some people work harder and make better life choices then others.They should be punished and ridiculed for the same success most wish to achieve?Very Hypocritical.
What should be equal is the oppurtunity to succeed.What we do with it,is what separates us as a society.Sure there are those born lucky with a silver spoon and other who are born never to see life outside of squalor,but all in all starting from the same place I would want all to reach for the stars.
Gambs,who's to say the CEOof Rockwell isn't a fucking straight up great guy.Benevlent to the hilt.Founding hospitals,and charitable orginazations,donating time and money.To pass judgement without knowing him or her as individual is careless and equally as bad as saying everyone who is poor is a loser.
I think it's an equally, if not more, slippery slope to say a person can accumulate an unlimited amount of resources and pass them on from generation to generation while tens of thousands of people starve before they ever get a chance to even make "better life choices".
Then sell all your possessions and live in box,so you can be more like those that don't have what you have. Why is it any different? Will you be a worse person because you want Jean Claude to go to the best schools you can afford?(talk to me in a few years,you will see)We sell out in little ways everyday.But most of us try to be good citizens of our world daily also.We do what we can with what we have.If you can help others along the way that's awesome.You mentioned you felt blessed with what gifts you have and feel guilty for excessiveness when others have nothing,right? So do you compromise your family to be more like those who don't have what u got? How is that make the world better?It dosent. But if you use some of your resources wether that's money or time or knowledge.That can make a profound difference.Even if it's just one life you can effect,then you hit a home run.
Idk,I think it's a slippery slope to start governing what is too much wealth,and what should or could be done with said wealth. I felt this same way during those ridiculous Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.So you go after the big money,who gets hurt? The ones at low end of that totem pole.
The notion that everyone should be equal is a pipe dream.Some people work harder and make better life choices then others.They should be punished and ridiculed for the same success most wish to achieve?Very Hypocritical.
What should be equal is the oppurtunity to succeed.What we do with it,is what separates us as a society.Sure there are those born lucky with a silver spoon and other who are born never to see life outside of squalor,but all in all starting from the same place I would want all to reach for the stars.
Gambs,who's to say the CEOof Rockwell isn't a fucking straight up great guy.Benevlent to the hilt.Founding hospitals,and charitable orginazations,donating time and money.To pass judgement without knowing him or her as individual is careless and equally as bad as saying everyone who is poor is a loser.
as to the part I bolded, I completely disagree. this goes back to how a good friend of mine who is a dentist, owns his own practice, has loads of money, and had his entire schooling paid by his parents while he lived at home rent free, thinks that he shouldn't have to tip a server because "he/she made worse life choices than I did".
working harder and making better choices very rarely equals more money. it's part of it, but you can't tell me that a CEO of a major corporation works harder or made better choices than the single mother who was abandoned by her asshole husband with 4 kids and 3 jobs. she works hard as fuck. he probably grew up in priveledge, or something close to it, to begin with.
it has more to do with how you started out. most people do not change their social class from birth to death.
See,that has nothing to do with social class and everything to do with your dentist(yes im a anti dentite) buddy being clueless and kinda a dick.Maybe a bit of a snob as well.i bet he's a tightly whitey kinda guy,lol
What descisions did that single mother make.Did she get preggers early?Did she drop out of school?Did she have a drug problem?Does she choose to be with abusive dirtbag men?Many variables for sure. Her hard work ethic could positively effect her children's view of hard work and allow them to move forward.Not be stuck in the same trapped dead end life.
The CEO,how do we know he/she didn't work 3 jobs to put themselves thru school and work their way up from the mailroom.Maybe the person chose to be career minded instead of seeking a long term relationship early in the ladder climb allowing for more single minded dedication to the job.Maybe they were raised by a single mother working 3 jobs who taught them how to be dedicated to their proffesion.
I think it's easy to paint those who live differently then us with a wide brush.When in reality we know nothing about them.We have to judge each person on there individual merits and not on how many zeros are on their bank account.Rich can be giving and caring and poor can be bright and hard working.It all works.You can't cherry pick.
Paul, you are making presumptions above. .Most the very successful buisness people I've known have been very driven,bright people.Some are immigrants who's families came here with nothing,others are self made,but they all have the same quality in common.They weren't affraid to fail,they worked hard and made some good fortunate descisions.These are qualities that can be learned by anyone.and you don't have to be born into money to find success.
I'm sure there are CEO's that have made it there from the ground up. my grandfather was one of them. started at a company in the mail room. ended up VP of the entire company. true story.
i was just responding to your statement that people who are rich got there because of good choices and hard work. Hard work, yes. Good choices? more like good circumstances, for the most part.
and honestly, my dentist buddy is one of the nicest guys you'll ever meet. and very generous. which is why I found it so shocking when he told me his view on this. and this was over a decade ago. possible his view has changed since his practice is up in a highly poor aboriginal populated town.
you are also making a lot of presumptions about the hypothetical single mother. maybe her husband, the breadwinner, died suddenly. maybe she was raped and had a kid and that kid has special needs and so she can't work. maybe she's disabled. who knows.
all of the questions you posed are about how she put HERSELF there, and no questions with regards to how she got there through no fault of her own. most people who are in poverty, are there because they are born into it, not because they put themselves into it.
no, you don't have to be born into money to find success. but I would say it's the norm, and not the exception, that's all.
we can't assume that just because someone lives in poverty that it's the result of them making bad decisions in life. some people just get the short straw.
Idk,I think it's a slippery slope to start governing what is too much wealth,and what should or could be done with said wealth. I felt this same way during those ridiculous Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.So you go after the big money,who gets hurt? The ones at low end of that totem pole.
The notion that everyone should be equal is a pipe dream.Some people work harder and make better life choices then others.They should be punished and ridiculed for the same success most wish to achieve?Very Hypocritical.
What should be equal is the oppurtunity to succeed.What we do with it,is what separates us as a society.Sure there are those born lucky with a silver spoon and other who are born never to see life outside of squalor,but all in all starting from the same place I would want all to reach for the stars.
Gambs,who's to say the CEOof Rockwell isn't a fucking straight up great guy.Benevlent to the hilt.Founding hospitals,and charitable orginazations,donating time and money.To pass judgement without knowing him or her as individual is careless and equally as bad as saying everyone who is poor is a loser.
I think it's an equally, if not more, slippery slope to say a person can accumulate an unlimited amount of resources and pass them on from generation to generation while tens of thousands of people starve before they ever get a chance to even make "better life choices".
but why should a person be limited in what they achieve? I'm not saying I think it's necessary, I personally don't get it (I make a fairly meger living compared to most people my age, I just don't care about a big house and nice car), but don't you think it's a cornerstone of a democratic society to allow people the freedom to accumulate whatever they want? and as someone else mentioned, many of those super rich probably give away more than I'll ever make (whether it's out of philanthropy or just plain tax breaks is irrelevant). so they, in fact, are actually doing more for the poor than I ever could.
In third world countries if you told people they could get ahead by hard work and good choices they would either give you a funny look or think, "Yeah, maybe I can eat today!"
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
In third world countries if you told people they could get ahead by hard work and good choices they would either give you a funny look or think, "Yeah, maybe I can eat today!"
It just is unfathomable to me. I cannot imagine not being able to feed my kids.
In third world countries if you told people they could get ahead by hard work and good choices they would either give you a funny look or think, "Yeah, maybe I can eat today!"
It just is unfathomable to me. I cannot imagine not being able to feed my kids.
Definitely. It's hard to imagine.
This takes me back to the original question. It's unfathomable to me that the small percentage of people in this world with the majority of the power and the wealth aren't strongly focused on doing what it takes to bring stability in the world, both socially, economically and most importantly, environmentally. Instead, to a great degree, we have wars, starvation and an environment that may become inhospitable in many or perhaps all regions for human habitation. This doesn't make sense to me.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
but why should a person be limited in what they achieve? I'm not saying I think it's necessary, I personally don't get it (I make a fairly meger living compared to most people my age, I just don't care about a big house and nice car), but don't you think it's a cornerstone of a democratic society to allow people the freedom to accumulate whatever they want? and as someone else mentioned, many of those super rich probably give away more than I'll ever make (whether it's out of philanthropy or just plain tax breaks is irrelevant). so they, in fact, are actually doing more for the poor than I ever could.
Absolutely!
We make a decent combined income which we have worked so hard for - but we mostly live frugally. Not much splurging but when we buy something, it's a wise investment and paid for up front.
(except for my new car, and still - to be able to write out a 30% deposit check, earned a credit score close to pristine that allowed me to get a great deal, to know this isn't an expense we can't handle, etc...)
I'm proud of what we've accomplished, and to enjoy the fruits of our labor (they're not all tangible, by the way) takes nothing away from awareness of others' situations. And like I said before, most good people will do what they can to help, no matter how seemingly small.
In third world countries if you told people they could get ahead by hard work and good choices they would either give you a funny look or think, "Yeah, maybe I can eat today!"
It just is unfathomable to me. I cannot imagine not being able to feed my kids.
Definitely. It's hard to imagine.
This takes me back to the original question. It's unfathomable to me that the small percentage of people in this world with the majority of the power and the wealth aren't strongly focused on doing what it takes to bring stability in the world, both socially, economically and most importantly, environmentally. Instead, to a great degree, we have wars, starvation and an environment that may become inhospitable in many or perhaps all regions for human habitation. This doesn't make sense to me.
too focused on keeping the wealth and the power that they have. until the governments of the world come to a consensus on the needs of the majority, which will never happen, we won't thrive.
it just blows me away that WE CAN SOLVE WORLD HUNGER RIGHT NOW. the amount we throw away in first world nations is enough to feed the planet. so disgusting.
Idk,I think it's a slippery slope to start governing what is too much wealth,and what should or could be done with said wealth. I felt this same way during those ridiculous Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.So you go after the big money,who gets hurt? The ones at low end of that totem pole.
The notion that everyone should be equal is a pipe dream.Some people work harder and make better life choices then others.They should be punished and ridiculed for the same success most wish to achieve?Very Hypocritical.
What should be equal is the oppurtunity to succeed.What we do with it,is what separates us as a society.Sure there are those born lucky with a silver spoon and other who are born never to see life outside of squalor,but all in all starting from the same place I would want all to reach for the stars.
Gambs,who's to say the CEOof Rockwell isn't a fucking straight up great guy.Benevlent to the hilt.Founding hospitals,and charitable orginazations,donating time and money.To pass judgement without knowing him or her as individual is careless and equally as bad as saying everyone who is poor is a loser.
I think it's an equally, if not more, slippery slope to say a person can accumulate an unlimited amount of resources and pass them on from generation to generation while tens of thousands of people starve before they ever get a chance to even make "better life choices".
but why should a person be limited in what they achieve? I'm not saying I think it's necessary, I personally don't get it (I make a fairly meger living compared to most people my age, I just don't care about a big house and nice car), but don't you think it's a cornerstone of a democratic society to allow people the freedom to accumulate whatever they want? and as someone else mentioned, many of those super rich probably give away more than I'll ever make (whether it's out of philanthropy or just plain tax breaks is irrelevant). so they, in fact, are actually doing more for the poor than I ever could.
I don't really think a person should be limited to the amount they can accumulate. I think people should limit themselves. The freedoms that we enjoy in a democratic society are often the very ailments that plague us. Individual freedom is our greatest and most admirable principle as a species, but it is beyond obvious that it holds our species back from achieving true peace and prosperity as a whole.
Idk,I think it's a slippery slope to start governing what is too much wealth,and what should or could be done with said wealth. I felt this same way during those ridiculous Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.So you go after the big money,who gets hurt? The ones at low end of that totem pole.
The notion that everyone should be equal is a pipe dream.Some people work harder and make better life choices then others.They should be punished and ridiculed for the same success most wish to achieve?Very Hypocritical.
What should be equal is the oppurtunity to succeed.What we do with it,is what separates us as a society.Sure there are those born lucky with a silver spoon and other who are born never to see life outside of squalor,but all in all starting from the same place I would want all to reach for the stars.
Gambs,who's to say the CEOof Rockwell isn't a fucking straight up great guy.Benevlent to the hilt.Founding hospitals,and charitable orginazations,donating time and money.To pass judgement without knowing him or her as individual is careless and equally as bad as saying everyone who is poor is a loser.
I think it's an equally, if not more, slippery slope to say a person can accumulate an unlimited amount of resources and pass them on from generation to generation while tens of thousands of people starve before they ever get a chance to even make "better life choices".
but why should a person be limited in what they achieve? I'm not saying I think it's necessary, I personally don't get it (I make a fairly meger living compared to most people my age, I just don't care about a big house and nice car), but don't you think it's a cornerstone of a democratic society to allow people the freedom to accumulate whatever they want? and as someone else mentioned, many of those super rich probably give away more than I'll ever make (whether it's out of philanthropy or just plain tax breaks is irrelevant). so they, in fact, are actually doing more for the poor than I ever could.
I don't really think a person should be limited to the amount they can accumulate. I think people should limit themselves. The freedoms that we enjoy in a democratic society are often the very ailments that plague us. Individual freedom is our greatest and most admirable principle as a species, but it is beyond obvious that it holds our species back from achieving true peace and prosperity as a whole.
good god. so the Winnipeg Jets make the playoffs. a buddy of mine I work with is paying $250 for each ticket to go to one game. Some people are selling their tickets for $1200 EACH. Some people have too much fucking money. LOL
I said the only way I'd pay $1200 to see the Jets play is if EV was on the team.
In third world countries if you told people they could get ahead by hard work and good choices they would either give you a funny look or think, "Yeah, maybe I can eat today!"
This takes me back to the original question. It's unfathomable to me that the small percentage of people in this world with the majority of the power and the wealth aren't strongly focused on doing what it takes to bring stability in the world, both socially, economically and most importantly, environmentally. Instead, to a great degree, we have wars, starvation and an environment that may become inhospitable in many or perhaps all regions for human habitation. This doesn't make sense to me.
Can I ask why you feel it's unfathomable? Because I think it's typical. The story of Mr. Scrooge and seeing the error in his greedy ways, coming to terms with it and promising to be better to his fellow human seems to just be a nice story. Maybe it happens to a few, but it doesn't really happen. Of course it doesn't make sense to you, you are a caring and empathic person, you don't identify with those who place greed ahead of everything else.
Not to mention that in our capitalistic nation, the idea of taking care of each other - socialism - is a dirty word.
But not to me. I know we live in greedy times, so I'm going to give however I can. Because one person can make a difference and you alone can too. Don't let the world get you down, just do what you can to make a difference on a personal level. Because that's great in itself.
good god. so the Winnipeg Jets make the playoffs. a buddy of mine I work with is paying $250 for each ticket to go to one game. Some people are selling their tickets for $1200 EACH. Some people have too much fucking money. LOL
I said the only way I'd pay $1200 to see the Jets play is if EV was on the team.
Ah, but you'd consider it (you in the general sense, Hugh, not singling you out but this is a good example) - and that's my point. It's money you've earned, and with that comes the right to spend it as you see fit for yourself, whether on necessities or luxuries or donating it or....
good god. so the Winnipeg Jets make the playoffs. a buddy of mine I work with is paying $250 for each ticket to go to one game. Some people are selling their tickets for $1200 EACH. Some people have too much fucking money. LOL
I said the only way I'd pay $1200 to see the Jets play is if EV was on the team.
Ah, but you'd consider it (you in the general sense, Hugh, not singling you out but this is a good example) - and that's my point. It's money you've earned, and with that comes the right to spend it as you see fit for yourself, whether on necessities or luxuries or donating it or....
oh absolutely. I was more just singling out sports as I don't quite get it (see below). I would never do it, but I get it. most people think I'm nuts for travelling for a concert. or paying $50 a shot to see the Headstones 5 times on one tour (3 times in another province-flight, hotels, meals, etc).
the one thing I don't understand about paying that much for sports though, is that, with a concert, the probability of a disappointing show is probably about 10% or less. with sports, it's a crapshoot. to pay $250-$1200 for a ticket to a game you might lose and come away from depressed? that's a serious gamble in my eyes. but to a die hard sports fan, I suppose it's worth it.
In third world countries if you told people they could get ahead by hard work and good choices they would either give you a funny look or think, "Yeah, maybe I can eat today!"
This takes me back to the original question. It's unfathomable to me that the small percentage of people in this world with the majority of the power and the wealth aren't strongly focused on doing what it takes to bring stability in the world, both socially, economically and most importantly, environmentally. Instead, to a great degree, we have wars, starvation and an environment that may become inhospitable in many or perhaps all regions for human habitation. This doesn't make sense to me.
Can I ask why you feel it's unfathomable? Because I think it's typical. The story of Mr. Scrooge and seeing the error in his greedy ways, coming to terms with it and promising to be better to his fellow human seems to just be a nice story. Maybe it happens to a few, but it doesn't really happen. Of course it doesn't make sense to you, you are a caring and empathic person, you don't identify with those who place greed ahead of everything else.
Not to mention that in our capitalistic nation, the idea of taking care of each other - socialism - is a dirty word.
But not to me. I know we live in greedy times, so I'm going to give however I can. Because one person can make a difference and you alone can too. Don't let the world get you down, just do what you can to make a difference on a personal level. Because that's great in itself.
that's one thing I've always found interesting.......the amount of people, and I will say this cautiously, USUALLY, right wingers/republicans, that have an issue with living in a socialist society, with regards to obamacare, etc. Yet, how many services are social in nature already? too many to count.
what I really think is that they aren't so afraid of socialism at its core, they just don't understand it. and if it hadn't been part of the acronym for USSR, they wouldn't be so afraid of it. LOL. I get such a laugh out of people calling me a "commie" for thinking that "health care for all" is a good idea. LOL.
good god. so the Winnipeg Jets make the playoffs. a buddy of mine I work with is paying $250 for each ticket to go to one game. Some people are selling their tickets for $1200 EACH. Some people have too much fucking money. LOL
I said the only way I'd pay $1200 to see the Jets play is if EV was on the team.
Ah, but you'd consider it (you in the general sense, Hugh, not singling you out but this is a good example) - and that's my point. It's money you've earned, and with that comes the right to spend it as you see fit for yourself, whether on necessities or luxuries or donating it or....
oh absolutely. I was more just singling out sports as I don't quite get it (see below). I would never do it, but I get it. most people think I'm nuts for travelling for a concert. or paying $50 a shot to see the Headstones 5 times on one tour (3 times in another province-flight, hotels, meals, etc).
the one thing I don't understand about paying that much for sports though, is that, with a concert, the probability of a disappointing show is probably about 10% or less. with sports, it's a crapshoot. to pay $250-$1200 for a ticket to a game you might lose and come away from depressed? that's a serious gamble in my eyes. but to a die hard sports fan, I suppose it's worth it.
Funny, I'd never even considered the sports vs concert side of it. Pretty interesting perspective and a wise gamble/investment.
good god. so the Winnipeg Jets make the playoffs. a buddy of mine I work with is paying $250 for each ticket to go to one game. Some people are selling their tickets for $1200 EACH. Some people have too much fucking money. LOL
I said the only way I'd pay $1200 to see the Jets play is if EV was on the team.
Ah, but you'd consider it (you in the general sense, Hugh, not singling you out but this is a good example) - and that's my point. It's money you've earned, and with that comes the right to spend it as you see fit for yourself, whether on necessities or luxuries or donating it or....
oh absolutely. I was more just singling out sports as I don't quite get it (see below). I would never do it, but I get it. most people think I'm nuts for travelling for a concert. or paying $50 a shot to see the Headstones 5 times on one tour (3 times in another province-flight, hotels, meals, etc).
the one thing I don't understand about paying that much for sports though, is that, with a concert, the probability of a disappointing show is probably about 10% or less. with sports, it's a crapshoot. to pay $250-$1200 for a ticket to a game you might lose and come away from depressed? that's a serious gamble in my eyes. but to a die hard sports fan, I suppose it's worth it.
Funny, I'd never even considered the sports vs concert side of it. Pretty interesting perspective and a wise gamble/investment.
(good going, ya Commie )
although, I guess it's not much different if you are one of those PJ fans that travel to a show in hopes of seeing Oceans performed live so you can cross off all of Ten. LOL.
good god. so the Winnipeg Jets make the playoffs. a buddy of mine I work with is paying $250 for each ticket to go to one game. Some people are selling their tickets for $1200 EACH. Some people have too much fucking money. LOL
I said the only way I'd pay $1200 to see the Jets play is if EV was on the team.
Ah, but you'd consider it (you in the general sense, Hugh, not singling you out but this is a good example) - and that's my point. It's money you've earned, and with that comes the right to spend it as you see fit for yourself, whether on necessities or luxuries or donating it or....
oh absolutely. I was more just singling out sports as I don't quite get it (see below). I would never do it, but I get it. most people think I'm nuts for travelling for a concert. or paying $50 a shot to see the Headstones 5 times on one tour (3 times in another province-flight, hotels, meals, etc).
the one thing I don't understand about paying that much for sports though, is that, with a concert, the probability of a disappointing show is probably about 10% or less. with sports, it's a crapshoot. to pay $250-$1200 for a ticket to a game you might lose and come away from depressed? that's a serious gamble in my eyes. but to a die hard sports fan, I suppose it's worth it.
I spent $750 on a ticket for the 2006 AFC Championship between Colts / Pats. At halftime, with the score 21-3 in favor of the Pats, I considered it my worst financial investment ever ... but the Colts back out in the end and it all worked out.
I would never spend that much money for a ticket ever again, especially in the HDTV era.
good god. so the Winnipeg Jets make the playoffs. a buddy of mine I work with is paying $250 for each ticket to go to one game. Some people are selling their tickets for $1200 EACH. Some people have too much fucking money. LOL
I said the only way I'd pay $1200 to see the Jets play is if EV was on the team.
Ah, but you'd consider it (you in the general sense, Hugh, not singling you out but this is a good example) - and that's my point. It's money you've earned, and with that comes the right to spend it as you see fit for yourself, whether on necessities or luxuries or donating it or....
oh absolutely. I was more just singling out sports as I don't quite get it (see below). I would never do it, but I get it. most people think I'm nuts for travelling for a concert. or paying $50 a shot to see the Headstones 5 times on one tour (3 times in another province-flight, hotels, meals, etc).
the one thing I don't understand about paying that much for sports though, is that, with a concert, the probability of a disappointing show is probably about 10% or less. with sports, it's a crapshoot. to pay $250-$1200 for a ticket to a game you might lose and come away from depressed? that's a serious gamble in my eyes. but to a die hard sports fan, I suppose it's worth it.
I spent $750 on a ticket for the 2006 AFC Championship between Colts / Pats. At halftime, with the score 21-3 in favor of the Pats, I considered it my worst financial investment ever ... but the Colts back out in the end and it all worked out.
I would never spend that much money for a ticket ever again, especially in the HDTV era.
for a standalone championship football game I'd consider it. but hockey fans are nuts (and I'm canadian), spending that amount of money on 1/7th of the series. IMHO of course.
How do you consider purchasing a ticket to a football game an investment?
What you get out of it?
(or what you anticipate you'll get out of it, weighed with the cost?)
It's not that different from spending a fair amount for a nice dinner - the whole experience. Sometimes you rub your belly after and are supremely satisfied, other times you're hitting the pink Pepto stuff like your life depends upon it.
In third world countries if you told people they could get ahead by hard work and good choices they would either give you a funny look or think, "Yeah, maybe I can eat today!"
This takes me back to the original question. It's unfathomable to me that the small percentage of people in this world with the majority of the power and the wealth aren't strongly focused on doing what it takes to bring stability in the world, both socially, economically and most importantly, environmentally. Instead, to a great degree, we have wars, starvation and an environment that may become inhospitable in many or perhaps all regions for human habitation. This doesn't make sense to me.
Can I ask why you feel it's unfathomable? Because I think it's typical. The story of Mr. Scrooge and seeing the error in his greedy ways, coming to terms with it and promising to be better to his fellow human seems to just be a nice story. Maybe it happens to a few, but it doesn't really happen. Of course it doesn't make sense to you, you are a caring and empathic person, you don't identify with those who place greed ahead of everything else.
Not to mention that in our capitalistic nation, the idea of taking care of each other - socialism - is a dirty word.
But not to me. I know we live in greedy times, so I'm going to give however I can. Because one person can make a difference and you alone can too. Don't let the world get you down, just do what you can to make a difference on a personal level. Because that's great in itself.
that's one thing I've always found interesting.......the amount of people, and I will say this cautiously, USUALLY, right wingers/republicans, that have an issue with living in a socialist society, with regards to obamacare, etc. Yet, how many services are social in nature already? too many to count.
what I really think is that they aren't so afraid of socialism at its core, they just don't understand it. and if it hadn't been part of the acronym for USSR, they wouldn't be so afraid of it. LOL. I get such a laugh out of people calling me a "commie" for thinking that "health care for all" is a good idea. LOL.
I'd have a big problem living under a socialist /communist society.No thank you.
If tickets went on sale for a one off Zeppelin show,or. A one off Temple of the Dog full show.I could see value in dumping a premium on those tickets. It's really about what the buyer perceives as value.If I'm going to already spend a lot of cash on plane tix,hotel,rent a car,over priced merch,why wouldn't I want to pay the extra for sweet once in a lifetime seats or vip access to make the experience that much more special?
If you go to festivals you know ,just the bathroom access,Bars and shade are worth it for vip upgrades.Again what's the experience and memory worth.
Comments
I know we are veering strongly into speculation here and I think things will collapse more in slow-motion than quickly, but it might we worth thinking about as a way to prepare the next generation for what is to come. What concerns me most is what perhaps the kids being born today will have to deal with in terms of social upheaval. It seems like a wise choice to set into motion choices that will be less catastrophic.
www.headstonesband.com
Why is it any different? Will you be a worse person because you want Jean Claude to go to the best schools you can afford?(talk to me in a few years,you will see)We sell out in little ways everyday.But most of us try to be good citizens of our world daily also.We do what we can with what we have.If you can help others along the way that's awesome.You mentioned you felt blessed with what gifts you have and feel guilty for excessiveness when others have nothing,right?
So do you compromise your family to be more like those who don't have what u got? How is that make the world better?It dosent.
But if you use some of your resources wether that's money or time or knowledge.That can make a profound difference.Even if it's just one life you can effect,then you hit a home run.
i was just responding to your statement that people who are rich got there because of good choices and hard work. Hard work, yes. Good choices? more like good circumstances, for the most part.
www.headstonesband.com
you are also making a lot of presumptions about the hypothetical single mother. maybe her husband, the breadwinner, died suddenly. maybe she was raped and had a kid and that kid has special needs and so she can't work. maybe she's disabled. who knows.
all of the questions you posed are about how she put HERSELF there, and no questions with regards to how she got there through no fault of her own. most people who are in poverty, are there because they are born into it, not because they put themselves into it.
no, you don't have to be born into money to find success. but I would say it's the norm, and not the exception, that's all.
we can't assume that just because someone lives in poverty that it's the result of them making bad decisions in life. some people just get the short straw.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
This takes me back to the original question. It's unfathomable to me that the small percentage of people in this world with the majority of the power and the wealth aren't strongly focused on doing what it takes to bring stability in the world, both socially, economically and most importantly, environmentally. Instead, to a great degree, we have wars, starvation and an environment that may become inhospitable in many or perhaps all regions for human habitation. This doesn't make sense to me.
We make a decent combined income which we have worked so hard for - but we mostly live frugally. Not much splurging but when we buy something, it's a wise investment and paid for up front.
(except for my new car, and still - to be able to write out a 30% deposit check, earned a credit score close to pristine that allowed me to get a great deal, to know this isn't an expense we can't handle, etc...)
I'm proud of what we've accomplished, and to enjoy the fruits of our labor (they're not all tangible, by the way) takes nothing away from awareness of others' situations. And like I said before, most good people will do what they can to help, no matter how seemingly small.
it just blows me away that WE CAN SOLVE WORLD HUNGER RIGHT NOW. the amount we throw away in first world nations is enough to feed the planet. so disgusting.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
I said the only way I'd pay $1200 to see the Jets play is if EV was on the team.
www.headstonesband.com
Can I ask why you feel it's unfathomable? Because I think it's typical. The story of Mr. Scrooge and seeing the error in his greedy ways, coming to terms with it and promising to be better to his fellow human seems to just be a nice story. Maybe it happens to a few, but it doesn't really happen. Of course it doesn't make sense to you, you are a caring and empathic person, you don't identify with those who place greed ahead of everything else.
Not to mention that in our capitalistic nation, the idea of taking care of each other - socialism - is a dirty word.
But not to me. I know we live in greedy times, so I'm going to give however I can. Because one person can make a difference and you alone can too. Don't let the world get you down, just do what you can to make a difference on a personal level. Because that's great in itself.
Dirty words are made that by the context in which they're used.
the one thing I don't understand about paying that much for sports though, is that, with a concert, the probability of a disappointing show is probably about 10% or less. with sports, it's a crapshoot. to pay $250-$1200 for a ticket to a game you might lose and come away from depressed? that's a serious gamble in my eyes. but to a die hard sports fan, I suppose it's worth it.
www.headstonesband.com
what I really think is that they aren't so afraid of socialism at its core, they just don't understand it. and if it hadn't been part of the acronym for USSR, they wouldn't be so afraid of it. LOL. I get such a laugh out of people calling me a "commie" for thinking that "health care for all" is a good idea. LOL.
www.headstonesband.com
(good going, ya Commie
www.headstonesband.com
I would never spend that much money for a ticket ever again, especially in the HDTV era.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
(or what you anticipate you'll get out of it, weighed with the cost?)
It's not that different from spending a fair amount for a nice dinner - the whole experience. Sometimes you rub your belly after and are supremely satisfied, other times you're hitting the pink Pepto stuff like your life depends upon it.
It's really about what the buyer perceives as value.If I'm going to already spend a lot of cash on plane tix,hotel,rent a car,over priced merch,why wouldn't I want to pay the extra for sweet once in a lifetime seats or vip access to make the experience that much more special?
If you go to festivals you know ,just the bathroom access,Bars and shade are worth it for vip upgrades.Again what's the experience and memory worth.