People Don't Realise that their being force fed in the media on how to live their lives, But the people pushing this is those who own the banks... Anybody heard of Rockefella, he wants you to believe that I.D chips are the right thing to do[tho thats a different story]

When i lived in NZ, 16 year olds were putting down a $1 deposits on cars worth $20.000 + its crazy that people think its right, life style of the rich and famous!

I've never watched the shows mentioned. I don't think I'd want to. It wouldn't sit right with me. There comes a point where excess is morally reprehensible. It's a foggy line, though, I admit.

It's only, well, this year that I've really realized I make a fair amount of money for a single woman without a college degree. I'm damn fortunate. But I think part of that was finally being able to buy a condo for myself and even THAT was on sale as it was a foreclosure - I got it basically half off.

I'm not a materialistic person. I don't own a car. I get by just fine without. All my furniture is from Ikea or Target. My tv is about 8 years old and I'm feeling weird about replacing it, even though I've started to notice some color issues on part of the screen. My laptop is the most expensive item I own and I got a discount through my work to buy it. And it's far, far from top of the line. I bought my first mp3 player only last year (admittedly a very nice iPod), but it was a major gift to myself for quitting smoking.

Like others, I like and enjoy spending money on experiences. I don't think I've ever skipped a show or concert because I was broke. I went to NYC earlier this year mainly to see a play - though I had all kinds of other good fun too. It's funny, people I work with used to ask me how I could afford to travel all the time and I was like, it's easy! I don't have kids, I don't have a car, I don't have half the crap a typical american person deems "necessary" in their house.

can you live without an internet connection?


hmmmmm

I don't tend to watch these money-porn shows.

As for our obsession with wealth, despite being told from a young age that, "Money doesn't buy happiness", most of us seem to fall for the Life-would-be-perfect-if-only-I-were-rich myth at at least some point in our lives. This despite myriad examples of wealthy people whose lives were/are far from perfect.

Happiness studies show that true, lasting happiness comes from simple things. Zen monks have rated "off-the-charts" in these papers.

Here's the problem: Unenlightened people believe that, in order to be happy, we must have a romantic partner (usually someone who, in both appearance and behavior resembles the lead in a movie). They see that the rich often attract beautiful mates, so they try to accumulate wealth. They also like to keep up with the Joneses.

We are a society of mostly unenlightened people, ergo our obsession with wealth.

CarrieMpls said:

Exactly. Cut out the spouse, kids and unnecessary purchases and - hey! - "I have some money to spend and I can do whatever the fuck I want with it!!!"

Ah, the single, no-kids-havin', simple life!...

Ace said:

Indeed!

The older I get, the more I realize you're on to something, Ace.

I am poor, straight up poor and I ain't ashamed to say so. That truly is the problem with this world. Too many people are ashamed to be poor.

It's better to be a cheap stripper with a beat-up Gucci bag then to be a cashier carrying her shit around in a plastic shopping bag. The stripper chick will get more respect in today's world.

I've heard it said over and over again that you can tell alot about a person by the shoes they wear. Why is that? Surely if you have $2000 to spend on one pair of shoes they should be alot nicer than the pair someone else bought for $200. And should not the $200 be alot nicer than the $20 champions I got at payless? And how nice should a pair of $2 shoes for goodwill be?

It is painfully difficult for low income people to teach their children that integrity and dignity can be easily sold for expensive shit and almost impossible to buy back.

CarrieMpls said:

Of course, I'm not talking to you, Orger-with-a-kid/kids. Your kid/kids is/are special.

Deadflow3r said:

The people who have more "respect" for the stripper are the people you don't want to know.


I think that's more of a personal-style thing than a money thing.


I think that, if I were in that position, I would - as often as possible - point out people who've "lived large" yet ended up unhappy, as well as people of humble means who lived admirable lives.

KatSkrizzle said:

Girl, you killing me.

I moreso like Coach K so I root for Duke but my heart will ALWAYS belong to the Longhorns. But yeah we'll box anytime Duke and UNC play each other.
[Edited 10/24/09 13:36pm]

Why is it that EVERY thread that discusses money or wealth ALWAYS ends up judging people that like nice shit, a nice home, a nice car or designer shoes and handbags?

As if to say that just because someone CHOOSES to spend their money on those things automatically means that they MUST be materialistic, selfish, shallow, and evil? In your judging eyes, by merely owning certain things that immediately tells you all you need to know about a person ignoring the possibility that they could be more than the things YOU see and choose to focus on? It's absolutely no different than judging someone because they are fat, unattractive or can't afford new clothes.

You guys qualifying your statements with comments that basically denigrate anyone who chooses to spend money they work to earn in a way that you don't approve of is quite comical because you don't see the double standard because it's always in fashion to criticize people who are viewed as the "haves."

Why is it so hard for people to just say "different strokes, for different folks" and leave it at that without making some moral judgment about strangers with certain things???

As long as I ain't paying for it, I couldn't give a damn what anyone chooses to spend their money on.
[Edited 10/24/09 13:48pm]

SCNDLS said:

Looking back at the thread, I don't see any post that does that...

SCNDLS said:

There's nothing wrong with having nice things, and if you have the money to pay for it, help yourself. The problem we're talking about is how society (particularly American society) defines wealth as having lots of goodies like expensive clothes from the hottest fashion designers, the latest high-tech gadgets, the huge gas-guzzling SUV or sportscar, a humongous flat-screen TV, etc., when what most people should be doing is saving some of their money so they can live well in retirement instead of getting by on Social Security and living from hand to mouth in their later years. There's been a particular emphasis by the banks and retail companies for people to over-extend themselves on credit cards or taking out second mortgages to buy stuff that they probably don't need or could get on their own if they just saved some money prior to purchasing this stuff. And what Dan and the others are saying is that when we are in our elderly years and/or on our deathbeds, we're probably not going to look back at our lives and say "Wow, remember when I bought that huge 80 inch flat screen TV so I could watch 'Jerry Springer' and laugh at all of that trailer trash", or "Remember when I bought that $1200 Prada purse and took it with me to the club and had all of those jealous bitches staring at me because they though I was the shiznit". The flat screen TV's will ultimately get broken and need to be replaced, and that Prada purse will eventually be sold at some thrift shop for $20 someday, but the experiences of going to places you always wanted to go with people you genuinely love and want to be around will be priceless.

CarrieMpls said:

Then why even clarify with comments like "I don't need expensive shoes, designer handbags, nice cars, the latest gadget, a plasma tv, etc., etc. " ? Every time anything material is mentioned there is either a disdainful tone or an explanation that insinuates that there's something wrong if people DO want those things and that by saying YOU don't means you're somehow superior or "enlightened."

Naw, I don't consider everybody who is wealthy or likes nice things to be materialistic. But I do consider people who are consistently unwilling to live within their means to be to be foolish. I'm talking about folks who's credit card debt is through the roof and paying outrageous interest rates just so they can show off their dooney & bourke handbag that ain't got 20 dollars inside. Paying for something like that for years is senseless.

When I think of shallow, I mean folks who confuse their material assets with their self worth, whatever their income level.

We all know people who buy into excessive consumerism though. And I have seen it ruin quite a few folks. I've seen people do some shady stuff just so they can "look the part". Just a few weeks ago two people I knew who practically lived at the mall both lost their entire careers due to financial misconduct because of their need to "front" all the time. One of them is well on her way to the federal penitentiary.

I don't begrudge people their wealth earned by honest means or even windfall inheritance, but ill gotten gain is another story and I do believe this society worships wealth no matter how it's acquired. That's a problem to me and it's why I hate those reality shows.

728huey said:

Well what I'm saying is that there's absolutely nothing wrong if someone DOES want those things and has the means to pay for it. And it's a real big fucking assumption that they would somehow regret spending THEIR money on the things that they decided for themselves would enhance their lives. Also, just because someone indulges themselves doesn't mean that they are incapable of balancing satisfying their want for certain things with planning for their future and retirement. And even if they didn't plan why is it anybody else's business to care that they spent their dough on stuff that they got enjoyment out of?

SCNDLS said:

So, because someone mentions they don't "need" designer things, they have an inherent sense of superiority over people who do? That's as silly as saying folks who buy designer things all feel superior to folks who don't.

CarrieMpls said:

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying.

These threads always go this way.

It's tricky though. I can see where SCNDLS is coming from.

There was a time when I moved back home, wasn't paying rent and was only paying for some of my food (i.e. sponging ). I was working as much overtime as possible and I was single. I had lots of disposable income so I was always going out and buying music equipment, designer clothes, shoes, video games and whatever else I wanted. If I say that over the years my priorities have changed and I no longer care for these material things the way I used to I am in effect saying this latter way is better (else why would I make the change and show my happiness in doing so?). This then looks like a judgment on those that don't share this outlook. It's just an opinion, really. I don't have a problem with how anyone chooses to spend their money, but in showing that their way may not be cool for me and making it clear I don't approach spending the same way it's virtually impossible to not appear disparaging or disdainful to at least some degree. Surely every time you put forward an opinion that opposes someone else's there's an inherent sense of superiority since no matter how humble and open-minded your approach you're still just saying you're right and someone else is wrong! All that softens it is the 'for me'.

ultrablue said:

I see what you mean but I'm sure that wasn't the intent of the op or most of the people who replied. For example, I agree with the general idea that obsession with wealth is destructive because just about anything done to excess is.

Some people went on to explain their own value system but I didn't take it as an indictment toward everybody who likes nice things.

babynoz said:

No, I didn't really read that intent in anyone's post either, but there's always going to be an element of that that comes across anyway, hence defensive responses like SCNDLS's.

ultrablue said:

SCNDLS...

Dat gurl ain't obsessed wit nuthin but big, black.....












Nevermind,

SCNDLS said:

Wasn't meant that way. The people I'm referring to as "unenlightened" would be people who believe that wealth will guarantee them happiness.

CarrieMpls said:

hmmmmm....yeah i don't see that either.....hmmmmm

but what Ace said is true about the Buddhist Monks

recently i got the chance to spend the night in a 400 year old Zen Buddhist Temple here in Japan and have breakfast with the monk and his wife

he seemed like the happiest guy in the world and had done so much with his life and yet had none of the wealth and goods that Western cultures value so much

he had been on so many adventures that it kinda made me jealous
[Edited 10/24/09 18:00pm]

ultrablue said:

I wasn't trying to indict anyone for their individual value system about money; if anything, I was trying to indict what a lot of so-called experts call the "conventional wisdom" about money and wealth. Like I replied to SCNDLS earlier, if you like having nice things and have the means to pay for it, then go ahead.

Likewise, I've read a lot of news articles on the web about how much harder it is for young people out of college to get jobs these days and how it is more difficult for them to make a living, yet I see a lot of snide comments from people posting their opinions on these stories calling these young people a bunch of spoiled brats because they spend big money for the latest iPhone or their PS3 or Xbox. They also seem to act like they are superior because when they were the same age they got married, settled down, and bought their first house.

In fairness to most of the younger adults today, they can afford to buy an iPhone or PS3/Xbox as their single luxury, simply because younger adults out of college are not getting married until their late 20's or early 30's. Also, considering that most young people are already up to their eyeballs in student loan debt, plus the fact that home prices skyrocketed during the housing bubble, they couldn't afford to buy their first starter home unless they had a subprime or interest-only mortgage. As it is now, most young people either move back home with their parents until they can save enough money from their first real career job to get out on their own, or they move in with friends and pool their resources together. I know for a fact that they do this in Chicago, because the only way for some person just out of college to rent apartments in the more desirable parts of the city, which in some cases are going for $1,200 to $1,500 a month or more, is to get three or four people to rent it out together. Even with the current foreclosure crisis, many homes are still to expensive for young people to buy, and even for those who could conceivably buy their first home, the banks won't lend them any money.

SCNDLS said:

your spoiled brat baby Duke boys will catch a beat down from the people's team! It's more than a team, its the state, and the little rich school in the middle of a Blue Collar city has nuttin on the state!

babynoz said:

KatSkrizzle said:

Girl, I wish I could watch a game with you IRL for the sole purpose of talking MUCH shit and watching you get redfaced

SCNDLS said:

I jacked my own thread!