jean-luc sisko Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 jean-Luc, I would suggest you start your own thread, instead of threadjacking this one. That way, it will be your thread that gets closed for pointless banter, (like your other one was) not somebody else's. Thanks. I'm stating my opinion. It's my right to do so. Link to post Share on other sites
jean-luc sisko Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 God is an artist and makes everything unique and beautiful. Perhaps. But there are a number of schools of thought that says God purposefully chooses a person's place. Who is to say this is not the case? I don't believe that standpoint personally, but I think that human beings are not born nor experience equal scenarios in life. If we accept that people who are more attractive have advantages, then why not accept other advantages? Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I think that human beings are not born nor experience equal scenarios in life. If we accept that people who are more attractive have advantages, then why not accept other advantages? Well, the disadvantages are created by the ignorance of men. And about beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I just see beautiful people all around. Link to post Share on other sites
pookster72 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 What makes you feel entitled to someone else's property? Rich or not? this....... Link to post Share on other sites
jean-luc sisko Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Well, the disadvantages are created by the ignorance of men. And about beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I just see beautiful people all around. There is a general standard of attractiveness. People who meet this standard have more opportunities for dating, love or sex. Differences should be celebrated, and we are all different. Our differing outcomes in life largely stem from these differences. Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 this....... The problem with this mentality is that somebody gets to live in a house like this and someone gets to live in a house like this. But people think that they both "deserve" it. The poor people are too stupid to be poor and should get an education and go to college, and the rich person is admired because he made it and he deserves to have that money and live in that house. Both are lies. Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 There is a general standard of attractiveness. People who meet this standard have more opportunities for dating, love or sex. I see attractive people here having heck of a problem for dating, finding love and sex, so I think it's more complicated than that. Link to post Share on other sites
pookster72 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 The problem with this mentality is that somebody gets to live in a house like this and someone gets to live in a house like this. But people think that they both "deserve" it. The poor people are too stupid to be poor and should get an education and go to college, and the rich person is admired because he made it and he deserves to have that money and live in that house. Both are lies. the mentality doesn't imply anything about "deserving" one's possessions. the position one is born into is inherently not fair. but what part of that makes one person entitled to another person's belongings? Link to post Share on other sites
jean-luc sisko Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I see attractive people here having heck of a problem for dating, finding love and sex, so I think it's more complicated than that. they still have the advantage. All things being equal, good looking people by definition have advantages in dating. And if the rich hold an advantage, then why is advantage wrong in other areas? Not everybody is as intelligent as Stephen Hawking. Not everybody can run as fast as Usain Bolt. If we accept that inequity is normal in other areas, why not wealth? Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 the mentality doesn't imply anything about "deserving" one's possessions. the position one is born into is inherently not fair. but what part of that makes one person entitled to another person's belongings? People are very concerned about their possessions and not to have them taken away, but the distribution of these is unfair and people should all have equal treatment. It should be implemented in a completely different way than how things are now without any sense of entitlement. The way things are now, lucky if someone does something for the needy. Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Not everybody is as intelligent as Stephen Hawking. Not everybody can run as fast as Usain Bolt. If we accept that inequity is normal in other areas, why not wealth? See, here lies the problem. If SH writes well, then he can write all he wants. And if Usain Bolt runs, good for him. They both should have a decent living like everyone else. They can get a little prize or recognition if that is what they want to do. But instead, they pay 20 million dollars to NBA players per year and so on. Link to post Share on other sites
pookster72 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 People are very concerned about their possessions and not to have them taken away, but the distribution of these is unfair and people should all have equal treatment. It should be implemented in a completely different way than how things are now without any sense of entitlement. The way things are now, lucky if someone does something for the needy. you can't do that in a "fair" way without changing the circumstances of everyone's birth. are you going to disallow a father from passing on his earnings to his son? Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 you can't do that in a "fair" way without changing the circumstances of everyone's birth. are you going to disallow a father from passing on his earnings to his son? Yes, and the circumstances of birth are the problem. As it is, people are holding tight to what they think they own. As it is, just to make a living is a struggle. Link to post Share on other sites
Darwin.McLoud Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 áðàâî, âàøå ìíåíèå ïðèãîäèòñÿ. Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 áðàâî, âàøå ìíåíèå ïðèãîäèòñÿ. "bravo, your opinion will prove useful." Cool! Link to post Share on other sites
Blackfrost Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I have always believed strongly in the wisdom of the famous newspaper article written in 1966 called "A Gift for my Daughter" by Harry Browne. Punch it into google if you care to read it - it's very short and very true. For those who can't be bothered, the TLDR version is this: No one owes you anything Link to post Share on other sites
Nightsky Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Incorrect. THE LOVE OF MONEY is the root of all evil. no it isn't. Life is Life. What people do in Life can seem unfair to us, but it's a question of perception. If you want to get technical a more accurate rendering from the original Greek may be: “For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil.” I wanted to write it simply as commonly misquoted. Life certainly is life, and everything is perception. I was simply trying to communicate a common idea that often resonates with people, but it probably wasn’t helpful. Link to post Share on other sites
jean-luc sisko Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yes, and the circumstances of birth are the problem. As it is, people are holding tight to what they think they own. As it is, just to make a living is a struggle. If somebody has worked hard, honestly, justly, and ethically, for their possessions, then who is to say they should give them up or forego them? Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 If somebody has worked hard, honestly, justly, and ethically, for their possessions, then who is to say they should give them up or forego them? The point is not that they should give away their stuff. It's more that the wellbeing of all people and animals is our responsibility. So those (governments, people) who can do something should so that we don't see poverty, misery, illness, and so on. There are people doing something, but there is enough wealth to go around so that none of that should happen. Link to post Share on other sites
jthorne Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) Oh nevermind. I should have read the rest of the thread before I responded. Edited January 10, 2011 by jthorne Link to post Share on other sites
TaraMaiden Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 If you want to get technical a more accurate rendering from the original Greek may be: “For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil.” I wanted to write it simply as commonly misquoted. Life certainly is life, and everything is perception. I was simply trying to communicate a common idea that often resonates with people, but it probably wasn’t helpful. And I apologise for being a thoroughly pedantic arsehole, it's the proofreader in me. Link to post Share on other sites
selena_cat Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) You know, you hear so many stories of rich folks donating billions to charities, I think it's bull. I've been poor all my life with just enough funds to meet fundamental requirements and never received anything from charities. Where do all the billions of dollars go? Education? Schools? Health? Hospitals? Sounds to me it is just the rich paying their taxes in different way. The governments get the cash along with the real poor, the bum with no life in that shabby apartment or that family of four within the rented house that's nearly crumbling with no vehicle never get any assist from rich strangers to get off their feet and as a result struggle all of the time make ends meet. They can't get a job since they do not have an education. They can't get an education because it takes funds. They don't have money since they don't have job. It is a vicious cycle. Here in Canada, I only get $10,000 a year compared to the average Joe who gets $30,000 a year and rich men and women who get more than $100,000 a year. The disparity is too excellent. It wouldn't hurt the rich guy making $100,000 a year to give $40,000 to four of the folks making $10,000 a year now would it? The reality is the poor want at least $20,000 a year to make it. The poor have to a method to begin enjoying life too. If the poor had a lot more they would make very good placements with their cash, get an education, get a job and join the middle class. Instead you got rich individuals with so much funds they don't know what to do with it, except for expanding their empire of wealth and get richer and richer. It's soo a lot less difficult for rich person to get richer when genuinely a greater way would be for the poor people to have an straightforward way to make a decent quantity. The difficulty with our society is that to be able to make money you have to invest cash. When there's no dollars to start with, and worse, if you do not have an education since your family was too poor to maintain you happy in school forcing you to drop out, as in my case, then you've got a difficulty beginning out. It shouldn't be that way. There needs to be a method to make education totally free but it's not totally free. Education costs dollars. Governments would rather use the rich people's not so challenging earned funds to create a stronger military, invest in business that are already making a decent amount and paying health care individuals (Doctors are the highest paid folks in the world and yet here we are giving to lots of money for merely prescribing medications). Here in Canada we have the Sun card which pays all medical expenses. It takes yet another comparable which need to pay our education. That would truly aid men and women. Since once men and women have an education, then it's so a lot less difficult come across a job. Yet governments don't do that. It is filled old wealthy men and women who do not like the poor, complain simply because the they have pay taxes to them. They only care about their oil and gas costs, and also the stock market...pathetic. Oil and gas costs...lol...Growing up my family never had a car and even nowadays I still do not have a vehicle. I laugh when they woory about that. C'mon, we ought to be more worried about the rising FOOD costs. Paying an average of $3.50 for a one person meal is just too pricey. Unless you eat ramon noodles, the rest of the food prices are so high. Some say, well, eat mac and cheese, it takes milk and butter too, hot dogs takes buns, so when you add up the costs of food it is just too high-priced. Rich people still do not get it. Never will. Actually I do not believe anybody need to earn much more than $100,000 dollars a year. Anything far more needs to be redistributed to the poor. It sickens me to hear rich individuals complain about at that suggestion. In short, I'd just like everyone to know... [sIZE=4][color=#0000FF]I HATE THE RICH!!!!!!!!!!!![/color][/sIZE] hey Tara! I havent read evryones comment,though i'm sure it would be in the way of,hey why should anyone give anything to you,go get it youself,not anyones problem. I'm in the U.S. so that thinking,everyone for his or herself is tres popular,i may be wrong,but i wanted to write to you to tell you. I do agree with you! This world thrive on selfishness and everyone is for themselves however,this shaky economy does not ensure everyone will stay rich or keep their cushy high salaried jobs. Also for another reason that i agree,is my current guy has a sister whose making over 100,k i'm sure. However she does not lift a finger to help her struggling brother,who is not a bum,he just completed his Doctorate and just landed a job. He needed money at least to move bc this job is in U.S. territory but not on the mainland. He had to borrow $$$ from his retired parents,while she never bothered to ask him,hey do you need some cash,i know it must be expensive. She's single,doesnt have kids,have her own house which she loves to brag about whenever she has the chance. Her ideal of helping i guess is calling her brother every minute while we were traveling toward our destination saying I love you,God Bless you. Oh she's suppose to be a die hard Christian too. So to me its personal how people who have can be selfish especially if it concern their own kin. She wants to visit us but then is constantly saying well she has to becareful of the price of traveling bc its pricey???? Meanwhile her brother had to pay more than $10k just so he can move for his job,with money he had to borrow,and her rich a$$ is worried about Air fare??? I never really cared for her or people like her,no its not jealousy. i'd rather be poor and real then loaded and fake. You can fool everyone but you can't fool yourself if you're that selfish. People like that no matter what will never be really happy. I am not saying if i made the same amount as her i would be giving away lots of money. Perhaps to churches because they do help the community in need. however I wouldnt be that selfish either,even the Bible stresses on giving. Edited January 10, 2011 by selena_cat Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts