Ustwo

Give up Lebell, some people insist on learning things the hard way

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

waltert

if I got a sum of money which would require me to never work again do you think I'd just spent my time idly by, wasting it away?

no, I'd finish college and pursue what I really have a passion for, and though that involves work, I'd have a hell of alot of fun doing it.

Stompy

Some of you people have no concept of OPINION or SUBJECTIVE TOPIC.

I'll just leave it at that. I'm sick of wasting time posting things that should be quite obvious

__________________
I love lamp.

smooth

I think the most telling facts about the people you listed is that none of them were poor, they had the freedom to enter a life of austerity.

I wouldn't classify all, or even any, of them as "happy," maybe more accurately as tormented by what they perceived to be injustice in the world.

All of them were anti-capitalists, as well.

But the myth that these people lived and died poor, yet still lived happy lives, makes a powerful story indeed.

Parsing between purchasing a pleasant or comfortable environment and whether that actually "buys" happiness isn't clear and quite frankly seems to be a useless distinction.

People can't buy happiness, but they can buy things or an environment conducive to happiness?
OK, you "win" the argument. Are you happy now?

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

The Prophet

American-style greed. Mindless consumerism and selfish materialism!

What happiness!

__________________
"The death-knell of the republic had rung as soon as the active power became lodged in the hands of those who sought, not to do justice to all citizens, rich and poor alike, but to stand for one special class and for its interests as opposed to the interests of others. " - Theodore Roosevelt

Lebell

I didn't realize that you had a horse in this race.

In any event,

-Ghandi, Mother Teresa and Jesus did not start out rich.

-The myth as you call it appears to be very real, or do you have anything to back up your assertion that it's a "myth"

-At a minimum, Jesus was not "anti-capitalist" as you put it. Jesus WAS of the assertion that the love of money was a serious impediment to the search for God (which I do NOT argue against). (I will not answer for the others, because I do not know. But I would like to see for each of them some proof for your assertion that they are/were "anti-captilist".

-I did no such "parsing", I did however make a clear distinction between providing an environment that was more condusive to pursuing happiness and actually buying happiness (i.e., if I had enough money to buy that car/house/boat/trophy wife/etc, THEN I WILL BE HAPPY, or even, if I can just pay off my credit card, THEN I WILL BE HAPPY!)

Having such an environment is significantly different from having happiness, which is in direct contradiction to what Stompy and Manx seem to believe (that if I won a million bucks then I wouldn't have to work and then I would be happy!)

The failure to see the distinction is IMO, the major stumbling block for many in western culture and also a key part to this entire thread.

-No, debating on the net has relatively little to do with my "happiness". It does however pass the time while scripts run as well as provide some amusement. Occasionally, I like to flatter myself and think that some of the things I post help others understand things in a new way.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Manx

Sorry, no.

Having money to pay off a credit card, move closer to work to cut commute times, pay for a better school for your child, take a relaxing vacation to the Caribbean = happiness. It is not Ultimate And Everlasting Happiness™ - but it provides an environment of lower stress. Lower stress = higher happiness. Money buys lower stress. Money buys happiness.

Whether the people you mentioned were happy is entirely unknown. Whether they were anti-capitalist is irrelevant. None of them lived in a capitalist society or according to capitalistic methods of living. Their entire relationship with money was fundamentally different than the average person living in the U.S., so they have nothing to do with this conversation.

ARTelevision

I'd assert there has never been a civilized nation that was not obsessed with money. In the case of some "primitive" "nations" that might be utilized to subvert my statement, I'd submit they were/are obsessed with the things their cultures considers "valuable"

So, people are what their cultures shape them to be. Cultures place "value" on certain things - the most common is some concept of "money" or material exchange. It seems to me that all humans share this trait.

__________________
create evolution

Manx

Art - as in everything there are degrees. My understanding of the original post is that the question is whether the U.S. is more obsessed with money than other many other countries and cultures.

And I would also say that not all humans share the trait of desire or obsession with material exchange. Most, but not all. I am of the belief that it is not an inherently human trait, but a trait of most cultures.

Lebell

One last attempt and then you are free to have the last word.

To just use ONE example, Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha) had great wealth, but he forsook it all, knowing that it had no relevance to his happiness.

This is VERY relevant to our discussion.

Lower stress and higher happiness are NOT equal. To prove this, I meerly have to provide one example of someone with low stress that is not happy.
Also, more money does not equate to lower stress. (I can provide examples of people with a lot of money who have high stress.) What it does do is remove SOME stressors, which I have listed a few of.

As to your examples:

Pay off credit card: Why is it high in the first place? Paying for a trip to the Caribbean? Eating out? Attempts to buy happiness?

Cut commuter time: Why are you commuting? Could you work closer to home? Or is the high paying job accross town and you want the bucks?

Better school: Is it too much time to spend working with your child, making sure their homework is done? Are you working late across town finishing a project for a big promotion (and raise) instead of going to a parent teacher conference?

Vacation in the Caribbean: would a local (read, less expensive) vacation, seeing the beauty of the area in which you live not serve to lower your stress? Why is the Caribbean "better" at lowering your stress? Is it because it is the "Caribbean"?

In otherwords, there are plenty of people that manage to be happy in the situations you've described without having the money, while there are plenty of people who have money in the same situations and are NOT happy.

This last fact alone logically proves that money does NOT buy happiness.

[austin]And I'm spent...[/austin]

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Rodney

People are splitting hairs here. Would money make you happy? It would certainly erase some of the bumps in the road of life, but is that the same as happiness? I have read that everybody has a natural temperament that can be on the grim or pessimistic side, or on the positive and anticipating-pleasure side, or somewhere in between. A good event or piece of fortune can temporarily bump up the mood of even the sourest individual, but his or her basic mood will inevitably return to its preset level in a matter of weeks or months. This has certainly been the case for me.

In short, nothing can make you happy but you. Some people can maintain a basically positive outlook on the world when their loved ones are dying of cancer; they mourn, cope, and go on. Others are thrown for loop by simply losing a job or a girlfriend and can take years to recover, if ever. Money might erase a few bumps, or lack of money might add a few. But even with money, the grim will find a reason to be grim; and without it, the naturally optimistic will find reasons to keep looking forward with anticipation.

Manx

It is only relevant to our discussion if you are insisting that I am speaking in absolutes. Buddha (and let's note his story is mythological) is a story about Ultimate And Everlasting Happiness (i.e. enlightenment) - and his point is that money prevents attaining it. But we are not talking about mythological Ultimate And Everlasting Happiness - we are talking about people living and working in the U.S. (specifically) and the average person (in general). In this case, lower stress does equal more happiness. Stress creates the inverse of happiness. Again, not Ultimate And Everlasting Happiness, but just regular-old normal happiness that puts a smile on your face. Money buys it. Money does not eliminate stress by any measure.

Yes they are. All you would prove by providing such an example is that low stress does not equal Ultimate And Everlasting Happiness. Which I have never claimed. So feel free to prove something which is not being argued.

Take the most unhappy rich person you can find. Take away all his money. I'd bet you my house that 99% of the time, he'd be trying to get his money back - i.e. he is presently more unhappy.

smooth

You only need to bone up on some history before you incorrectly assert that:

a) those three people were not wealthy at birth

b) that they were not anti-capitlist


first of all, just use google on Ghandi and Mother Teresa

Here's your first "impoverished" example:


here's your second:

As for Jesus, we'll just allow that he was a historical character for the time being (I don't know what kind of proof you desire as evidence that biblical Jesus was mythological; perhaps you looking up the definition of myth would be in order):

The historical Jesus (and his disciples) was a skilled worker, and would have remained so with his family had he not gone wandering preacher in his adult life, not a pauper.

The mythological Jesus, evidently, was already a king before he eschewed riches and humbled himself to become flesh.

So your point fails on both the historical record and the mythological one.


Your assertions about capitalism and how those three characters are oriented to it are symptomatic of your history lessons in school.

Notwithstanding the fact that capitalism didn't exist in Jesus' day--it's telling that he and his disciples didn't subscribe to private ownership seeing as they lived in communes.

What would a nun have to say about private ownership? Not much in her own life given that her needs were taken care of via the community.

Was Ghandi opposed to capitalism? Even in death, he can speak for himself:

"No doubt, capital is lifeless, but not the capitalists who are amenable to conversion."

"There's enough on this planet for everyone's needs but not for everyone's greed"

Of course, Ghandi had some equally ripe things to say against socialism, so one must temper quotes with his historical context and a fuller understanding of the issues he faced than your commentary wants to indulge in. Suffice it to say that Ghandi felt compelled to argue that capitalists and laborers are not fundamentally opposed to one another and he looked to a time wherein they would co-exist. Now, whether that belief can come to fruition while capitalism operates isn't a subjective determination. But idealism certainly has my respect and a certain place in the global arena.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Lebell

I concede the Mother Teresa and Ghandi (mostly because I don't care to go digging at this point), but I do not concede Jesus and the Buddha. Contrary to what has been asserted, Buddha's early life is not unknown. Also contrary to what you seem to want to assert, Jesus would not have been 'wealthy' or even 'well off', as carpenters were not considered even as equal to the merchant class at the time. At best, had Jesus not entered into preaching, he would have been in the upper lower class of the time. (From biblical accounts, Joseph does not appear to be in the picture when Jesus is an adult.)

As to the 'mythical' Jesus, I was specifically addressing your assertion,

This is indeed false, so I don't understand this next assertion,

since you failed to address the points I made. (Perhaps that is your training taking over.)

And capitalism did not exist in the ancient middle east? Seems that the merchants of the time practiced it pretty well. Perhaps you ought to hit the dictionary yourself and look up the definition of "capitalism".

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Ustwo

I think the problem here is that some people can’t get beyond the miserable part. If you are young and poor, as I’m willing to bet many of you are, money will be your top worry. Everything you do will be based around the money in your pocket, from paying the rent to getting pizza. There will never be enough money to do everything you want, and get everything you want and you have no idea where you will get more.

I was once young and poor, but I always had backup plans, and a long term plan to be sure I wouldn’t be poor forever. Having disposable income is great, or perhaps I should say was great, now that my wife isn’t working it will get tight a while, but its not the happiness maker some of you seem to think it is.

Having money obviously removes the big worry that lack of money can cause. You will never be stuck in a spot where you just can’t do what you feel you need to do to survive. It helps at home as there won’t be pressures on how the money is spent, or any of the other pressures having to many bills and not enough cash can bring.

This state is not happiness. This state is just having a need met. It can make it easier to be happy, but only a very shallow person is made happy based on what they buy. People rant on consumerism yet they think that same consumerism will make them happy?

I now have a young son. No amount of money would make me happy if it required that he suffer for it. His well being is more important to me than money. I’ve seen to many rich parents with shitty kids they spoiled to the point of them being truly good for nothings, who are anything but happy with how life has gone.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

smooth

Oh dear god.

First of all, a myth is a story that relays a culture's ideals. Whether something is true or not doesn't determine whether something is a myth. If you had looked it up instead of just reacting to my statement, you would have found that out for yourself. Instead, I have to point it out to you along with the next incorrect assertion you make:

Capitalism wasn't around in B.C. or even the first 100 years of A.D. (whereever you want to place Jesus and his disciples).

Before you admonish someone to look something up, you might want to at least know what you're talking about. If you get interested in actually learning about these topics, the relevant terms would be: mercantilism, capitalism, and nation-states.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

smooth

Stompy, I would have expected you to point out the silliness in the statements by pointing out the obvious in:

a) comparing a rich person dying of cancer to a poor person dying of cancer

b) comparing a poor person who longs to be young and attractive to a rich woman who can actually afford to alter her body (ignoring the even more obvious of what each one's respective health is going to be like once they hit that later stage)


But, as often the case on this board, people have to "win" a point rather than just agreeing with the forest

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Lebell

Who wants to be pot and who wants to be kettle?

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!