Thanks for sharing, Latin. This advice is so Princely. It wouldn't work for the average person, though, because most people who have just been laid off could not afford a two-week international retreat. Also, I daresay that 99% of us don't have a Princely figure in our lives who could make virtually all of our dreams a reality. Still, by all accounts, Prince was a wonderful, sage friend.

Prince gave this advice to Van Jones shortly after he "resigned" from his White House environmental adviser position, resulting from the revelation of a controversial past that, administration officials acknowledged, caught the White House off guard. Things like rising to public prominence as a race-baiting agitator at the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights in Oakland, funded by the George Soros-supported Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the liberal Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. Also, becoming a public fixture in the Bay Area after crusading to free convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal for a Marxist organization, and being an avowed communist as well. I personally think that Prince would've been better off not knowing somebody like Van Jones. However, I will agree with one thing that Van Jones has said; that the whole Trump so-called collusion with Russia thing is a big nothing burger. He's right, it is!

TheVaultKeeper said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

A few weeks' retreat, preferably alone, in a place one loves or just travelling, is definitely something that gives perspective and time to figure out things away from daily pressures (that make us incapable to escape the stress and think clearly). Not everything will be solved when you come back but you got back your strenght and it's often enough to pull things back together at least for a while.

.

Most average people, in developped countries, should be able to afford a 2 weeks retreat abroad if they go to a developping country where life is significantly cheaper. I've known a lot of pretty poor people (me included) who have spent up to several months in Asia or Africa. It takes a bit of savings, being able to take a break from work, and travelling cheap but it's definitely something most Westerners can afford. If you really want it, it can be done.

laurarichardson said:

databank said:

A few weeks' retreat, preferably alone, in a place one loves or just travelling, is definitely something that gives perspective and time to figure out things away from daily pressures (that make us incapable to escape the stress and think clearly). Not everything will be solved when you come back but you got back your strenght and it's often enough to pull things back together at least for a while.

.

Most average people, in developped countries, should be able to afford a 2 weeks retreat abroad if they go to a developping country where life is significantly cheaper. I've known a lot of pretty poor people (me included) who have spent up to several months in Asia or Africa. It takes a bit of savings, being able to take a break from work, and travelling cheap but it's definitely something most Westerners can afford. If you really want it, it can be done.

For most average people in this country, times are tougher than you might imagine...but I'm not saying that P's advice to Van was not good. Also, based on your comments, I think you and Prince were talking about different things. You're suggesting taking a vacation, after saving for a year or more. Prince was meaning a spur of the moment 2-week trip...after being suddenly unemployed. As I said, that is beyond most of us. Still, it was good advice.

laurarichardson said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

Thanks for sharing, Latin. This advice is so Princely. It wouldn't work for the average person, though, because most people who have just been laid off could not afford a two-week international retreat. Also, I daresay that 99% of us don't have a Princely figure in our lives who could make virtually all of our dreams a reality. Still, by all accounts, Prince was a wonderful, sage friend.

—The average person can write down his or her goals. It can be in your living room.

Agreed. I'm very familiar with vision boards and other motivational techniques--or even things like journaling--which are available to just about anyone. But, last minute international travel, for most of us? Not so much. Also, if I remember Jones' complete story about how Prince helped him after he left the White House, P made it his business to help fulfill Van's dreams. That's my point. Shoot, I wish I had a Princely friend!!!

FlyOnTheWall said:

databank said:

A few weeks' retreat, preferably alone, in a place one loves or just travelling, is definitely something that gives perspective and time to figure out things away from daily pressures (that make us incapable to escape the stress and think clearly). Not everything will be solved when you come back but you got back your strenght and it's often enough to pull things back together at least for a while.

.

Most average people, in developped countries, should be able to afford a 2 weeks retreat abroad if they go to a developping country where life is significantly cheaper. I've known a lot of pretty poor people (me included) who have spent up to several months in Asia or Africa. It takes a bit of savings, being able to take a break from work, and travelling cheap but it's definitely something most Westerners can afford. If you really want it, it can be done.

For most average people in this country, times are tougher than you might imagine...but I'm not saying that P's advice to Van was not good. Also, based on your comments, I think you and Prince were talking about different things. You're suggesting taking a vacation, after saving for a year or more. Prince was meaning a spur of the moment 2-week trip...after being suddenly unemployed. As I said, that is beyond most of us. Still, it was good advice.

IDK about most average people in the US, but I've met my fair share of lower-middle class Americans during my trips. I'm not saying "lower-class-mother-alone-with-three-children", of course, but I've met unqualified people, like factory workers or waiters and usually without children, who were travelling for months in Asia.

.

What I suggest is really a retreat, not a vacation. The difference may be subtle but that's why I emphasized doing it alone, and honestly it's mostly about what state of mind you do it with. I'd say a holiday is about relaxing while a retreat is really about taking a break in order to think about where you are in your life. How you do it and where depends on each individual. It's always better if one can improvise it when one needs it (and what better time than between 2 jobs indeed), but of course that depends whether you have some savings or not. What I mean is that a European can spend, for example, one month in India with 1500€ (plane ticket included), which really is not much money all things considered. But I've met Europeans who believed they could never afford it because in their mind it was a 5000€ budget. I'm sure an American can go to Mexico or Central America without spending extraordinary amounts of money. And that even with a family and a job one can manage to get away for 2 or 3 weeks. And since we're talking retreat not holiday, one doesn't need a 5 star hotel with a swimming pool.

databank said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

For most average people in this country, times are tougher than you might imagine...but I'm not saying that P's advice to Van was not good. Also, based on your comments, I think you and Prince were talking about different things. You're suggesting taking a vacation, after saving for a year or more. Prince was meaning a spur of the moment 2-week trip...after being suddenly unemployed. As I said, that is beyond most of us. Still, it was good advice.

IDK about most average people in the US, but I've met my fair share of lower-middle class Americans during my trips. I'm not saying "lower-class-mother-alone-with-three-children", of course, but I've met unqualified people, like factory workers or waiters and usually without children, who were travelling for months in Asia.

.

What I suggest is really a retreat, not a vacation. The difference may be subtle but that's why I emphasized doing it alone, and honestly it's mostly about what state of mind you do it with. I'd say a holiday is about relaxing while a retreat is really about taking a break in order to think about where you are in your life. How you do it and where depends on each individual. It's always better if one can improvise it when one needs it (and what better time than between 2 jobs indeed), but of course that depends whether you have some savings or not. What I mean is that a European can spend, for example, one month in India with 1500€ (plane ticket included), which really is not much money all things considered. But I've met Europeans who believed they could never afford it because in their mind it was a 5000€ budget. I'm sure an American can go to Mexico or Central America without spending extraordinary amounts of money. And that even with a family and a job one can manage to get away for 2 or 3 weeks. And since we're talking retreat not holiday, one doesn't need a 5 star hotel with a swimming pool.

I understand the distinction, so I should not have used the words interchangeably. If you notice, I did use "retreat" initially. In any case, I still maintain that extended travel (or, for some, any travel at all) is out of the reach of far too many Americans.

FlyOnTheWall said:

databank said:

IDK about most average people in the US, but I've met my fair share of lower-middle class Americans during my trips. I'm not saying "lower-class-mother-alone-with-three-children", of course, but I've met unqualified people, like factory workers or waiters and usually without children, who were travelling for months in Asia.

.

What I suggest is really a retreat, not a vacation. The difference may be subtle but that's why I emphasized doing it alone, and honestly it's mostly about what state of mind you do it with. I'd say a holiday is about relaxing while a retreat is really about taking a break in order to think about where you are in your life. How you do it and where depends on each individual. It's always better if one can improvise it when one needs it (and what better time than between 2 jobs indeed), but of course that depends whether you have some savings or not. What I mean is that a European can spend, for example, one month in India with 1500€ (plane ticket included), which really is not much money all things considered. But I've met Europeans who believed they could never afford it because in their mind it was a 5000€ budget. I'm sure an American can go to Mexico or Central America without spending extraordinary amounts of money. And that even with a family and a job one can manage to get away for 2 or 3 weeks. And since we're talking retreat not holiday, one doesn't need a 5 star hotel with a swimming pool.

I understand the distinction, so I should not have used the words interchangeably. If you notice, I did use "retreat" initially. In any case, I still maintain that extended travel (or, for some, any travel at all) is out of the reach of far too many Americans.

Certainly. One American is already far too many, and I just saw on Wikipedia that 43M Americans live under the poverty line.

And there are other constraints.

My freedom to move, travel and take regular breaks despite a relatively low income, for example, is in great part connected to the choice I made not to have children.

He did live in Princeland by the way.

Latin is our new Vampy

laurarichardson said:

TheVaultKeeper said:

Prince gave this advice to Van Jones shortly after he "resigned" from his White House environmental adviser position, resulting from the revelation of a controversial past that, administration officials acknowledged, caught the White House off guard. Things like rising to public prominence as a race-baiting agitator at the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights in Oakland, funded by the George Soros-supported Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the liberal Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. Also, becoming a public fixture in the Bay Area after crusading to free convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal for a Marxist organization, and being an avowed communist as well. I personally think that Prince would've been better off not knowing somebody like Van Jones. However, I will agree with one thing that Van Jones has said; that the whole Trump so-called collusion with Russia thing is a big nothing burger. He's right, it is!

—Let us see Van is black = Civil Rights, Van is a Democrate and the last time I looked it is not illegal to have socialist views. Why would he not have been involved with any of these causes? You also see to miss out on the fact that Van and Prince worked with non-profits that provided jobs and training. Which Republicans believe they are the only people on the earth who care about people working which is a load of bull.

Well, being that I'm not a Republican, Democrat, or a socialist, I really don't care.

TheVaultKeeper said:

laurarichardson said:

TheVaultKeeper said:

Well, being that I'm not a Republican, Democrat, or a socialist, I really don't care.

—Yet you took the time to go on about politics.

So did you.

TheVaultKeeper said:

Prince has admitted that racism exists but I think what he is saying is that "Why give fuel to the racists? Making Black Zuckerberg's helps not only black folks but it also helps combat the excuses of racist.". Prince was being very pragmatic. I just watched Van Jones on the Daily Show and the VIew and his point is that change comes first at home... Sort of like combining the beliefs of W.E.B dubois and booker T washington into one.

rogifan said:

Van is cool. And different than when he was younger or even when he first worked for Obama. I like that he’s someone willing to challenge his own side. Not enough people do it on either side of the isle. Perhaps some of Prince’s critical thinking rubbed off on him. http://www.rollingstone.c...y-20160425

As an example, Jones explains how the murder of Trayvon Martin inspired #YesWeCode. While people were debating whether the 17-year-old was a "thug or a victim" and whether George Zimmerman was a "racist or a hero," in Jones' words, Prince zeroed in on the hoodie Martin wore. "He said, 'Hold on a second: If a black kid wears a hoodie, you say he's a thug, and if a white kid wears a hoodie, you say it's Mark Zuckerberg. Why is that?'" Jones recalls. "And then of course, I say, 'Because of racism.' And Prince goes, 'Well, maybe. Or maybe we just haven't produced enough black Mark Zuckerbergs. Why don't we focus on that?' Complete genius.

In case anyone is interested, here’s a good podcast where Van talks about his book The Messy Truth. http://bit.ly/2iP8NEm

[Edited 11/12/17 12:06pm]

purplerabbithole said: