dimreepr

True understanding is achieved via a complete education; so both chopsticks are required.

I'm sorry, but it is. They took out the money and spent it. Booze is not the only thing one can blow money on.

 

Had no say! Yes they did and do, as in case you've missed the point, it is a democracy. The people get the government they vote for.

 

How did you work that one out? They did see the money, they saw it in the form of the level or lack of taxation and the result of state spending.

 

And as for this business of printing money, money is a representation of human labour. And printing the stuff is nothing more than undermining labour; which like death and taxes, a certain way to descend into chaos and destitution - similar to borrowing.

Are you trying to display a lack of understanding (of the economy, humanity and democracy)?

Personal debt doesn’t equate to national debt.

From my understanding, since the Earth spins around the equator and it is wider around the equator, the North and South Poles are like the bottom and the cold air will try to sink to the bottom.

That would be the case in a snow shelter but the poles are cold for very different reasons.

History isn't doomed to be repeated but it should be learnt from.

What's tour point (on topic)?

I would be delighted if you would comment on either of these threads:

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/89548-if-you-cant-be-content-without-money;-you-cant-be-content-with-money/

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83468-why-forgive/

Allowing corporate greed be detrimental to good health and a good society.

The wisdom of the founding fathers laid the foundations of a very good society; unfortunately those foundations have been eroded by certain amendments and their wilful misinterpretation by interested parties.

You like stuff that is terrestrial and cheap, right? Plus it is proven, almost pedestrian technology, just deployed in an unusual way.

IOW stuff that works.

 

I wasn't confusing the two, but money buying things seems to be the deciding factor here. It's OK not to be content with your lot in life, it's OK not to be content with staying where you were born, but it's not OK to want wealth. Wealth defined as money you don't need to survive. And money is something we can't be content with if we can't be content without it. What makes money different?

 

It seems like when the money is earmarked for something we can justify, like music or travel, it's OK to want it. If I want to amass great wealth so I can give it all away to people who need it, is that OK? Can I spend my money on visiting every country in the world, even though it's not necessary for my basic needs?

 

I don't believe the meek will inherit the Earth. I think the assertive told them that to keep them meek. And I'm just being contrary here, especially with all the aphorisms being thrown around. I feel ornery about this, for some reason.

The choice is yours to make and I’d never presume to tell anyone I know the correct choices for anyone other than me; and I get them wrong more often than I’d like to admit.

But to pin ones hopes and choices on a future that may never be better than now could be to deny one the chance to enjoy, at least, something however meagre.

So why spend this treasured now needlessly angry or jealous or stressed or worried or focused on the negative when one has breath to wonder and dream?

This goes to show that too many beers doesn't clarify your thoughts quite as well as you imagine at the time.

Money = stuff, and sometimes, Knowledge = understanding; but if you use your knowledge to = stuff then you don’t understand.

Perhaps I can't shake the austerity angle of contentment because it seems tied with "living within your means", "knowing your place", "your lot in life", and other concepts like that. There's also a certain meekness associated with being content. Stop trying to rock the boat, be content with what you have. I don't like that part because it seems to run counter to what we call "spirit". If pioneers are content, do they roam about discovering new things?

Don’t confuse a thirst for knowledge with greed and besides don’t the meek inherit the Earth?

A gift would mean so much less if you had one every day.

It's no accident the word present also means gift.

And the gift in my present is a cold beer, a fat doobie and Wimbledon on the TV; happy days...

Indeed, enjoy the journey rather than fear the destination.

Don’t wait for the penultimate station to realise you’ll get there anyway.

You can be content with the money you have if you like your lifestyle and do the things that make you happy. You can be happy with less money if you know what you want to achieve in life and feel that you are on the right path.

My point is, money is a means to an end, not an end in itself; contentment can only come from within.

 

Can we can agree that Dylann should do something productive that earns money that can be given to the victims families? If he gets life in prison, then he should be motivated to do something of value that he knows is going to his victims families for the rest of his life. The motivation for such a detestable task for a racist, will be different levels of confinement, some of which are much less pleasant than the others, which all depends upon his willingness to work for his victims families.

 

Any psychologist that is worth his salt will be skillful in handling unusual people. All the psychologist needs to do is show empathy, something alien to Dylann, and I assure you the boy will become cooperative, since the alternative is solitary confinement.

Seeking revenge for imagined slights only highlights your shortcomings.

Maybe the idea isn't to fill it. Maybe it's a huge jug instead of a cup, but I really only need a fraction of it's capacity to be content.

 

This seems a more honest gauge of contentment. I'm not content because my cup is full, I'm content because I have just enough to satisfy my needs in my big old jug that could hold more.

 

This seems to say our actual needs will never change, never grow or lessen. Maybe I really only need a fraction of the jug's capacity at any one time to be content.

 

I keep going back to this idea of austerity vs actual needs. Do I get to say I need music, if other people can live without it, or if it's not part of the basics of staying alive? If music is an actual need of mine, and I can't hum Bach well enough to call it music, do I get to own a copy of The Brandenburg Concertos, and something to play them on?

 

If you asked me to divest myself of everything I possibly could, and identify the least amount of "stuff" I need to live, then give me food, shelter, clothing, and unlimited paper and pencils. I'll be good to go.

 

But if you're taking away other people, and I'm left with just myself being fed, clothed, and housed, I think that's an emotional satisfaction I can't be content without. You could keep the writing implements if I could keep the ability to interact with people.

My point isn’t so much austerity as it is doing what you need to be content; if that need includes music then do what you can to fulfil that need. If you can’t then what choice do you have?

The point is, if you’re not part of the solution you’re part of the problem, we ALL are, as evinced in our participation in this forum.

Do what you can/are comfortable with, to help and you too could be part of a better future.

 

When I think about it like that, though, there are some things I'm not sure I could ever get enough of. Could I make a list of twenty places to go I've never been to before, and be content with just those? Could I live with just twenty more grateful smiles from people I helped just because I could? Could I be content with the love and laughter I've already been lucky enough to have had, and no more?

 

Needs that further contentment obviously have to be continually met. "Enough to be content" must have a lot of pieces one needs to keep in play, especially if contentment is an emergent property.

If the cup, you choose to fill, is based on emotional satisfaction; it can never be filled.

But if that cup is based on your actual needs it’s often full.

You’re missing the part where the law suit has to be paid for and by whom.

 

Blame his pappy all you want. I'm sure he was aware that point blank murdering people in cold blood was a crime. A really bad crime at that. See? There is no one to blame but Dylann.

"No man is an island"

Everything you experience is part of the/your journey; the good has little meaning without the bad.

Indeed, but not, I think, an impossible ideal; heaven, after all, would be the same.

If that could be understood by someone who could translate it for all to understand maybe we could live in peace for a while.

OK, gents, I concede the point; what I don’t concede is that a more prosperous economy/society exceeds a content one.