Terg,
I AM NOT A HE!!! I am most definitely female.
Sorry to shout folks. I just wanted to make sure that was heard above the cacophony of bitching.
“I celebrate myself, and sing myself, and what I assume you shall assume, for every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” --Whitman
terg whines:
That would be me.
Keep this up and I will reinstate the law that requires a visit to the electric chair for those convicted of whining.
>^,^<
KITTEN
Fluff yer hair Beula, I’s feelin frisky - M.S.
Yosemite,
Thanks for the clarification. I should never go to the boards when I am pooped!
Tergi,
The thing is, I have a strong suspicion that my father would not have been any better at forcing the issue of my mother and her abuse even if he had a regular day-to-day job. I agree, every child is a precious thing, and my father has apologized for not being a better father to us kids.
What my father did, a lot of people do all the time, they hide from reality and it doesn’t take a large bank account and investments for this to happen.
What you bring up is a topic in it’s own. A parent that is blind to the actions of another.
It is important that we distinguish that difference now, as this happens in all socio-economic groups.
We will never have a perfect society, no matter what we do. We are all individuals that see things from our own experiences and teachings. I admit, I benefit now from my father’s wealth, I thank God everyday for that, for had he not been as wealthy as he is he may not have been able to help me out of a potentially suicidal time in my life (just 2 years ago). I had written about this is another thread.
My father helps out others, more generously than he does his own kids, but then again he is our father and he wants us to be self-sufficient and self-reliable as we are his kids.
So, this is all I have to say with regards to the wealthy. I have very Libertarian thinking so you can’t convince me that (from your OP) the wealthy should be forced into giving up their hard earned money to those less fortunate. If God intended for everyone to live equally, it would be so.
Sure, I hear it on the news all the time. “Man dies of starvation from lack of 500 gallon aquarium - News at 11:00” :rolleyes:
You are trying to mix basic necessities with the nice extras. Apples and oranges. I live in NY, no one is denied food and shelter. You don’t even need to work, it’s there for the asking. It may not be room service at the Plaza, but hey, it’s free. But, no one has ever, in the history of the world, died for lack of a Ming vase, second car, country home, jacuzzi, or baby grand piano - those are the kind of excesses we are discussing.
So, if I follow your logic… Because I have a piano, some poor person on welfare (who would never be able to afford one anyway) can’t have a piano? So? Is there a charity - Pianos for the Poor? Do you donate? Is this really a problem?
terggie
I don’t think so, sweet cheeks. You’re nutt’in but a “Drone Wanna Bee”. Keep trying though, …with your brown nose, who knows?
Hey, SHE knows how to make the quotes work.
-Melin
Having now read @ 125 posts on this topic, I find that I am going to do something that I didn’t think possible: I agree with Tergie on the following: There are approximately 4000 members on the SDMB most of whom appear to me inactive. Altho I’m not a shrink there appears to be approximately 20 or so members with a “holier-than-thou” attitude. They know all the rules about yelling and the use of the word sheesh and they correct a person’s language and are mean-spirited. I for one don’t care if words are capitalized. I don’t hear any screams. The “elders” seem to defend each other against the illiteracy of those like me unfamiliar with the “computer know-how” regarding chatting in these forums. Then there are those who have such little self-esteem that they must mention how much money they make or the cases they have tried in court. And there are those as Tergie said who will cow-tow to the “elders”, hopefully to be accepted by the “Group”. It is interesting how so many of the Elders avoid putting in their occupations or even where in the U.S. they are from. What are you people hiding?
Yeah, but she ain’t no $100 Million, HOT SHOT PedeGOD bee like you, melinoma, is she? No sireeee.
terggie
I’m flamed out now. So, good night all to all. Is been…a fine ride.
Night Paul!
terggie
::blushing prettily::
I SO love a man who knows how to flatter a lady.
“I celebrate myself, and sing myself, and what I assume you shall assume, for every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” --Whitman
Sorry for these hurkin’ ass posts. I just don’t know what gets into me. I can’t stop myself. . .I also apologize for my soap box rants. Opinionated is such a hard way to be.
“I celebrate myself, and sing myself, and what I assume you shall assume, for every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” --Whitman
Ignoring the flames, because they’re pretty boring when it’s not you, I will say I understand the sentiment behind the OP. So let me put it my own way.
Money represents resources. Human, material, and energy resources. When you control money, you control how those resources are applied. If you buy VCRs resources are put into making VCRs; if you open a factory, resources are funneled into that activity; if you buy gold-plated bathroom fixtures, some part of the world’s resources are spent on that. Generally this is a good thing. It means that industrious people can obtain resources which they can then funnel into creating more wealth.
ASIDE:[The system isn’t perfect, and I find it questionable to assume that someone who is wealthy necessarily became so through superior ability (it is equally questionable that anyone with a law degree could just decide to go start a $200/hr practice, as was implied earlier). That said, it is usually true that money is obtained through competition of one sort or another and that wealth correlates at least roughly with some kind of talent or ability. many of the posters here equate that with merit, but that’s another issue I don’t want to go into.]
What I find irksome is the wealthy people who seem to have no clue what to do with the resources they control beyond spend it on their own material comfort. re: the OP, a baby grand piano is fine, if you can play it, but does anyone need two spas in a single house? When I win the lottery, I sure as hell intend to spend some of it on creature comforts; but when I get back from Disneyland on my yacht, I like to think I wouldn’t find myself at a loss as to what to do next. I mean besides buy myself an indoor Olympic-size swimming pool or some such thing.
I don’t insist that people give money to the poor; and I promise to avoid bringing “It’s A Wonderful Life” into this (please! spare us! 
); but surely there is something, rather than more and more palatial opulence, that these folks could have funneled that bit of the world’s resources into? Stock in a company making immunotherapy drugs? Or a company making the next great recreational tool (say, like snowboards were ten years ago)? Or an independent newspaper? Or even a blue chip? Or, if not a charity, then how about a political party you like? Or a candidate who will push NASA to get us to Mars before A.D.2100? Or anything the person who owns the money decides is worthy, as long as it is not the banality of gold-plated bathroom fixtures. The house described in the OP implies that the owners can think of nothing worthier than their own extravagent luxury.
The point is, it’s not an issue of telling people what to do with their money; it is an issue of whether or not we respect what they have chosen to do with it. At least, that’s what I took terggie’s point to be.
I confess, I have little respect for opulence for it’s own sake. As I said above, some interest in our material state is natural. Even a desire for luxury is fine with me. But there is a line beyond which it becomes just silly self indulgence when one considers the other things those resources could go to. I recognize that it’s a personal judgement where that line is; but those who have claimed that there IS no such line or shouldn’t be, are, I think, a little off-base.
Another ASIDE:[The issue is not, and never was, one of giving pianos to the poor, as someone rhetorically suggested. It is a question of taking all the manpower, energy, and materials that went into producing that piano and directing them differently. In my mind it depends on whether the talent in the house justifies putting those resources into the form of a baby grand.]
SINSApple:
Sometimes there is strength in numbers, and when a person who is struggling with mental illness (or depression/suicidal tendencies) finds out that they are not alone, it is often helpful. Really helpful. If reading someone else’s heartfelt confessions about their own frailties distresses you, I daresay you speak for yourself alone.
I also think that your assumption that anyone who discusses their past depression/suicidal feelings are doing it to “brag” or for the “status” is weird, and very presumptuous.
Those people that are multi-millionaires I do not envy nor am I jealous of them. I do admire the Getty people who built a 5 Billion dollar museum with their oil funds and I admire David Packer of Hewlitt and Packer fame for giving 40 million dollars to Stanford University. Who I don’t admire in my opinion are people like Bob Hope and others like him who have or had hundreds of millions of dollars and kept it the family with little donation of monies to any good cause…some of the sports figures as M.J. or the Barbara Streisands who won’t leave a decent tip and are squeaky tight. Yes, they can do what they desire but certainly not to be admired for their frugality. Then there is Bill Gates, the world’s richest man who finally gave some millions to minority education. I personally know a limosine driver at a 5 star hotel who took Gates around town and Gates stiffed him completely. In short I respect a person for how he conducts his life whether rich or poor. If he chooses to hang on to all his possesions, all well and good but he or she is not someone I look up to admire and respect except for their talent that made them wealthy.
David Packer also donated the intial something-like-$70 million (IIRC) to start the Monterey Bay Aquarium. (The story is that daughter Julie, a marine biologist, eseentially said “Daddy, can I have $70 million for an aquarium?”)
Just because you don’t hear about some of these people giving money to charity or elsewhere, don’t assume that they don’t do it. You have unfairly maligned Bob Hope, for example. Remember all those years he spent entertaining the troops? For years he never spent Christmas home with his family – he was abroad with the troops, and I doubt there was a five star hotel in most of those places. He donated his time for that – never got paid. He has donated time and money to many causes. They just don’t get bragged about in the paper. It’s not for nothing he was made a Papal Knight a year or so ago (and he ain’t even Catholic). My hubby recalls meeting him in the 70s when he came to St. Ignatius College Prep in Chicago (hubby taught there at the time) for a benefit.
As for Bill Gates, seems to me that, as you’ve indicated, he and his wife (another Melinda!) recently announced a significant donation to minority education. Rumor has it that his will leaves a significant portion of his wealth to “good causes.” And don’t forget that, as we’ve discussed elsewhere on this board, his wealth isn’t as liquid as you might think. What’s he gonna do, sell off his controlling interest in the company? Doubt it!
-Melin
Dammit! “Highlander” is my husband – the 'puter automatically inserted his name in that reply because he was the last one to post. Sorry about that!
-Melin
A curiously enjoyable thread turned on to me by ren-man (who by the way is a “pedagogue and a prick”.
A bullheaded poster who will defend any point of view for the sake of defending that point of view usually fails to defend that point of view.
Tergy is said poster with a touch of illiteracy and a dash of contempt for anyone more well off than he thrown in.
Raspberries to him and his faulty reasoning.
You are now leaving a “Smiley-free zone”!
A public service message brought to you by G.R.O.S.S.
YosemiteBabe:
I agree with you that it is often helpful to talk with others who have experienced mental illness. However, that is something that I don’t believe belongs on the net, especially on a message board. You never know who you are talking to or how impressionable they are.
I wasn’t trying to say that suicidal feelings should be hidden or never talked about. What I was trying to get at was that there is a time and a place for everything, and this isn’t the time or place to be trotting out your past problems with suicide and depression.
I may have been a bit harsh to accuse her of bragging, but I really didn’t see a need for her to mention her suicidal past in her post. She could have simply said “serious problems/issues.” Depression and suicidal tendencies have become popularity illnesses. In my experience I have found that many people, especially teenagers, believe and are getting the message that it is cool to be dark and depressed and that people who take their own lives should be glamorized. (i.e. Kurt Cobain, and I am not saying Kurt Cobain wasn’t a great musician or a talented person but simply that I have read far too many articles that tout him as a martyr who died for his music and way of life and should therefore be looked upon as genius)
“I celebrate myself, and sing myself, and what I assume you shall assume, for every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.” --Whitman