Mamba Girl has some ridiculous views on consumption, but I gotta say Duke - you are totally not sustainable.

8/24/2010 11:02:33 AM

*buys up all of the water*

FUCK YOU SPEND IT HOW I WANT

8/24/2010 11:04:38 AM

Quote :

"because places are so desperate to hire people right now they will hire anyone who walks in the door regardless if they have an address, experience, or smell nice TO SERVE FOOD. I'm sure bums anywhere could walk into restaurants and be hired on the spot..."

Have you seen the people that work at the Waffle House? Not being down on those folks because they serve a mean waffle and put up with a ton of shit from people, but the Waffle House personal appearance standards are not exactly the same as Credit Suisse.

Quote :

"I know a biology grad that applied to chick fil a (they were hiring) and she still hasn't been called back."

I bet you any high school drop out as a significantly better chance at getting a job at a Chick Fil A store than a PhD could ever hope for, for the exact reason that disco_stu pointed out. But even if it were all the same, the point is, there are people hiring and there is help out there. If people are starving and dying on the streets, it isn't for lack of opportunity.

Like I've asked before, how is it that illegal immigrants from mexico can manage to build themselves up and make a life for themselves from nothing, but so many americans are unable to do the same?

8/24/2010 11:13:30 AM

Also, I've noticed Chick Fil A apparently only hires young, reasonably attractive people, so if the Biology grad is a fatty she probably has no chance.

Quote :

"Mamba Girl has some ridiculous views on consumption, but I gotta say Duke - you are totally not sustainable."

Should he be?

8/24/2010 1:38:31 PM

Everyone should live a sustainable lifestyle.

8/24/2010 3:26:59 PM

Dubble post

[Edited on August 24, 2010 at 3:27 PM. Reason : .]

8/24/2010 3:26:59 PM

Quote :

"the point is, there are people hiring and there is help out there. If people are starving and dying on the streets, it isn't for lack of opportunity."

Not necessarily. Did not the Democratic Congress just raise the minimum wage 40+%? If you cannot produce $7.75 an hour then it illegal for you to have a job in this Country.

8/24/2010 3:31:40 PM

Quote :

"Everyone should live a sustainable lifestyle."

Define sustainable. If Duke gathers enough resources to sustain his lifestyle, is it not sustainable?

8/24/2010 3:55:45 PM

^^ As much as I agree with the sentiment, minimum wage doesn't stop people from working for themselves. Instead of "Homeless, please give me money" signs, how about "Homeless, will do odd jobs. Bottled water $1" signs?

8/24/2010 8:04:19 PM

Riiiiiiighhhttt. Because a destitute homeless person is exactly the kind I'd like to invite in my home to do chores and such. I don't really know a ton about the homeless, but I'm guessing you don't know much either.

8/24/2010 8:07:37 PM

Quote :

"Everyone should live a sustainable lifestyle."

do you include the millions who suckle from the government teet? or only those who can actually afford such things but "shouldnt?"

8/24/2010 9:09:46 PM

I worked my ass off to have the job that pays me well. I'll buy whatever the fuck I want.

8/24/2010 9:16:47 PM

Quote :

"Riiiiiiighhhttt. Because a destitute homeless person is exactly the kind I'd like to invite in my home to do chores and such. I don't really know a ton about the homeless, but I'm guessing you don't know much either."

What's the difference between the homeless guy and the illegals who hang out in front of home depot all day offering to install your windows?

8/24/2010 10:14:47 PM

What makes you think that with all the other opportunities provided by all sorts of charities that are already out there that they will ever work? We can't even save them, they won't save themselves at this point. The best we can do is hope to help younger people avoid that situation and treat those in it like human beings.

8/24/2010 10:21:39 PM

theres so many opportunities. thats why we have no unemployment in this country. (remember, unemployment only counts people who are ACTIVELY LOOKING FOR WORK)


Look at China, since they adopted communism their economy has only gone backwards.

Quote :

"Which means what? I presented the argument, someone owning more than they need does not deprive anyone else of anything. If they did not buy the "too much stuff" then it would not have been produced at all, society would just have less stuff, it wouldn't be distributed any fairer. As such, your realist talk is bullshit. If you want to help the poor, then help the poor, berate people into helping the poor. Berating them for owning two stereo systems does nothing helpful for anyone, especially not the poor."

the poor people would buy more stuff so more stuff would be produced. instead of one duke owning 7 cars. 7 different people would own one car each. how is that so hard to understand?

8/24/2010 11:14:54 PM

wait, how does that result in more cars produced?

8/24/2010 11:37:57 PM

because total productivity goes up when more people are able to get on their feet and drive to work, drive their kids to the library, have more time to spend with their kids who then grow up and buy cars. society benefit and the economy grows long term.

8/24/2010 11:48:18 PM

how does my owning a pile of toys prohibit them from doing all that?

8/24/2010 11:49:50 PM

because they are in your driveway right now and not theirs.

8/24/2010 11:59:06 PM

umm

you realize that I didn't buy every last car, truck, and motorcycle on the market, right?

Quote :

"Mamba Girl has some ridiculous views on consumption, but I gotta say Duke - you are totally not sustainable."

?





[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 12:04 AM. Reason : ]

8/25/2010 12:03:44 AM

Quote :

"the poor people would buy more stuff so more stuff would be produced. instead of one duke owning 7 cars. 7 different people would own one car each. how is that so hard to understand?"

With what money? if they could buy a car and wanted to, then they would have. That they did not has nothing to do with anyone else. The car market is highly competitive, so it is improbable to judge which will hit first, economies of scale or diseconomies of scale. As such, if we all had refrained from buying extra cars, such that the industry sold fewer cars, it is just as likely that the price charged for them would have been higher. As such, someone that was priced out of the car market in a world of Duke having 7 cars, would have still been just as priced out in your alternate world.

Quote :

"Look at China, since they adopted communism their economy has only gone backwards."

Odd. That is not what the Chinese call it. They call it Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics. And I believe them over you any day.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 1:32 AM. Reason : .,.]

8/25/2010 1:30:21 AM

Quote :

"(remember, unemployment only counts people who are ACTIVELY LOOKING FOR WORK)"

Is there a reason why it shouldn't? Why should you be counted as unemployed if you aren't actually seeking a job? Should we be counting the trust fund babies as part of the destitute? What about the wacko communes in california? Should the hermit survivalist nut in Kansas be considered part of the unemployed? Or are you only concerned with the people who at one point wanted a job, but then decided that looking for one was just too much work.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 7:30 AM. Reason : sdfg]

8/25/2010 7:29:27 AM

Quote :

"They call it Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics."

Technically, the PRC and CCP call it Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. What you refer to is what outsiders call it.

Back into hiding with my worldly possessions.

8/25/2010 10:11:47 AM

Quote :

"With what money? if they could buy a car and wanted to, then they would have. That they did not has nothing to do with anyone else. The car market is highly competitive, so it is improbable to judge which will hit first, economies of scale or diseconomies of scale. As such, if we all had refrained from buying extra cars, such that the industry sold fewer cars, it is just as likely that the price charged for them would have been higher. As such, someone that was priced out of the car market in a world of Duke having 7 cars, would have still been just as priced out in your alternate world"

I am awaiting the crazy communist response to this awesome bit of pwnage from Lone Snark.

8/25/2010 10:17:18 AM

Quote :

"With what money? if they could buy a car and wanted to, then they would have. That they did not has nothing to do with anyone else. The car market is highly competitive, so it is improbable to judge which will hit first, economies of scale or diseconomies of scale. As such, if we all had refrained from buying extra cars, such that the industry sold fewer cars, it is just as likely that the price charged for them would have been higher. As such, someone that was priced out of the car market in a world of Duke having 7 cars, would have still been just as priced out in your alternate world."

Money is not being created or destroyed here. It would be nice if cars were much more expensive and incentive was in sustainable urban development but thats a whole different thread and a whole different attack on your terribly inefficient system of beliefs.

Now car production would not change at all if 7 people bought 1 car as opposed to duke buying 7 cars. Duke would essentially just be giving the cars to the other people. It doesn't have to be cars either. Duke owning 7 cars is simply at an opportunity cost of 1 car for 6 other people. I'm not saying he has to give this stuff away, I'm just pointing out this its painfully obvious that someone has "too much" when they have to start buying a 7th of the same thing.

If you want a 7 series get a 7 series, but if you have 5 7 serieses, its at a blatant opportunity cost of 4 7serieses (houses) to 4 families.

Quote :

"Is there a reason why it shouldn't? Why should you be counted as unemployed if you aren't actually seeking a job? Should we be counting the trust fund babies as part of the destitute? What about the wacko communes in california? Should the hermit survivalist nut in Kansas be considered part of the unemployed? Or are you only concerned with the people who at one point wanted a job, but then decided that looking for one was just too much work."

You misunderstood me. This was an argument against someones claim that "anybody who wants to work can easily find opportunities in this country, people who don't work simply aren't trying to work"

If that was the case then there would be no unemployment since unemployment only counts people who are searching.

8/25/2010 11:32:31 AM

Preservation of finite, non-renewable resources like oil, copper, aluminum, fresh air, undeveloped natural land, etc.

Humanity has reached a point where we can't get more out of the planet than we are currently using. Duke's standard of living/consumption of such finite resources is well beyond what is portioned to him by the planet. Would you disagree disco_stu?

8/25/2010 12:07:41 PM

^^, so what you're really saying is that Duke didn't deserve even the buying power to buy those 7 vehicles. You're saying the other 6 people should have his share of the money he used so they too could buy cars.

Have you admitted you're a communist?

Quote :

"Humanity has reached a point where we can't get more out of the planet than we are currently using. Duke's standard of living/consumption of such finite resources is well beyond what is portioned to him by the planet. Would you disagree disco_stu?"

Yes, I do disagree. It feels to me like you see Earth's resources as X and the amount of resources due to each person on the planet is X divided by the number of people on the planet. I don't see being born on this planet as an automatic entitlement to resources. "portioned to him by the planet" makes absolutely no sense to me.

I also don't agree that we've reached any point where we can't get more out of the planet than we're currently using. We've barely scratched the surface of nuclear power generation capabilities, and the technology is getting more efficient.

8/25/2010 1:10:00 PM

Quote :

"Duke owning 7 cars is simply at an opportunity cost of 1 car for 6 other people. "

No, it's not. How do you figure this?

(and just in case anyone didn't actually count, I only have 3 cars...and 2 motorcycles)

Quote :

"Duke's standard of living/consumption of such finite resources is well beyond what is portioned to him by the planet."

Ok, so it's probably not possible (from a resource perspective) for everyone to have 2 cars, 3 motorcyles, a boat, a jet ski, and 1/2 or 1/3 of an airplane. That's irrelevent, though...only a tiny fraction of the world's people both want and can afford something like that.


Furthermore, my toy collection (and proposed future toy collection) is a drop in the bucket compared to just one person with a vacation home, if you want to go down this road.

Quote :

"*buys up all of the water* FUCK YOU SPEND IT HOW I WANT"

...but nobody is doing that or advocating anything that's even analogous.

...which brings up another point--even if, somehow, my purchases deny ownership to the downtrodden, it's not like I own 40 used Kias and Hyundais. Poor people don't/shouldn't buy sports cars and speedboats to begin with.

It's like saying that poor people can't have jet turbine cars and rare Porsches because Jay Leno and Jerry Seinfeld bought them all.

No, poor people can't have jet turbine cars and rare Porsches because they're expensive and too impractical to serve as primary transportation, necessitating the further expense of buying ANOTHER car.




[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 1:39 PM. Reason : ]

8/25/2010 1:33:54 PM

^^I'm not saying that. You didn't read my whole post. I'm certainly far from communist

Quote :

"I'm not saying he has to give this stuff away, I'm just pointing out this its painfully obvious that someone has "too much" when they have to start buying a 7th of the same thing. If you want a 7 series get a 7 series, but if you have 5 7 serieses, its at a blatant opportunity cost of 4 7serieses (houses) to 4 families."

I'm an advocate of redistribution that would prevent people from getting to the point of boredom where they have to start buying multiples of the same thing from the share of money they've exploited from everyone else. Thats clearly different from communism (which again, isn't bad.).

Quote :

", I only have 3 cars...and 2 motorcycles"

O thanks for clarifying. Its good to know your 1 driver household ONLY has 5 vehicles.

Quote :

"Furthermore, my toy collection (and proposed future toy collection) is a drop in the bucket compared to just one person with a vacation home, if you want to go down this road."

This thread was never aimed at you. You just happened to expose yourself to it. We all know there are millions in this nation much more wasteful than you.

Quote :

" It feels to me like you see Earth's resources as X and the amount of resources due to each person on the planet is X divided by the number of people on the planet."

Its probably something like X divided by number of children + adults who seek work + disabled and sick adults on the planet.

Quote :

"Poor people don't/shouldn't buy sports cars and speedboats to begin with."

typical american ego. What makes you more deserving of nice things than anyone else who works everyday?


[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 1:42 PM. Reason : the fact that you were born in america]

8/25/2010 1:39:50 PM

Quote :

"I'm an advocate of redistribution that would prevent people from getting to the point of boredom where they have to start buying multiples of the same thing from the share of money they've exploited from everyone else."

People avoid boredom by taking up hobbies. Car enthusiast is a hobby. In fact, it's a much more constructive hobby than smoking crack.

Quote :

"typical american ego. What makes you more deserving of nice things than anyone else who works everyday?"

Hard work and prudent spending that has left him with a higher level of disposable income than many. Would you rather he have one car and spend the rest of the money putting rims and tvs on it?

8/25/2010 1:49:14 PM

Quote :

"I'm an advocate of redistribution that would prevent people from getting to the point of boredom where they have to start buying multiples of the same thing from the share of money they've exploited from everyone else. "

1. I haven't exploited shit. Again, your problem is with some people making more money than others.

2. They are not multiples of the same thing. They all serve a specific, specialized purpose. They do things that a Honda Accord is not capable of doing--the drawback being that sports cars and large trucks are fairly specialized. You can't haul or tow anything in a small sports car, and I don't want to drive my huge truck around, getting 10 mpg.

The only place that there would really be any overlap is if I pick up another BMW motorcycle, but even then, it would have a somewhat different purpose than the one I already have (the primary purpose of which is really simply that it came from my grandfather's dealership almost 30 years ago, and I wanted one of his old bikes).

3. Even if they were multiples of the same thing--if, say, I collected Corvettes or Porsches or whatever, it's still not hurting anything.

4. I could just buy a 1990 Honda Civic, which is plenty for my needs, but who are you to tell me what my hobbies will be?

8/25/2010 1:51:36 PM

Quote :

"Its probably something like X divided by number of children + adults who seek work + disabled and sick adults on the planet."

So by that equation, Person X fucks irresponsibly and has 10 children and my share decreases through absolutely no action of my own? Or my family, my progeny, my tribe deserves less because it's smaller? Fuck that.

You deserve exactly as much as you can A)take, or B)convince others that you're worth them giving you some of their resources (also known as working).

8/25/2010 1:58:12 PM

Quote :

" Would you rather he have one car and spend the rest of the money putting rims and tvs on it?"

Waste is waste. Everything serves a "need" to the person buying it Rims are cosmetic and tvs entertain children so driving parents can focus. If anything, yes I would because at least then he wouldn't be buying multiple things with the same function.

Quote :

" People avoid boredom by taking up hobbies. Car enthusiast is a hobby. In fact, it's a much more constructive hobby than smoking crack. "

and???? dot dot dot????? who said otherwise?

Quote :

"Hard work and prudent spending that has left him with a higher level of disposable income than many"

Hundreds of millions work hard, spend wisely and will never have disposable income. Why does he deserve nicer things than them?

Quote :

"1. I haven't exploited shit. Again, your problem is with some people making more money than others. "

Maybe you haven't exploited shit personally but you've undoubtedly benefited directly or indirectly (likely both) from exploitation due simply to the fact that you were born to an underexploited or unexploited family in an exploitive nation with an exploitive system and several exploitive citizens.

Quote :

"2. They are not multiples of the same thing. They all serve a specific, specialized purpose. They do things that a Honda Accord is not capable of doing--the drawback being that sports cars and large trucks are fairly specialized. You can't haul or tow anything in a small sports car, and I don't want to drive my huge truck around, getting 10 mpg."

I know they are not all identicle. Some have cigarette lighters some have 8 cupholders some don't I get it. The point is they all serve the main function of carrying you from point a to point b. If you need to carry things then one truck would cover it all.

Quote :

"3. Even if they were multiples of the same thing--if, say, I collected Corvettes or Porsches or whatever, it's still not hurting anything."

The point isn't that its not hurting anything, its that its not HELPING anything and unless something is problem free, if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.

By not helping a world that needs help you are essentially, hurting it.

Quote :

" 4. I could just buy a 1990 Honda Civic, which is plenty for my needs, but who are you to tell me what my hobbies will be?"

Hobbies require a skill. Buying things does not require skill. Even then, hobbies need to be positive and help society in a certain way. Building houses and giving them away would be an example of a GREAT hobby.

8/25/2010 2:02:13 PM

Quote :

"Preservation of finite, non-renewable resources like oil, copper, aluminum, fresh air, undeveloped natural land, etc."

Those cars will likely end up in a scrap yard at some point down the road and their components will be reused. In the meantime, Duke paid someone money for them and will continue to spend money on their use and upkeep. That's better for everyone than just putting the money in the bank and sitting on it.

8/25/2010 2:02:15 PM

Quote :

"Yes, I do disagree. It feels to me like you see Earth's resources as X and the amount of resources due to each person on the planet is X divided by the number of people on the planet. I don't see being born on this planet as an automatic entitlement to resources. "portioned to him by the planet" makes absolutely no sense to me. I also don't agree that we've reached any point where we can't get more out of the planet than we're currently using. We've barely scratched the surface of nuclear power generation capabilities, and the technology is getting more efficient. "

Regardless of how you "feel", there are finite resources being used wastefully. Resources that are non-renewable and without substitute. Numerous studies, focused on a wide array of resources, have indicated that mankind is currently consuming more than Earth can reliably provide.

One day in the relatively near-future, these things will no longer be widely available: plastic, certain circuit-board and cpu components, certain lubricants, copper wire, Amazonian wood, platinum, zinc, genetically-sustainable vegetable plants, coal, fresh water, viable antibiotics, certain rare elements essential to the production of water filters, fish.

Power generation is hardly a sustainablitiy issue. We'll always have fuel for electricity - thats completely renewable, and it's only scace now because it's so often wasted. I imagine you have a dreamy "the market will provide" outlook on human consumption, but the reality is that there ARE finite resources and we cant SCIENCE our way to infinite prosperity.

Quote :

"Ok, so it's probably not possible (from a resource perspective) for everyone to have 2 cars, 3 motorcyles, a boat, a jet ski, and 1/2 or 1/3 of an airplane. That's irrelevent, though...only a tiny fraction of the world's people both want and can afford something like that."

Maybe today, but people in countries like India and China are quickly reaching America's level of prosperity - and they ARE going to want boats and planes and everything else America had first. It's only a matter of time.

I have two motorcycles myself, so it's not like I'm claiming to be a sustainable-sally.

8/25/2010 2:09:13 PM

^^you mean providing the bank with loanable funds?

same difference. neither are good though.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 2:11 PM. Reason : k]

8/25/2010 2:09:35 PM

Quote :

"Waste is waste. Everything serves a "need" to the person buying it Rims are cosmetic and tvs entertain children so driving parents can focus. If anything, yes I would because at least then he wouldn't be buying multiple things with the same function."

You're crazy. What about 3 poor folks that couldn't afford rims? Why should Duke have all 4?

Quote :

"Hundreds of millions work hard, spend wisely and will never have disposable income. Why does he deserve nicer things than them?"

Because we live on planet earth where tribe status matters. I should be able to provide for my children exactly whatever is in my power to. And my parents should be able to provide for me exactly however much they felt like. And so forth.

Quote :

"Maybe you haven't exploited shit personally but you've undoubtedly benefited directly or indirectly (likely both) from exploitation due simply to the fact that you were born to an underexploited or unexploited family in an exploitive nation with an exploitive system and several exploitive citizens. "

There is only one person on this planet that has benefited less than everyone else due to exploitation. Cheap food exists in our country for poor people to eat because of an exploitative system.

Quote :

"The point isn't that its not hurting anything, its that its not HELPING anything and unless something is problem free, if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. By not helping a world that needs help you are essentially, hurting it."

It's not that you're hurting anything, it's that you're essentially hurting it. Got it.

Quote :

"Hobbies require a skill. Buying things does not require skill. Even then, hobbies need to be positive and help society in a certain way. Building houses and giving them away would be an example of a GREAT hobby."

I prefer a society wherein people are free to do whatever the fuck they want with their time and money (provided it doesn't physically harm other people). Hobbies don't need to be positive nor help society in any way.

Quote :

"One day in the relatively near-future, these things will no longer be widely available: plastic, certain circuit-board and cpu components, certain lubricants, copper wire, Amazonian wood, platinum, zinc, genetically-sustainable vegetable plants, coal, fresh water, viable antibiotics, certain rare elements essential to the production of water filters, fish."

One day in the relatively near-future we will replace each of those things with something else to fulfill the needed purpose or adapt to whatever becomes missing. There are countless species of animals, compounds, etc. that have existed on our planet at one point and no longer exist. I don't believe that the current combination of animal and plant species on our planet is the only combination in which the human species can thrive.

Don't get me wrong, I do think that our planet is fucked by having us being the dominant species on it and cosmologically speaking in the short-term. I just don't feel bad about it, being part of the dominant species. I do think we can "science" our way out of it with the expansion to outer space and other planets. (which of course, you'll get the space hippies that tell us that there's only a finite amount of asteroids to mine or gas clouds to farm for mass or whatever).

And of course, once we get matter replication down, sustainability will absolutely be a question of electricity (or whatever we're using for a power source at that point).

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 2:21 PM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 2:12:21 PM

Quote :

"Those cars will likely end up in a scrap yard at some point down the road and their components will be reused. In the meantime, Duke paid someone money for them and will continue to spend money on their use and upkeep. That's better for everyone than just putting the money in the bank and sitting on it."

You don't look at the big picture. Every vehicle bought is a vehicle sold. When I sell my car, I'm going to BUY another one. When a car goes to the scrap, a NEW one gets made. I would LOVE if every car ended up in a scrap yard and every viable part was picked for reuse, but that's not the case for most vehicles. They get sold to a scrap dealer and crushed into a cube. Then that cube is processed and a portion of the steel in that cube is reclaimed as crap-grade steel.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 2:17 PM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 2:16:18 PM

My hobby is preparing expensive, exquisite meals and then throwing them in the trash.

8/25/2010 2:17:27 PM

Quote :

"When a car goes to the scrap, a NEW one gets made."

So Duke's 3 cars will turn into 3 new cars? That's amazing. Of course, they'll be cleaner and more efficient cars, but that's not part of the big picture.

Quote :

"I would LOVE if every car ended up in a scrap yard and every viable part was picked for reuse, but that's not the case for most vehicles."

Reuse is also becoming more efficient as resources become more expensive.

8/25/2010 2:20:53 PM

Quote :

"My hobby is preparing expensive, exquisite meals and then throwing them in the trash."

High-five!

But now that I think about it the trash is probably too nice because some landfills create energy from the methane that decomposition creates. I would take those meals and hermetically seal them in non-recycled plastic so no bacteria could get in and then buy out some low income house and store them there, with the water and electricity running to keep the environment cool and dry to postpone the degradation of the plastic containers.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 2:29 PM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 2:22:34 PM

Quote :

"typical american ego. What makes you more deserving of nice things than anyone else who works everyday?"

Since I've thrown myself onto this thread as a real-world example, I'll continue:

Look, I'm thankful as hell to have been born in America. Everyone (well, maybe not you) says that, but I've been to and seen more than enough other places to very much mean it. Mexico, Azores, Qatar, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bahamas...a few nice things in those countries, but they are not "first world" like America--they are how most of the world lives, and seeing it will make you really damned glad you have the opportunities that you do within fairly easy grasp.

...but let's not even talk about starving kids in Africa. Let's just talk about America, where the vast majority of people have had PLENTY of opportunities.

I have had better breaks than some, and not as good as others. I didn't grow up in the projects (though there were some, which have since been condemned, about a mile from my house), but I'm not a trust-fund baby from Beverly Hills, either. I grew up out in the country in the middle of a bunch of tobacco farms. My extended family is made up of farmers, mechanics, bus drivers, etc. I don't even know how many fucking hours I've spent picking beans, digging potatoes, plowing fields, shucking corn, shelling beans, etc.

Neither of my parents went to college. In fact, nobody in my family, all the way out to great aunts and uncles, 3rd-cousins, etc, had a college education, save one uncle who went to N.C. State back in the 70s. Oh, and my great-grandmother went to Duke back about 90 years ago, although then she worked as a schoolteacher. My parents got married immediately after highschool. My dad was a barber; my mom did secretarial jobs (although she quit work for about 10 years when I was born). They lived in a singlewide trailer right up until a month or two before I was born, when they moved into a house.

When I was a teenager, my dad got a job as an insurance agent, my mom had gone back to work, and our family went from lower middle class to upper middle class, getting well into the upper-middle class by the time I went to college. My parents paid for 2 years of college for me.

I certainly didn't come up hard, but we didn't have a lot of money, either. I know what it's like to eat a shitload of Hamburger Helper. Again, I'm not saying that I'm more "deserving of nice things" than the genius from Mumbai who did my laundry in Iraq, probably because he wasn't from the right caste in India and could make more by leaving his home for Iraq to spend years doing laundry for Americans, or the English teacher from Nepal who rang me up for a bottle of soap the other day at the PX here in Afghanistan, where he's been for 5 years, striving and sacrificing to make a better life for himself when he leaves. Again, we're talking about America.

Why am I stroking checks for sports cars, when others are living paycheck to paycheck at a lower standard of living? Well, a lot of it is because I studied hard in school, made good grades, and went to college, and got a good degree. A lot of it is because I worked part time and lived pretty frugally while I was in college, and got most of it paid for by the military (which most anyone could do if they wanted to, and if they didn't, there are plenty of other ways to subsidize the cost of college), graduating without a lot of debt. A lot of it is because I took an extremely demanding job when I graduated college--one that certainly doesn't pay extravagantly, but does allow me to earn a decent living. A lot of it is because I've lived relatively frugally and below my means pretty much the entire 6 years since I graduated and started my career. A lot of it is because I've put in the effort, tied up money that I could've otherwise spent, and accepted the risk of making some investments (not retirement savings--I'm not going to buy Porsches from that pot), and on average, they have paid off some (and I expect will to a greater extent over the coming years). A lot of it is because I've spent over a year of my life living in fucking converted shipping containers and plywood shacks, using porta-johns, eating off of paper trays, etc. You don't spent much when you're living that way. Speaking of which, a lot of it is because I don't blow money on lots of other things that most people do--while I have a garage and driveway full of stuff, that's partly due to the fact that I don't have an expensive home theater system, or lots of new clothes (I wear my flight suit most of the time, anyway), or lots of expensive furniture, etc. I was 30 years old before I ever bought a TV (and it was a Best Buy house brand, and an open box purchase).



Basically, it's like this:

People value different things. Some people value free-time, low-stress, and goofing off. They haven't worked as hard either academically, professionally, or both--if you value that more than a good paycheck, I completely understand, but accept the choice you have made. Some people value a job that they truly love which happens to not pay much, for whatever reason (sometimes because it's a job that is only 9-10 months out of the year, just as an example ). Some people (including me) value travel. That's fine, but recognize that it has no salvage value--when you get home from that vacation, you have nothing to show for it but memories and experiences. Some people have to always have tons of the nicest clothes--there are as many dollars in their closet as there are in my garage (and I submit that THIS is truly an example of duplicity of effort). Some people seem to need instant gratification--they have to have it now, and they get into the debt cycle and end up paying for everything twice over (whereas I have delayed a lot of things until I could easily afford them, paying cash, and having my money make money for me all along rather than paying someone else to borrow). Some people cannot emotionally handle financial risk--whatever money they have, they keep very conservatively. They won't lose it, but it won't do much for them.

For reasons like these, there is a disparity of income and wealth in our country. It's the result of freedom we have to live according to our own priorities. I'm not even close to "rich", but I'm pretty financially secure...and getting that way involved choosing to make sacrifices in various other regards. It isn't a 100% perfect system, but there are enough safeguards and mobility in place that I don't really care to hear any shit from anyone about what's in my or anyone else's garage. There is no free lunch unless you are a trust fund baby...if you want to buy more "stuff", make the tradeoffs necessary to enable yourself to do so. If not, that's just as respectable, but don't complain about me buying a Porsche, and I won't complain about you living a relatively relaxed lifestyle (or spending your money on other things, doing a cool job that doesn't pay, etc). You do your thing, and I'll do mine, and let neither of us infringe upon the other.

8/25/2010 2:57:57 PM

Quote :

"By not helping a world that needs help you are essentially, hurting it."

First of all, I am helping a world that needs me. That was my #1 motivation, by far, for my choice of career. I signed up pre-2001, figuring that I'd be headed to Africa or somewhere to deal with exploitative warlords, etc. As it is, I have spent 6 months helping to save lives (American and Iraqi) in Iraq, 3.5 months in Qatar working to save lives in Afghanistan (Afghan, American, and lots of others), and am finishing up another 3.5 months in Afghanistan, helping to take the lives of those who basically exist to take or ruin the lives of others. Regardless of the goods/bads/others of American foreign policy, I have no doubt whatsoever that I, personally, have easily made a positive net contribution to both human life preservation and human welfare.

Quote :

"Hobbies require a skill. Buying things does not require skill."

Well what in the hell do you think I do with it all, just sit around and look at it?

Quote :

"Even then, hobbies need to be positive and help society in a certain way."

No, that's why they are called hobbies. There is no crime in recreation.

Quote :

"The point isn't that its not hurting anything, its that its not HELPING anything and unless something is problem free, if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. "

If I had not bought multiple cars and motorcycles, I would've either bought one really nice car, or I would've kept the money to spend on something else, either now or sometime down the road. I'm not going to work my ass off to make money, then give tens of thousands of dollars of it to charity (I pay into a progressive tax system that funds entitlement programs and foreign aid. If we streamline that and make it more fair, I pledge to step up my contributions to charity). If I was going to go without that money, I would do it by chilling the hell out and relaxing more.

I wouldn't have studied as hard in school. I wouldn't have enrolled in a difficult degree program in college. I wouldn't work as hard at such a demanding job. I'd have a better social life, I'd work bankers' hours in an easy, fun job (which would give me more time to spend with my little girl), etc.

8/25/2010 3:21:19 PM

I cant wait to see the responses to this.

how long until we get a race comment (your white privilege)?
how long until we get a clever "bootstrap" cartoon making fun of the idea that a person should take responsibility for themselves?
how long until we get an anti-military comment?

I am not in the military, but my life history follows a VERY similar trajectory otherwise. I came from a poor, single parent household. neither parents had a college education. yet I am supposed to feel 'guilty' because I do have an education and a career.

8/25/2010 3:41:30 PM

Don't forget that God has left the building.

8/25/2010 4:25:45 PM

^^ I was never poor, but I don't come from a privileged background, either (nor am I well-to-do now). I've had more advantages than some, and less than others. I'm fairly satisfied with what I've done so far with the cards I've been dealt (financially and in general).

All I'm saying is that almost everyone in America has the opportunity to do pretty well for themselves financially if they apply themselves properly (certainly to meet the standard of living I'm currently at). If I drove a $40,000 new pickup truck or Honda sedan, nobody would think twice...but since I'd rather spend about that sum on a used Porsche, a beater pickup, a speedboat, a jet ski, and a few motorcycles, a couple of people are up in arms and think I shouldn't do it.

Additionally, I hate this idea that success is mostly a matter of privilege or luck or something. Look, I make more money than a garbageman or a secretary, but it's not a free lunch. Over the years as well as today and ongoing, both I and they make choices and set priorities. You're goddamn right I make more money than they do...why shouldn't I? I could've skated through highschool, making mediocre grades in easy classes, then gone straight to work, pulling 9-5 hours answering the phone. I would've had a ton of fun doing it, too, and my lifestyle now would be looooow-stress.

Plenty of people consciously make exactly that decision, and good for them if that's what they want. There's not a thing in the world wrong with that (as long as you don't then try to turn and take a slice of someone else's pie when you didn't do what it took to earn it yourself). The world needs laid back, vanilla, people to do menial jobs (I really don't mean that in a disparaging way, either).

Others want the Porsche or the travel or to take a jet inverted over a mountain ridgeline at a few hundred feet and 600 mph...but they didn't/haven't/don't do what it took/takes to have/do those things, because at the time, living the easy life seemed more appealing. They score no sympathy from me.

There are others who are workaholics and run themselves absolutely ragged, but make shitpiles of money doing it. They succeed like hell at what they set out to do (make money, have power/influence, whatever). Again, if that's what they want, go for it. The world needs elite powerbrokers, CEOs, and other earth-shakers, too...and I'll be damned if I'm going to enslave myself to be one of them. That said, I'm not jealous of them, and I don't think they owe me anything.

8/25/2010 5:08:48 PM

Quote :

"This was an argument against someones claim that "anybody who wants to work can easily find opportunities in this country, people who don't work simply aren't trying to work" If that was the case then there would be no unemployment since unemployment only counts people who are searching. "

Having the opportunity is not the same as using that opportunity.

8/25/2010 7:07:10 PM

I really hate to say this...the only thing sadder than this dumb whores posts, are the impassioned replies to them.

And I don't say this because I disagree with her arguments, I say this because she is dumb as shit and hasn't made any sort of an argument worth replying to. This is a big red flag

Quote :

"Look at China, since they adopted communism their economy has only gone backwards."

What? No, what the fuck? As soon as I read this, I stopped paying attention to anything else this vapid cunt had to say, I'd encourage everyone else to do the same. At the very least, save the damn life stories of coming from the lower/middle class (I'm guessing the majority of us did) for someone who is actually making an argument where that is a worthwhile reply.

8/25/2010 8:02:17 PM

WELP. SO MUCH FOR SARCASM

8/26/2010 8:54:34 AM

Sarcasm? What you said was absolutely true: back in the 40s when China adopted communism, its economy became backwards. 60 million died of starvation. In the late 70s when they abandoned communism, their economy began to prosper. The problem is that this well known story is not known by you, I can only guess through willful ignorance, as you clearly meant a true statement as sarcasm.

8/26/2010 9:32:47 AM